It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is James O'Keefe About To Smoke CNN?

page: 3
62
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: YouSir

I know right? It's weird when somebody from the government is more interested in the preservation of your rights than your fellow citizens seem to be.





posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: RazorV66

we need a " just JAQing off " sub



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   
Can only imagine the behind the scenes of CNN.

They have enough hollow hammy drama on the air and in their web stories as it is.

Exposing *ALL* their horse dung is gonna be good.




posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 10:56 AM
link   
It really isn't 'news' that CNN is bias, or makes up news stories. I suppose now, it's just going to be confirmed.



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6


Ummm...well...I suppose if one champions...freedom of the press...does that mean they also champion the presses freedom to print totally manufactured...news...and the propensity of that manufactured...news...to cause it's intended damage...

Does that mean one would then support the damage caused by printing non factual material...?

I realize your answer would most likely be no...However how does 1st amendment freedom of the press also permit printing the opposite of truth in order to perpetuate agenda...?

Perhaps there should be some adjustment that includes a penalty...how you would get there without a politicized truth or fact checker is the question...






YouSir



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: YouSir

There's a wealth of case law as to what's covered by freedom of the press, what isn't, and how much freedom the press enjoys with what it prints and/or broadcasts. You're welcome to look it up for yourself, as it'll answer your questions.

To bring it back on topic - again, if O'Keefe has actual evidence of manufactured news, then that's worth paying attention to. If all he has is people who happen to be journalists talking about their own political beliefs then big whoop.



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: YouSir

If the media were regulated and were fined, say... every time a fabricated story was created to promote a political agenda, CNN and MSNBC could pay for the wall within months!



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: RazorV66

Okeefe better release all of the unedited footage if he is to be believed.

He is known as a dishonest troll that makes political hit videos, without providing proper and complete context.


No, this is just the excuse libs always throw out to deflect from what O'Keeffe captured.



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: kurthall


Bill Clinton had more morals than tRUMP. Hell even AFTER his impeachment proceedings he had a 73% approval rating LEAVING THE OFFICE......Highest since Truman!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


The press is an extension of the Democrat party! What do you expect? If the media was hammering him day in and day out like they did W and do Trump, it would be much different.



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 11:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Can only imagine the behind the scenes of CNN.

They have enough hollow hammy drama on the air and in their web stories as it is.

Exposing *ALL* their horse dung is gonna be good.



Right now, they're having a roundtable discussion entitled "Trump's First Month. BOOM or BUST?" Each "expert" looks like they had horse dung for breakfast. Their DNC Debate tonight should be a hoot! Failing party on a failing network.



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: YouSir
a reply to: Shamrock6


Ummm...well...I suppose if one champions...freedom of the press...does that mean they also champion the presses freedom to print totally manufactured...news...and the propensity of that manufactured...news...to cause it's intended damage...

Does that mean one would then support the damage caused by printing non factual material...?

I realize your answer would most likely be no...However how does 1st amendment freedom of the press also permit printing the opposite of truth in order to perpetuate agenda...?

Perhaps there should be some adjustment that includes a penalty...how you would get there without a politicized truth or fact checker is the question...






YouSir



I gotta say I think you keep free speech sacred and the truth will win out.

Propaganda by its nature usually gets busted up sooner or later . We just have to use logic and not allow people to use straw man and slippery slope arguments without ever addressing the actual proposal.



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: RazorV66

Okeefe better release all of the unedited footage if he is to be believed.

He is known as a dishonest troll that makes political hit videos, without providing proper and complete context.


No, this is just the excuse libs always throw out to deflect from what O'Keeffe captured.


How is that a deflection? I'm open to what he has to offer, but he better release the unedited version or he cannot be trusted. He has a history of producing out-of-context material.
edit on 22-2-2017 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 12:17 PM
link   
Trump needs to close down CNN and the other fake new sites by sending the police in and arresting these seditious traitors



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




How is that a deflection? I open to what he has to offer, but he better release the unedited version or he cannot be trusted.
[/quote Un-edited would mean all of the data ,which is foolish in its self . Editing is what happens when a news story is produced .The MSM have a staff of editors .They clip /cut /and create a narrative . They edit and all producers of music / film / and text edit .So for you to demand he release all of his unedited material or it cant be trusted is something you will have to cry about to someone who will believe you ...That sure aint thinken folk .



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: TrueAmericanPatriot

Pass on that.



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 12:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: introvert




How is that a deflection? I open to what he has to offer, but he better release the unedited version or he cannot be trusted.


Un-edited would mean all of the data ,which is foolish in its self . Editing is what happens when a news story is produced .The MSM have a staff of editors .They clip /cut /and create a narrative . They edit and all producers of music / film / and text edit .So for you to demand he release all of his unedited material or it cant be trusted is something you will have to cry about to someone who will believe you ...That sure aint thinken folk .


Do you believe every thing the MSM puts out? If a news source lies to you or produces something out-of-context, do you not ask for more information?

That's all I'm doing with Okeefe. He's a known liar and edits his material which does not provide full context.

So I'd like to see what he has and I will decide what he has found. That is what a thinking person would do.

Sounds to me like you want me to just believe him blindly. That is foolish.



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




Sounds to me like you want me to just believe him blindly. That is foolish.
Not suggesting that at all .But saying that you needing all of the unedited data is ridiculous . He might end up having hours and hours of vid in order to get that 2 or 3 min. smoking gun . If he was to put it all out in one unedited piece then you or I would probably not watch it all . As to believably only on unedited reports then the MSM seldom if ever puts out stuff that would meet your requirement for believably . just sayin



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 12:50 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Why don't you hold those same standards when it's against Trump? Clearly everything is spun and out of context but you guys have no problem accepting it.



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 12:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: introvert




Sounds to me like you want me to just believe him blindly. That is foolish.
Not suggesting that at all .But saying that you needing all of the unedited data is ridiculous . He might end up having hours and hours of vid in order to get that 2 or 3 min. smoking gun . If he was to put it all out in one unedited piece then you or I would probably not watch it all . As to believably only on unedited reports then the MSM seldom if ever puts out stuff that would meet your requirement for believably . just sayin


If he was interested in proper context he would have the unedited version available for those who wished to view it, if he understood where his reputation now stands.

He can put together a video that highlights the important aspects, but should also have the other footage available as well.



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 12:56 PM
link   
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986



Why don't you hold those same standards when it's against Trump?


Can you name an instance where I blindly believed any material produced about Trump that turned out to be out-of-context due to the way the material was edited?



Clearly everything is spun and out of context but you guys have no problem accepting it.


Everything? I cannot comment when your argument is completely made-up.




top topics



 
62
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join