White House hand-picks select media outlets for briefing

a reply to: Irishhaf

Did Fox have their credentials revoked?

Were they banned from the White House?

You're the one that made the statement about Fox being mistreated under Obama, which is what I addressed in what you're responding to. I didn't say that you have said CNN should be excluded ... but there are those here who have.

I haven't said you were crying about anything either. Fox News actually did attack and try to undermine the President. That's not even a question for anyone who witnessed what happened. Whether CNN, etc. are doing the same thing at the same level is a matter for debate (which I'd love to see.)

However, your linked NYT article ... what do you think it proves? Further, the comparison seems to be a bit pekid to me, because not only was CNN excluded, but also, Poitifact (not liberal) the BBC (not liberal), the New York and LA Times, (pretty liberal but fair) and Huffington Post (pretty obviously as one-sided as Fox has ever been.)

If that is, as I suggested yesterday, the first small step in a wider plan to discredit any media outlets that disagree with President Trump ... then we have a real problem on our hands. If, as you seem to think, this is just a minor spat ... it will come to nothing, and trust me, I will be ecstatic to be wrong.

I think it's great. They never let the bad kids ride the bus either until they behaved. Lots of growing up to do in DC

a reply to: Gryphon66

I guess you missed the line where I said Democrats backed down in 09... Republicans did not..

You really think CNN and the times have not been combative???

Hit pieces on trump started about a week after he tossed his hat in the ring for the republicans...

the post has been banned from the white house a few times over the years...

CNN and the times did not get to sit in on a briefing, nothing I read says their credentials are revoked, or that they are banned...

the hysteria in this thread was amusing for a while... but now its becoming concerning.

White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said: “We invited the pool so everyone was represented. We decided to add a couple of additional people beyond the pool. Nothing more than that.”

PIX11 news

While I find the idea of black balling certain media organizations a little troubling, I do believe that what is good for the goose is good for the gander. I know it is childish of me me, but I feel like their is a lesson to be learned... unfortunately the hypocrits excuse away any fascism as long as it suits their ends.

Ultimately, the same people that are calling out Trump still believe Obama was a great president.

a reply to: Irishhaf

Nope, didn't miss that line at all. Agreed with it in fact. DIdn't feel the need to comment on it, therefore.

CNN and the others "combative"? Sure. Confrontive? Sure. That's kind of their jobs, as long as it's based in facts.


"Hit pieces on Trump"? I know this is a matter of differing opinions, but I can't say I've seen one of those. If you have one in mind, I'd be glad to look at it. Again, statements early on that Trump wasn't the most likely candidate and so forth are not fake.

The Washington Post? I'll do some reasearch and see what you mean. ETA: Did you mean banned from Trump's campaign?

Yes, I know the official story that this was "just a gaggle" (honestly, have you EVER heard that term before) and there just "wasn't enough room in Spicer's office."

Except that ... as a matter of course, these gaggles have a representative from each type of media (network news, cable news, newspapers, internet blogosphere, etc.) who then share with the rest. That's not what happened yesterday.

"Hysteria"? LOL ... appeal to emotion much?

Your link is another example of the dishonesty of this Administration. It was a message sent, and received.

We will see what happens next.

a reply to: alphabetaone

Saw a news clip where Spicer was asked back in Nov/Dec if Trump would lock out media from the White House like he was doing in his campaign. Spicer said no, because that would be what dictators do.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Washington post during Nixons days, LBJ had issues with the press as well, I would not be surprised if the founding fathers had issues with the press.


As for the hysteria... attack on the constitution for what to date has been a one time thing is hysteria: exaggerated or uncontrollable emotion or excitement.

If it continues or he tries to shut them down, or has goons intimidating the press.. I will happily stand with the left..

Right now I will just yawn, have some scotch and worry about other things.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Did you intend to lie? Was your intention merely to misrepresent what I said to make your own point, serve your own agenda? Did you fail to take the whole discussion of this thread into account? Was your purpose to discredit?

I'm not asking those questions to be insulting or accusatory. I'm asking them to make a point.

(We're still friends, imo....this post is an example using me and you, and our ongoing discussion.)



In my answers to this whole discussion, I said President Trump did not declare the media the enemy of the people. He said "fake news" is the enemy of the people.

Then, you accused me of saying he did not name names. Yet I have named names. I told you that I read his tweets everyday. I listen to his speeches, his interviews, read transcripts, and pay attention to the words that come out of his mouth into my ears and I hear them within the context of the discussion and his philosophy as he has laid it out to the American People for at least two years.

So, I KNOW he has called out CNN by name....even using the term 'Very Fake News'. I KNOW he has called out the "failing NYT". He has called out others by name when they have lied, misrepresented, taken things out of context, and embellished the facts to discredit him. I have said this on multiple occasions. I know he has specifically named organizations that have intentionally mislead their readers and listeners. We can dissect some of their lies and misrepresentations and embellishments on another thread, if you like.

The FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People! -Donald Trump

You did this same thing to me in your post.

If you do it all the time, day in and day out, I am going to call you out about it. At some point, I will no longer deal with you, and I will point out the "fakeness" of your accusations every time you do it. (That's an example...still friends?) Now....

______________

Another thing you did: You accused me of saying you and I have not had a civil discussion. You apologized if I thought otherwise.

Yet, that is not what I said. I said that after you read the opinion piece I posted from The Hill, perhaps we could have a civil discussion about it. I did not say we had not had a civil discussion thus far. You misunderstood, mis-read, or intentionally made a false accusation in order to make it seem that I was accusatory.

See how that works? (Just talking here....still friends?)

_____________

Now, before you think I am arguing or picking on you, let me clarify what this post is about.

It is about how some of the liberal media take a statement from Trump, remove it from its overall context, add a passive-aggressive element, or embellish it with a misrepresentation or outright lie, and spoon feed it to an audience that laps it up as if it were 100% the truth. It is about the fact they have been called out about it multiple times, and rather than acknowledge what they have been doing, they doubled down on it.

Now they are angry that they have been taken down off their pedestal where they have, for years, stood high and mightly, fawning and praising all things left-wing, and lying and misrepresenting anything that is not. They are in bed with leakers that are illegally jeopardizing national security and trying to undermine this administration. They are dangerous, imo, and if they can't tell the truth and nothing but the truth, they don't deserve any special favors.

a reply to: Gryphon66

I sure hope you got an Applause! for this post.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

And you also --- MBTM. You two are voices of sanity that make it easier for me to come here. Love ya both.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
a reply to: Gryphon66

Respect for the truth, the Constitution, the rule of law, the freedom of the press, are CORE conservative values.

Agreed , which is why it confounds me so that there seems to be so much placating from them with this all out attack from Trump on those very things.

Everything Mr. Trump has done so far has been by fiat ... and the same folks who cried for 8 years that made Obama a Tyrant thinks the SAME THING makes Trump the bestest President ever.

Trump is playing the same cards , just a different deck.

The ONLY explanation I have come up with in my mind , for this indifference, is the "payback" factor, otherwise it makes absolutely no sense that any of them support the things going on.

Hell even his campaign slogan to me sounded like "hope and change"

Do you wonder that I call you one of ATS's last true Conservatives?

Well , sometimes , but then again sometimes i wonder if I have just lost it and maybe what I thought was conservative all along wasnt.

politically Ive always identified as libertarian as far back as I can remember.

I hope there are enough of us on that same page, that MAYBE the next election cycle we can blow up a 3rd party

I think the scariest part of all of this is that BANNON is the one calling the shots. Trump is too vain and too impressed with himself to actually do this job. The entire administration knows it already.

It's about time now that the public realizes that as well. Trump doesn't know what the hell he is doing. I think it would be fantastic if NOBODY EVER talked about him anymore. Him or Bannon. Just ignore them. That would be the absolute best thing. If this country pays no attention to the White House, we can get on with our lives without having to be bombarded daily with these faces of ugliness, lies, and hatred.

People are taking this far too lightly. And also folks need to consider looking at it in a neutral light. Just because he turned away MSM you don't like doesn't mean it's a good thing. He is turning away media that paints him in a bad light, and allowing media that paints him in a good light. Many news outlets reported on this.. but Fox for example, had -nothing- about this on their site. So obviously.. he is creating biased media, in favor of his administration. The whole point of having media on both sides of the fence is transparency.

It's all fun and games until his administration does something you actually do care about.. and by then, it could well be too late.

a reply to: Irishhaf

George Washington did in his second term. I posted a link the other day.

It's not hysterical when we saw promises and statements throughout his whole campaign that suggested he really didn't understand the limitations (Constitutional) on the powers of the Presidency.

So what I see now ( I won't speak in the plural) is that in the Office he actually DOES the things he only talked about doing.

Enjoy that Scotch. Let's hope you're right.

The arguments here are the same ones that Trump makes ... wide-sweeping generalities, appeals to emotion and an allergy to faacts and concrete information.

Painting a whole news operation with a wide brush. It's nothing more than rhetorical shorthand.

Claiming that everything that is said, done and published by an entity the size of CNN is "fake news."

He's not after "fake news." He's after his critics. He's after control of the narrative.

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: alphabetaone

So much for Freedom of the Press

I know it will never happen...but...how about we make a few laws that govern the press. Yes...the press will remain free to investigate, report, etc. and there will be no restrictions placed upon them during these processes. Except...when reporting, verbally or in writing, the writer/reporter must take the same oath that witnesses take in court. To tell the truth...the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Now think about that for a moment. In a court of law, a witness can speak their mind and provide factual, truthful testimony in favor or against the defendant. They can use their expertise to explain facts. The press is there to report "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth" with the exception of opinion pieces/articles. So why not put them under oath so if they knowingly lie, twist facts, etc...they can be charged with contempt? And this is a pretty safe way to go...it is quite difficult to prove someone knowingly lied. But that responsibility should always be there to avoid the press preaching propaganda.

What say you?

And I'll go one step farther. All politicians should be considered "under oath" when addressing the American citizens and/or their representatives.

Why should anyone have to wait to confront the actions of the President?

I mean, whether we're right or wrong, this idea that it's improper (or even disloyal) to criticize the actions, the man, whatever ... that boat has sailed effective in the 1990s in our current generation and certainly as of January 2009.

In fact, it is entirely AMERICAN to do so.

If Mr. Trump wasn't prepared to face the criticism of a nation, he shouldn't have put himself in front of it.

Reminder:
This is NOT the Mud Pit!!!

All rules for polite political debate will be enforced.
Reaffirming Our Desire For Productive Political Debate (REVISED)

You are responsible for your own posts.
and
Go After the Ball, Not the Player!


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!

a reply to: LSU0408
You are aware that the text following this is your 'signature', right?

PIERS MORGAN: My message to the left is if you want to try and beat Donald Trump do it democratically and stop trying to delegitimize him stop trying to make every tweet every statement every comment he says the armageddon of the world and just try to apply some rational political sense in defeating your opponent.

So ---- how would you state it yourself? How do you receive this input and process it?
What is the spontaneous reaction you had to it when you first saw it?


Because what I'm reading there is that you expect others to ignore his comments. His tweets and comments are not important. Right? So, then -- WHO are we supposed to listen to and take seriously?

Be careful here, LSU. Be careful.....

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Gryphon66

I sure hope you got an Applause! for this post.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

And you also --- MBTM. You two are voices of sanity that make it easier for me to come here. Love ya both.

Well I know we try to be, and Buzzy we feel the same about you........

Like ive said before, all of us are examples of what can happen if you put "ego" aside and genuinely make an attempt to understand each other......

If WE can do it anyone can do it......I just hope that Trump supporters eventually learn and follow suit.......

its our only hope to salvage this country and heal......

Trump cant make America Great again........people like us will.......the American people refusing to partake of the hostility towards each other , is the only thing that will save us

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Bannon by far is the scariest out of all of them. This guy is intelligent, directed, driven, and has an agenda.....on top of that he KNOWS how all of this works......

The Steve Bannon, Alexander Dugin connection should scare the hell out of anyone who values our country....

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Most times a man will tell you his intentions ahead of time, if you listen.-Kevin Costner "Open Range"

Except people are refusing to listen......yet they claim the moral high ground with Obama when they say "We told you he was going to do this , he said he was going to"

Now they say judge him by his actions not his words......lol but then on the same note say "He did exactly what he said he was going to do on the campaign trail"

So which is it? Are you supporters going to brag about him doing exactly what he says he will do, or are we to not listen to what he says?

Mental gymnastics