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.

 

Cnn needs to fack check themselves before creating more fake-news

page: 3
26
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 04:56 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Wasn't a lie it was an error.

CNN lied.




posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Diisenchanted

You edited your OP to take out the erroneous, make believe quote, that you claimed proved that CNN lied, by removing the words that you added, "candidate for". And now you say it doesn't matter?

Please! Your argument is a total fail!

The President of the Untied States of American is not just the president of those who voted for him, he's everybody's president.

The "Free Press" doesn't give a president a free ride because they supported their election. It's the job of the "Free Press" to serve as a watchdog to the American people, ask tough questions and hold elected officials and their appointees feet to the fire.

Trump can try control their narrative, to silence the "Free Press" by refusing to answer their questions, but it will come to bite him, sooner rather than later.

"I love WikiLeaks!" Donald J Trump


edit on 25-2-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 05:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Diisenchanted

Adding made up words isn't a mistake, it's a lie!

CNN did not lie, in this case. You did!




edit on 25-2-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: windword


(CNN) - The New York Times on Saturday endorsed Barack Obama, citing the president's policies in health care, the economy, foreign affairs, civil rights and his choices of two Supreme Court justices among the reasons for support.

CNN

While I admit that there was an error in my original post it turns out that I should have let is stand because it was true.

You are fake-news

If I could change it back I would because it was factual.
edit on 25-2-2017 by Diisenchanted because: to add

edit on 25-2-2017 by Diisenchanted because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 05:35 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

backwards.




posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: mkultra11

What does your ignorant opinion about my state of consciousness over the past 8 years have to do with the OP lying about the contents of the quote they're using to make an erroneous point?



Because in your effort at correction exposed that they were actually still lying regardless and you fail to acknowledge it.



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 05:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Diisenchanted

By all means CHANGE IT BACK!

You are still wrong. CNN never claimed not to support candidates, yet you're still going on about how they lied about supporting candidates! CNN hasn't lied. You attempted to put words in the mouth of a pundit in order to make it look like he/CNN lied. He never said what you're saying he lied about!

The media doesn't (blindly) "root for" (support) presidents, just because they're the president, or just because they supported their candidacy. That's not the job of the Free Press. The Free Press is the watchdog of the American People.




edit on 25-2-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 05:59 PM
link   
a reply to: mkultra11

What did they lie about? Please show me where CNN ever announced that they don't support candidates.





edit on 25-2-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 06:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: mkultra11

What did they lie about? Please show me where CNN ever announced that they don't support candidates.



You already list the argument bc your intention is to argue semantics candidate vs. President. In the video in the original post they clearly claim they don't support any president and then you have examples already posted where they and others clearly supported Obama and Hillary as candidates. This is all well established fact at this point.



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: mkultra11


This thread is the epitome of FAKE NEWS and the liars who push it and try to gaslight people into believing what they saw and heard wasn't what they saw and heard!

edit on 25-2-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: windword



Saying you don't see CNN or the NY Times supporting any president regardless of political affiliation.

Brian Stelter said that neither CNN nor the NY Times supported any president.
Obama was both a candidate and a president. Blatant lie!

Reality check on fake-news.



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Diisenchanted

They blatantly supported Obama's candidacy. They never claimed otherwise. As well, they criticized Pres Obama, called him out on stuff all the time and asked him tough questions and held his feet to the fire. Obama's relationship with CNN and the press wasn't a walk in the garden.

You keep trying to twist facts to make it seem like CNN lied, but they didn't. You have taken the pundits comments out of context, (plus, you put words in his mouth, that he never said), in regard to the treatment of a candidate as compared to the treatment of a sitting president.

The president isn't entitled to a unchallenged, free ride from the press.


edit on 25-2-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Sorry xuenchen I have to.

Triggered!



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 07:01 PM
link   
Seems the intellectual superstars over at GP are working a little too hard...they are clearly confusing one person's outraged opinion with "news". To have "fake news", there must first actually be news to fake. One person's butthurt and his choice to cry about it is not news, fake or otherwise.

However, spreading it around as if it actually were news is itself the very epitome of "fake news". Which is what is happening here. At least GP seems to have the basic knowledge of how to spell simple four-letter words, such as "fact"...or at least utilize spellcheck before posting their "news". So there's that.



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 07:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Diisenchanted
a reply to: windword

Sorry xuenchen I have to.

Triggered!



The word is free-range distributable !!



(certified by Roy Rogers' Horse)



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 07:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: Diisenchanted

CNN has lowered their standards to the point that they are now lower on the food chain than the National Enquireror!



Before It's News, The Onion & Sorcha Faal are reliable sources when compared to CNN & the retards.



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 08:31 PM
link   
I am no Trump supporter but given the fact that they reported on him on a very regular basis gave him free media attention that helped his campaign so imo he should be grateful.a reply to: Diisenchanted




posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

Define "far left." Who and what are you talking about?

I disagree with you about the Trump protests, mostly because the message in general is not just "I don't like Trump" but also "I stand against Mr. Trump's values, agenda and promises."

The last makes perfect sense, because no matter what you thought about Hillary Clinton or her many (real) flaws ... 55% of Americans who voted DID NOT VOTE for Mr. Trump, and while I know that doesn't make any difference to his win in the Electoral College, what does mean is that if he truly wished to be the President of "all" Americans, he would have modified his agenda to more inclusive of all.

The protests are the epitome of our freedom of speech ... because ... when is the time when that freedom becomes most important?

When you find what the other person is saying COMPLETELY obnoxious. Standing up for their rights then is the telling factor.

Who said or implied that you have to agree with me? Not me, certainly.



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 09:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sublimecraft

originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: Diisenchanted

CNN has lowered their standards to the point that they are now lower on the food chain than the National Enquireror!



Before It's News, The Onion & Sorcha Faal are reliable sources when compared to CNN & the retards.


Can you give us a practical example of what you're referring to?



posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 09:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: rickymouse

Define "far left." Who and what are you talking about?

I disagree with you about the Trump protests, mostly because the message in general is not just "I don't like Trump" but also "I stand against Mr. Trump's values, agenda and promises."

The last makes perfect sense, because no matter what you thought about Hillary Clinton or her many (real) flaws ... 55% of Americans who voted DID NOT VOTE for Mr. Trump, and while I know that doesn't make any difference to his win in the Electoral College, what does mean is that if he truly wished to be the President of "all" Americans, he would have modified his agenda to more inclusive of all.

The protests are the epitome of our freedom of speech ... because ... when is the time when that freedom becomes most important?

When you find what the other person is saying COMPLETELY obnoxious. Standing up for their rights then is the telling factor.

Who said or implied that you have to agree with me? Not me, certainly.


And what is trump supposed to do, give the presidency to Hillary because he did not get the popular vote? If it would have been the opposite way and hillary won, she would be smiling ear to ear and ignoring the fact that Trump got the popular vote.

I tell you what, a lot of people are starting to dislike the Far left. Who are the Far Left, anyone who is dumb enough to think they are doing the country good by doing all this meaningless protesting. Getting in touch with your representatives is the right thing to do. Being reasonable when you send them E-mails, concentrating on letting them know you do not like a certain action and asking them to consider what you say. If people make negative comments in a district by a high percentage on an issue that is not just Trump bashing or supporting bias media that bash Trump, maybe they will listen to them.

This is the most ridiculous I have seen people in this country since the riots in the sixties. Those riots were only in a few areas, this delusion seems to be going on all over. Concentrate on important issues. Scattering protests all over doesn't work, it just brings on retaliation from the whole government and causes the country to go into lockdown. Martial law caused not by trump but by irrational protesters and media that is going manic. Two wrongs do not make a right, Trump's administration will be forced to call martial law if things get bad. Hillary would have never went for this if she was president, she would have initiated martial law already. Maybe you guys do not realize what she was like, look at Kerry's comments about internet use.

You guys are lucky this is Trump, Bill Clinton would have not let this stuff go on when he was president, Neither would half of the other presidents. I grew up hearing stories of the Nazi's, they call trump a neo-nazi. He does not fit the description of nazi's I remember, the nazi's were overpowering controlling lying liberals who believed that only what they believed to be relevant was allowed. That was not at all like the Republican party, they were more like the Far Left by comparison. With the Far Left, there is no compromise, it is either their way or no way. The Far right does not act like the far left, they aren't as pushy.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join