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.
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: ketsuko
The point is, no such headline exists in the MSM.
You guys are not ignorant now after all, as you know I was going to find quotes, right?
Read and weep:
www.dailykos.com...
"This, then, would be the precise sort of "collusion" with foreign intelligence efforts that probes of the Trump campaign's association with Russian election hacks have been exploring."
nymag.com...
"that U.S. investigators “have examined reports from intelligence agencies that describe Russian hackers discussing how to obtain emails from Mrs. Clinton’s server and then transmit them to Mr. Flynn via an intermediary.” "
www.newsweek.com...
"Below is a new timeline of publicly reported events of Donald J. Trump’s acts of accommodation toward Russia since the U.S. presidential election."
nymag.com...
"What’s new is that explicit evidence of collusion may now extend to the Trump campaign itself."
NOW DENY AWAY for your lying MSM.
originally posted by: Kali74
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: ketsuko
The point is, no such headline exists in the MSM.
You guys are not ignorant now after all, as you know I was going to find quotes, right?
Read and weep:
www.dailykos.com...
"This, then, would be the precise sort of "collusion" with foreign intelligence efforts that probes of the Trump campaign's association with Russian election hacks have been exploring."
nymag.com...
"that U.S. investigators “have examined reports from intelligence agencies that describe Russian hackers discussing how to obtain emails from Mrs. Clinton’s server and then transmit them to Mr. Flynn via an intermediary.” "
www.newsweek.com...
"Below is a new timeline of publicly reported events of Donald J. Trump’s acts of accommodation toward Russia since the U.S. presidential election."
nymag.com...
"What’s new is that explicit evidence of collusion may now extend to the Trump campaign itself."
NOW DENY AWAY for your lying MSM.
You still have not provided a headline nor sentence from within an MSM article that states that Trump colluded with Russia. You are only finding that his campaign or people within his campaign are under investigation... which they are, so there's no lies.
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: ketsuko
The point is, no such headline exists in the MSM.
You guys are not ignorant now after all, as you know I was going to find quotes, right?
Read and weep:
www.dailykos.com...
"This, then, would be the precise sort of "collusion" with foreign intelligence efforts that probes of the Trump campaign's association with Russian election hacks have been exploring."
nymag.com...
"that U.S. investigators “have examined reports from intelligence agencies that describe Russian hackers discussing how to obtain emails from Mrs. Clinton’s server and then transmit them to Mr. Flynn via an intermediary.” "
www.newsweek.com...
"Below is a new timeline of publicly reported events of Donald J. Trump’s acts of accommodation toward Russia since the U.S. presidential election."
nymag.com...
"What’s new is that explicit evidence of collusion may now extend to the Trump campaign itself."
NOW DENY AWAY for your lying MSM.
originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Justoneman
Just give it up man. You won't win this one.
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Justoneman
Just give it up man. You won't win this one.
Right and no matter what the truth is or is not in that ones eyes.
originally posted by: Deaf Alien
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Justoneman
Just give it up man. You won't win this one.
Right and no matter what the truth is or is not in that ones eyes.
You haven't provided a single example of MSM claiming that Trump colluded with Russia.
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
You don't understand? The press is under attack by the administration. You don't understand that this has been a whisper building to a crescendo for years? You don't understand how Trump is fomenting outright hostility against the press and his supporters are lapping it up like kittens with milk? Milk isn't good for kitties though.
I think you understand all too well. It reminds me of your outrage that people protested Milo and Coulter (before it turned violent). Free speech seems to end for you when people vocalize disagreement with other speakers. I don't agree with trying to get Trump banned from twitter but I hardly think it was a serious call. Funny how Trump and supporters get to use that continuously huh?
I think a journalist is perfectly entitled to call attacks on the press un-American. It is. Saying so is also free speech.
originally posted by: Kali74
originally posted by: Lab4Us
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Lab4Us
The dossier was always reported as iffy. There was no major outlet that I can recall claiming that Comey would testify that Trump was under sole investigation.
But from an honest press, if iffy, why report it? There used to be a policy that a story had to be thoroughly vetted before being published/reported. Seems that is no longer the case and would be another big thing that would go a long way in fixing the problem.
Whether it gets verified or not, it's existence alone is news. It's either real which is a bomb shell or it's fake and a British spy was working to derail the GOP nominee at someone's behest.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: pavil
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
People, ie the Media, who live in glass houses shouldn't be shocked that people throw stones at them from time to time. Especially when they get themselves caught in repeated falsehoods and unverified statements that turn out to be wrong. Basic journalistic procedures would prevent their glass from being broken.
They scoff at the importance and foundations of their own craft for profits and other gains. It would all end if they returned to their principles, which are currently floating somewhere in the wind. The importance of an informed public is no longer something they hold to.
originally posted by: redtic
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
Again, I'm really interested to see an example of what you would consider good reporting on this subject. Can you provide one?
Who said the press runs the country or are attempting to?