CNN Doxes Elderly Trump Supporter, Harasses Her, Accuses Her Of Working For Russian Trolls

Goebbels would be so damn proud that propaganda is legal again, and proud of the MSM.

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
...and so it begins.

Communist!

Terrorist!

Reading the comments that people have left her
is just sickening, accusing her of treason
and wishing her dead.

Unreal!

Yup. All of a sudden the left are patriots?! I thought that's a trigger word for them.

CNN is done. They are now under the old adage "you can do anything you like on your last day"
1) Multiple major lawsuits in Georgia (their HQ) on harassment and discrimination
2) CNN knows that AT&T will definitely restructure and reorganize CNN if the buyout goes through . Starting with Zucker.
The buyout is still in limbo and the only reason that it is , is someone in power wants CNN to completely fail .

a reply to: burntheships

This is typical scumbag news CNN, the Clinton News Network, "Your first name in screwing the general public." Harassing a woman for no reason all the as$wipes in on this need to be demoted or out right fired.

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed

Yup. All of a sudden the left are patriots?!

Who would have known....

Yeah, and The FISA court and Robert Mueller are their hero's!?

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire

So not just posting but the host the supporters group. An activist.

She is not an "activist".

And why did CNN badger her when Rod Rosenstein said
no Americans knowingly participated?


" There is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election. "

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire

So not just posting but the host the supporters group. An activist.

She is not an "activist".

And why did CNN badger her when Rod Rosenstein said
no Americans knowingly participated?


" There is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election. "

Woman who expresses conservative opinion on facebook.... POLITICAL ACTIVIST!

Woman who shows up at several anti-free speech rallies and damages personal property......non affiliated random individual.

a reply to: JonCrichton

Yes, I think she was defending her honor. She clearly took the mention of Russian influence personally and defended her and her group as patriots who are all Americans with nothing to do with Russia. She was very clear on that and I believe her.

As I understand the word ''troll'' it means someone who knowingly passes along false or misleading information. From what I saw of her it makes no sense to me to think that she or her fellows were trolling at all. Rather they were speaking out about their concerns over the messaging they were recieving via the media. When she was asked the question about the source of some of the things and points that were being discussed were Russian influenced, her mind could not cope with that and she called an end to the interview.

a reply to: burntheships

We must disagree on the definition of the word ''activist''.
To me an activist is a person who takes actions to effect social change. An organizer who either physically, like organizing marches or events or confrences, or organizing a facebook page for political discussion.

She did not run for office. She supported someone who did.

I could understand this if she was a candidate for something, or an elected official already. You see news people showing up at their offices all the time (not so often at their homes, but it does happen).

Here we have a person who did nothing other than support a candidate on social media. She did not cross that line where a person becomes "public interest."

So CNN's investigative journalism is now comprised of looking at social media posts, looking those people's information up (I'd like to know if she was listed or unlisted, and if unlisted I'd like to know the method with which they obtained her address) and just showing up at people's homes because it fits a story they've been pushing.

I believe that she made a mistake by engaging the "reporter" even though I understand and have seen the vile tactics they use to goad people into talking to them.

This is an embarrassment to journalism. Far moreso than the idiot searching through garbage.

CNN have taken it upon themselves to rally the new Brownshirts.

Cool. If something happens thanks to their xenophobic hysteria they'll discover the label "journalist" does not grant immunity from the law.

originally posted by: Beach Bum
a reply to: burntheships

This is typical scumbag news CNN, the Clinton News Network, "Your first name in screwing the general public." Harassing a woman for no reason all the as$wipes in on this need to be demoted or out right fired.

No no, CNN was doing their due diligence in interviewing that racist old nazi collaborator who posted things on facebook, by inviting her to an interview by publicly publishing her name and then showing up at her door, unannounced. On the side walk, because that's public property, and in no way when a valid, viable news source shows up pointing cameras at your house, do you ever go to engage them unless you're a willing participant in the legitimate interview process.

It's all above board. Shhhh now, CNN is on.

Serves her right for being pro trump, an obvious agitator and activist, who has no doubt, nefarious intent... like sharing posts.

Why is journalists chasing leads on stories all of a sudden the devil when the story focuses on someone from the right in America?

You guys praise Project Veritas even though they hide who they are and have to edit their content to make it fit their narrative but CNN chasing leads and doing interviews is to far!

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire

So not just posting but the host the supporters group. An activist.

She is not an "activist".

If I was a moderator on facebook I'd have put her in facebook jail for a year. She's obviously a trouble maker, and obviously deserves having her name dragged through the public and berated on public television for daring to support Trump on facebook.

One day, just a harmless old lady... the next day, feeding people prussian blue.

.... on a serious note, if any so called media had arrived at my door and badgered me for posting something on facebook, they'd come with one story in mind, and leave with a nice story on what hospital food is like for those who cannot eat without a tube.

originally posted by: Pyle
Why is journalists chasing leads on stories all of a sudden the devil when the story focuses on someone from the right in America?

You guys praise Project Veritas even though they hide who they are and have to edit their content to make it fit their narrative but CNN chasing leads and doing interviews is to far!

So you'd be ok with someone rocking up to your front door, for your opinions and posts on ATS?

No?

a reply to: burntheships

I watched this report.

They had to have permission to air her name. Have you ever seen a news story that didn't show the first and last, or was simply anonymous?

they actually interviewed two people that were duped by Russians. The other person was very understanding (but didn't leave the interview without putting the reporter down for not understanding how blue collar workers talk - I didn't know Trump was blue collar).

The woman wasn't even remotely trying to understand what the reporter was asking, so he had to continually repeat and rephrase his question.

She didn't even remember the name of the group that convinced her to rally. She thought the reporter was telling her she was "being patriotic"

They were very kind to her in the post interview commentary by 4 people (Anderson, 2 panel guests and the reporter).

I bet that's not on the OPs article, but I'm positive it's online.

I haven't read the thread (just the op and first few responses)... but I'm bettin' a lot of folks worked themselves into a tissy.

...she wasn't really elderly either.. I think of elderly as something like needing a walker or cane.

The way the op is written I'm surprised the title wasn't "CCN Beats Elderly Woman With Her Own Cane - Nursing Home Residents Report Troubled Sleep"

a reply to: Pearj

Who cares if she is *elderly enough* for you or not?

Unless there is some effort to bring balanced reporting about people who have been 'duped' by a bot, troll, or fake 'news,' then this kind of reporting is beneath contempt.

People who never lift a finger, ever, to personally investigate any information and consider the word of major media news as gospel? They are the stupidest society has to offer. Facts are meaningless to them because the popularity of the source gives them an easy excuse to claim they are credible and avoid their due diligence.

ETA: I mean, the nerve of anyone mocking this woman if they have, themselves, accepted information from people they have never personally investigated as credible or not!

a reply to: Pearj

Please do not post any names here, thanks.

Personally did not even look for her name.

Also, do you think CNN would tell her they
were coming to ask her if she was colluding
with Russians?

If, and that is a big IF they called ahead
did they tell her they would badger her
and accuse her like they did?

She sure looked like they just "dropped in"
and not prepared to be on Camera.

I have seen the really horrid things
CNN does when they were caught
being filmed without knowledge.

And why didn't they acknowledge
they themselves fell for or knowingly
colluded with these same trolls?

F CNN.