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 Peddles Fake News About Devin Nunes and He’s Now Seeking Legal Action

page: 2
44
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 07:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

don't worry, it's not just you, it's all the leftovers who rail on and on about how above everyone else they are, because they aren't part of the left vs right thing, but spend all their time defending the left, and railing against the right. it's a hobby to pick out irony and be damn sure the poster knows he said something kind of dumb.


It's a smug thing. I'm certain you understand.




posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 07:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

The only way to resolve these things is to have it adjudicated by a court where the rules of evidence are in place, and arguments must be fact based.

Defamation is fraud, and fraud is one of the few matters I think validly should be taken to court.


I agree.

Here is y wprry.

Lets say me or you start a newspaper, and although we may have bias, we legitimately want to report truthful news.

A person we interview tells us Senator Graham (it could be anyone just using an example) made a shady deal with a chinese company.

Now we look into the person we interviewed, and it turns out he is somehow involved with this chinese company.

Do we the get sued if we run the story and it tunrs out to be false?

I feel that there would have to be proven we knew the story was false and ran the story anyways to defame Graham.

Its just seems like a slippery slope to rush to lawsuits like this.

And I say this as a person who thinks journalism is basically dead on all sides in the msm



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

in the old days, they didn't post first, and fact check later, or never, they fact checked BEFORE they posted. I think they called it Journalistic Integrity. Those days are long gone, and I doubt the toothpaste will go back in the tube at this point.



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 08:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96



The only way news organizations are going to be held accountable for their false stories if someone has the ability to sue their pants off for falsehood/lies, IMO.


Regulate them like they do firearms.

Licensing,background checks,mandatory waiting periods,certfication classes.



I think the mandatory waiting period for "breaking stories" should be law.

How many times lately has there been "breaking stories" on CNN or MSNBC, NBC, etc. only to have it proven false a few days later. Too many times to count.

I have quit reacting to "the bombshell report that will take out Trump" that we get every other day it seems. Why? Because less than a week later, the bombshell turns out to be a dud. Problem is that the "dud" is not reported by the people who reported the false bombshell and so it is believed, even if the rest of the media proves it to be false or greatly greatly greatly exaggerated.



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 08:08 AM
link   
a reply to: 727Sky

He may as well sue NBC then,

The attorney for an indicted associate of President Donald Trump's personal lawyer says his client is willing to tell Congress that Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., met with Ukraine's former top prosecutor about investigating the activities of Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden."

www.nbcnews.com...

Ironically, it is the Daily Wire that makes a habit of running with an unverified story and, being bendy with the truth....and, creating anon pages on Facebook...they are lucky Facebook didn't go after them


edit on 23-11-2019 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 08:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Gryphon66

don't worry, it's not just you, it's all the leftovers who rail on and on about how above everyone else they are, because they aren't part of the left vs right thing, but spend all their time defending the left, and railing against the right. it's a hobby to pick out irony and be damn sure the poster knows he said something kind of dumb.


It's a smug thing. I'm certain you understand.


See, here’s the thing. You’re obviously not including yourself as a “leftover” (which is not as edgy as you seem to think) but you’re willing to classify every member here that you dont’ agree with as “leftovers” (with the operative pun being stale, secondhand food) ... and you think that’s not evidence of the arrogance of your posts? LOL.

Dude, I’ve never “railed” about how above anyone I am. You’re simply lying when you say I defend “the left.” I defend truth, evidence and logic.

I think I’ve recommended before that you skip over my posts, as you seem to be really irritated by them.



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 08:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
I don't see how Nunes has a case. The story was based on what Parnas said. Nunes was given opportunities to rebut those claims but he preferred to act like a child. So in the end CNN had to run the article without comments from Nunes.




Secondly, if cnn actually had this told to them, why should they be sued. Now if they were shown its false and continued to push it (like the sandman case) that seems to be different

I guess id need to see more deatils of exactly is happeneing before i make a judgement on this case; but even as spomeone who thinks nn is nothing more than a propaganda outlet, I hesitate to cheer for them being sued without all the acts.

Remember if this works for cnn, next it will be any small conservatove outlets getting sued for wrong stories



BEFORE publishing a story it should be confirmed to be TRUE and provable.

If an outlet charges ahead with second or third hand "presumptions" as evidence, that is irresponsible.

Especially if the presumptions turn out to be outright manufactured lies to destroy someone.

We are seeing way too much of that these days, way too much.

People should sue and I am glad they are for publishing stories without enough evidence to know they are true. If they fit the narrative the news outlet pushes the story is advanced for ratings, if it turns out to be a lie and ruin someone's life, they don't give a flying rats behind. That is and should be illegal and deemed libelous.

They SHOULD be sued for "wrong stories" and be afraid of publishing stories without enough evidence to know the truth. It destroys people lives, sometimes forever because the "wrong stories" - IE OUTRIGHT LIES that serve the narrative of the news outlet and their ratings. This is downright evil.

One should never support the idea that "wrong stories" (i.e. LIES) must be tolerated for journalism to thrive.

Really?
I go to a news outlet, tell them a huge lie about YOU,
they report it, you lose your job, you lose your family, you lose your ability to get another job.
Now the news outlet finds out it is a lie, but I am an anonymous source, so no one knows who I am.
I get off scott free, the news outlets get great ratings - your life it totaled.
That is what we must have so journalists aren't afraid to publish stories? Really?


You think I don't want small news outlets to be held to the same standards? Wrong, printing any story without proof it is true, real proof, is lying, is propaganda - is evil - is seditious - is wrong - and people must be sued for doing so to protect journalistic integrity.


edit on 11/23/19 by The2Billies because: addition format



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 08:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

If we publish a story that is not true, and it damages the other party involved in a concrete provable way, and both the falseness of the publication and the actuality of the damage is sustained in court, then ABSOLUTELY that is what should happen.

EVERY right is abused, as surely as every right has LIMITS.



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: The2Billies

For what it’s worth, I absolutely agree with your post here.

Well said, logically argued.



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 08:16 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

They have a direct witness telling them this happened. They have supporting evidence this happened. Should they scratch the story just because decided to act childish instead of responding to their multiple requests for a comment?



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 08:33 AM
link   
I feel like we’re discussing the topic in a vacuum ... here’s the story from CNN we’re apparently talking about.

CNN Devin Nunes: Giuliani




(CNN) A lawyer for an indicted associate of Rudy Giuliani tells CNN that his client is willing to tell Congress about meetings the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee had in Vienna last year with a former Ukrainian prosecutor to discuss digging up dirt on Joe Biden.

The attorney, Joseph A. Bondy, represents Lev Parnas, the recently indicted Soviet-born American who worked with Giuliani to push claims of Democratic corruption in Ukraine. Bondy said that Parnas was told directly by the former Ukrainian official that he met last year in Vienna with Rep. Devin Nunes.

"Mr. Parnas learned from former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Victor Shokin that Nunes had met with Shokin in Vienna last December," said Bondy


Now, let’s see what we have here in terms of journalistic integrity:

We have an identified source.

The article quotes the source.

It factually identifies the relationship of the source to the matter at hand.

The matter is not only newsworthy, but if true, could and should disqualify Nunes’ participation in the impeachment hearings.

(Allow me to say again here that the validity of these impeachment hearings have been totally nullified by Speaker Pelosi’s public admission that the only reason they’re pursuing impeachment is that they can’t trust the American electorate, the stupid $%#@&.)



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 08:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Further, CNN tried on several occasions to allow Mr. Nunes to respond ... here was his response:



In the Capitol on Nov. 14, as CNN began to ask a question about the trip to Vienna, Nunes interjected and said, "I don't talk to you in this lifetime or the next lifetime." "At any time," Nunes added. "On any question." Asked again on Thursday about his travel to Vienna and his interactions with Shokin and Parnas, Nunes gave a similar response. "To be perfectly clear, I don't acknowledge any questions from you in this lifetime or the next lifetime," Nunes said while leaving the impeachment hearing. "I don't acknowledge any question from you ever." CNN was unable to reach Shokin for comment.


That pretty much would invalidate any claim that CNN acted in an unfair manner.

CNN, ibid



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 08:48 AM
link   
The big thing that the right wing conspiracy nut jobs miss is that the "Ukraine Meddling Theory" came directly from Putin himself. Every time Trump repeats it he is helping Putins agenda. Every time Nunes says it, same thing. The only question is are they furthering that agenda knowingly or just cause that's their only "defense."



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 08:56 AM
link   
Seems we have a new standard.

CNN's excuse is "we tried to get him to talk to us" - AFTER they published the story.

It reminds me of Pelosi saying "Trump has to prove to us he is innocent" otherwise he is guilty was the unsaid assumption.

The US has abandoned the traditional, constitutional, very old fashioned, ultra-conservative idea that people are innocent until proven guilty. There is a caveat however, this is true only if the person accused is a conservative, or God forbid, religious, or even worse, worked for Trump.

Now in the social media, but far far more disturbing in the national news outlets, conservative people are presumed guilty and must prove beyond a shadow of a doubt they are innocent.

If they don't, it is fair game to destroy their lives, their ability to ever work again, their reputation. That is now how the media operates.

I see too many people supporting this "new" "liberal" way of deciding what the news should be able to report without any real proof. "He won't respond to our story, so it must be true" "He won't prove to us the story is wrong, so it is true"

Don't you realize that just the story itself destroys lives and declaring one's innocence simply drives the fake story further into the news cycle, further destroying the life of the person who was lied about. But destroying conservatives is what the liberal agenda loves to do and thinks is helping the cause of liberalism and gets votes for the Democratic Party.

But liberals seem to think that is what "real journalism" is or allowing this freely without consequence is "protecting journalistic integrity" - double speak abounds.

There is only recourse left - sue them, hit them where it hurts. That is the only justice left to conservatives, because it appears that (FBI, CIA, etc., systems run by liberals) have abandoned real blind justice in favor of political partisanship.





edit on 11/23/19 by The2Billies because: addition format



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 09:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: 727Sky

Shame no one can level the playing field and file against the fake news that comes from the White House and the tweeter in chief , I guess different standards apply between free press "fake news" and officially sanctioned "fake news".

Don't you concern yourself one little bit on that.
Trump is not your President.
Do you follow Don on Twitter ?
If so , why ?
If not , how do you draw those conclusions ?

Now that is out of the way , and back on topic , how do you feel about Nunes going after CNN ?


Alright, Goth!
Can we ALL participate in some sort of class action WITH Nunes?
Since we've ALL bee lied to, misrepresented, mischaracterized, propagandized, led to the point of nervous breakdown (mostly on the left) - the entire public forum has been contaminated by these tactics and we have all suffered "harm".

In this case, ACTUAL MALICE might be definitely proved, rocking the foundation of Sullivan v. New York Times forever. Perhaps we finally have a vehicle to hold the media accountable. (okay probably not, but)

I thing we should all get a piece of this action...

ganjoa

edit on 2019-11-23 by ganjoa because: nkey key nkey N



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 09:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Ya, Nancy was stupid to make this comment. And, I just ain't gonna track down the actual statement just to find out that her words are being taken out of context but it wouldn't surprise me to learn that she did.
I'm lazy and it's easy just to go with the claim. Nancy said something stupid. We are constantly being told not to pay that much attention to what trump says, look at all that hes done. And, hes constantly saying stupid things. And how many republican senators have come out and said they arent really paying attention to the testimonies, it doesnt matter, their mind is already made up? Those comments would remove them from any jury pool and you should know that.
Stupid statements, false statements, and Nunes sues his cow.. I hope people are saving the newspapers and printing out the web articles and preserving them for the future generations. I think they'd provide someone's grandkids hours of entertainment when they come to visit on those hot summer days.



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 09:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: GrandSchemeOfThings
The big thing that the right wing conspiracy nut jobs miss is that the "Ukraine Meddling Theory" came directly from Putin himself. Every time Trump repeats it he is helping Putins agenda. Every time Nunes says it, same thing. The only question is are they furthering that agenda knowingly or just cause that's their only "defense."


www.politico.com...

"Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election."

Those darn right wing conspiracy theories.



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: The2Billies




Don't you realize that just the story itself destroys lives and declaring one's innocence simply drives the fake story further into the news cycle, further destroying the life of the person who was lied about. But destroying conservatives is what the liberal agenda loves to do and thinks is helping the cause of liberalism and gets votes for the Democratic Party.

So you're saying it's bad when the press make accusations against Republicans but fine for Trump to do the same about Democrats from his twitter pulpit and election rallies , perhaps Republicans need a safe space too.




posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

You must get news approved by the Supreme Leader! That is the rights dream. Having DJT dictate their every move!!! Its a utopia for them😆



posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: BrennanHuff22

And, shortly after they backed away from the manifort investigation, they were gifted with some fun new toys to have in their arsenal... another quid pro quo?

And if mexico or canada were to decide to take our territory and some european candidates were suggesting that we should just let them have it I imagine there would be plenty in our govt speaking out against the idea also.
By the way, there were alot of govt officials from various countries publicly saying not so nice things about trump.

By what i hear, the intelligence community has briefed the senators telling them that this is a russian disinformation campaign and some of those senators are still playing along.



new topics

top topics



 
44
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join