Dog Brothers Public Forum

HOME | PUBLIC FORUM | MEMBERS FORUM | INSTRUCTORS FORUM | TRIBE FORUM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
February 25, 2018, 09:40:15 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
107531 Posts in 2406 Topics by 1095 Members
Latest Member: dannysamuel
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities
| |-+  Politics & Religion
| | |-+  Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 43 44 [45] Print
Author Topic: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues  (Read 574634 times)
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 7843


« Reply #2200 on: November 30, 2017, 10:51:33 AM »

" which was the biggest story in 'professional journalism', North Korea now able to reach Washington DC with nuclear warhead missiles or Matt Lauer out? "

For many on the LEFT it is by far the Lauer story.  Why, because is all a set up to get  Trump.  They are establishing platforms to launch an all assault on Trump.  They know they can't make the case till they make argument that we should not tolerate any of this "behavior".

From Wikipedia on Gloria Allred :

*Allred is representing at least 28 women who accuse Bill Cosby of sexual assault, sexual harassment, and/or other sexual misconduct.[60] She is also representing three women who accuse Donald Trump of sexual misconduct — claims which Trump has denied, and which first arose during Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.[61]*

read the paragraph about Gloria Allred , http://deadline.com/2017/11/2018-sundance-film-festival-lineup-jane-fonda-idris-elba-competition-movies-list-1202216273/

Recent Democrat explaining the Party needs to take the moral high ground.  Really ?  rolleyes  Why now? :

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/362471-democrat-pelosi-ceded-the-moral-high-ground-on-sexual-harassment
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2201 on: November 30, 2017, 11:20:17 AM »


"(B)ecause (it) is all a set up to get Trump."


EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 9484


« Reply #2202 on: November 30, 2017, 11:43:20 AM »

They won't have Trump circled until they get Franken out first. It seems like what Trump said and what Franken did are roughly the same thing.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/30/politics/al-franken-groping-allegation/index.html
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2203 on: November 30, 2017, 01:03:07 PM »

And the Weenie Reps are playing right into it!!!   rolleyes angry angry
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 7843


« Reply #2204 on: December 01, 2017, 07:13:19 PM »

This was Matt Lauer's best day all week.

 tongue
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2205 on: December 03, 2017, 06:35:06 AM »

https://pamelageller.com/2017/12/abc-news-suspends-not-fires-brian-ross-huge-trump-fake-news-fireross.html/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2206 on: December 03, 2017, 07:38:09 AM »

WASHINGTON — When President Trump fired his national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, in February, White House officials portrayed him as a renegade who had acted independently in his discussions with a Russian official during the presidential transition and then lied to his colleagues about the interactions.

But emails among top transition officials, provided or described to The New York Times, suggest that Mr. Flynn was far from a rogue actor. In fact, the emails, coupled with interviews and court documents filed on Friday, showed that Mr. Flynn was in close touch with other senior members of the Trump transition team both before and after he spoke with the Russian ambassador, Sergey I. Kislyak, about American sanctions against Russia.

While Mr. Trump has disparaged as a Democratic “hoax” any claims that he or his aides had unusual interactions with Russian officials, the records suggest that the Trump transition team was intensely focused on improving relations with Moscow and was willing to intervene to pursue that goal despite a request from the Obama administration that it not sow confusion about official American policy before Mr. Trump took office.

On Dec. 29, a transition adviser to Mr. Trump, K. T. McFarland, wrote in an email to a colleague that sanctions announced hours before by the Obama administration in retaliation for Russian election meddling were aimed at discrediting Mr. Trump’s victory. The sanctions could also make it much harder for Mr. Trump to ease tensions with Russia, “which has just thrown the U.S.A. election to him,” she wrote in the emails obtained by The Times.

It is not clear whether Ms. McFarland was saying she believed that the election had in fact been thrown. A White House lawyer said on Friday that she meant only that the Democrats were portraying it that way.
Continue reading the main story
Russian Hacking and Influence in the U.S. Election
Complete coverage of Russia’s campaign to disrupt the 2016 presidential election.

    ABC Suspends Reporter Brian Ross Over Erroneous Report About Trump
    DEC 2
    Wrenched From Scandal to Success, Trump Looks Ahead, and Over His Shoulder
    DEC 2
    Trump Says He Fired Michael Flynn ‘Because He Lied’ to F.B.I.
    DEC 2
    Mueller Removed Top Agent in Russia Inquiry Over Possible Anti-Trump Texts
    DEC 2
    Deck the Halls With White House Folly
    DEC 1

See More »
Related Coverage

    Michael Flynn Pleads Guilty to Lying to the F.B.I. and Will Cooperate With Russia Inquiry DEC. 1, 2017
    Documents Reveal New Details on What Trump Team Knew About Flynn’s Calls With Russia’s Ambassador DEC. 1, 2017
    WHITE HOUSE MEMO
    Flynn’s Guilty Plea Looms Over a White House on the Verge of a Tax Cut Success DEC. 1, 2017
    A Split From Trump Indicates That Flynn Is Moving to Cooperate With Mueller NOV. 23, 2017

ADVERTISEMENT
Continue reading the main story

But it is evident from the emails — which were obtained from someone who had access to transition team communications — that after learning that President Barack Obama would expel 35 Russian diplomats, the Trump team quickly strategized about how to reassure Russia. The Trump advisers feared that a cycle of retaliation between the United States and Russia would keep the spotlight on Moscow’s election meddling, tarnishing Mr. Trump’s victory and potentially hobbling his presidency from the start.

As part of the outreach, Ms. McFarland wrote, Mr. Flynn would be speaking with the Russian ambassador, Mr. Kislyak, hours after Mr. Obama’s sanctions were announced.

“Key will be Russia’s response over the next few days,” Ms. McFarland wrote in an email to another transition official, Thomas P. Bossert, now the president’s homeland security adviser.

In an interview, Ty Cobb, the White House lawyer handling the Russia inquiry, said there was nothing illegal or unethical about the transition team’s actions. “It would have been political malpractice not to discuss sanctions,” he said, adding that “the presidential transition guide specifically encourages contact with and outreach to foreign dignitaries.”

The only problem, Mr. Cobb said, was that Mr. Flynn had lied to White House officials and to F.B.I. agents about what he had told the Russian ambassador. Mr. Flynn’s misstatements led to his firing in February and his guilty plea on Friday to charges of lying to federal agents.

With Mr. Flynn’s plea and agreement to cooperate with Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel investigating the Russian election interference, the inquiry edges closer to Mr. Trump. The president tried to persuade the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, to drop the bureau’s criminal investigation of Mr. Flynn, and fired Mr. Comey after he failed to comply.

Mr. Trump and his aides have suggested that his concern about Mr. Flynn’s potential legal jeopardy was motivated mainly by the president’s admiration for his former national security adviser’s military service and character.

But the new details about Mr. Flynn’s Russia contacts underscore the possibility that the president may have been worried not just about Mr. Flynn but also about whether any investigation might reach into the White House and perhaps to the Oval Office. That question will be at the center of any consideration by Mr. Mueller of whether Mr. Trump’s actions constituted obstruction of justice.

The Trump transition team ignored a pointed request from the Obama administration to avoid sending conflicting signals to foreign officials before the inauguration and to include State Department personnel when contacting them. Besides the Russian ambassador, Mr. Flynn, at the request of the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, contacted several other foreign officials to urge them to delay or block a United Nations resolution condemning Israel over its building of settlements.

Mr. Cobb said the Trump team had never agreed to avoid such interactions. But one former White House official has disputed that, telling Mr. Mueller’s investigators that Trump transition officials had agreed to honor the Obama administration’s request.
Photo
K. T. McFarland made clear in an email exchange that the Trump presidential transition team was intensely focused on relations with Russia. Credit Gabriella Demczuk for The New York Times

Mr. Bossert forwarded Ms. McFarland’s Dec. 29 email exchange about the sanctions to six other Trump advisers, including Mr. Flynn; Reince Priebus, who had been named as chief of staff; Stephen K. Bannon, the senior strategist; and Sean Spicer, who would become the press secretary.

Mr. Obama, she wrote, was trying to “box Trump in diplomatically with Russia,” which could limit his options with other countries, including Iran and Syria. “Russia is key that unlocks door,” she wrote.

She also wrote that the sanctions over Russian election meddling were intended to “lure Trump in trap of saying something” in defense of Russia, and were aimed at “discrediting Trump’s victory by saying it was due to Russian interference.”
Newsletter Sign Up
Continue reading the main story
California Today

The news and stories that matter to Californians (and anyone else interested in the state), delivered weekday mornings.
You agree to receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.

    See Sample Manage Email Preferences Privacy Policy Opt out or contact us anytime

“If there is a tit-for-tat escalation Trump will have difficulty improving relations with Russia, which has just thrown U.S.A. election to him,” she wrote.

Mr. Bossert replied by urging all the top advisers to “defend election legitimacy now.”

Mr. Flynn, who had been fired by Mr. Obama as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, was the point person for the transition team on policy toward Russia and other countries. After Mr. Trump named him as his national security adviser in November, Mr. Flynn began briefing him — some say daily — on foreign policy.

Ms. McFarland, who served until May as deputy national security adviser and is awaiting confirmation as ambassador to Singapore, was sometimes referred to by other transition officials as “Flynn’s brain.” She could not be reached for comment.

Mr. Flynn’s Dec. 29 call with Mr. Kislyak was one of the first formal interactions between the incoming administration and a foreign government. On that winter day, Mr. Trump’s closest associates were scattered around several warm-weather locations.

Mr. Flynn was in the Dominican Republic. Other senior members of Mr. Trump’s transition team, including Ms. McFarland, were at Mr. Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Fla. Mr. Kushner was vacationing in Hawaii with his family.

Obama administration officials were expecting a “bellicose” response to the expulsions and sanctions, according to the email exchange between Ms. McFarland and Mr. Bossert. Lisa Monaco, Mr. Obama’s homeland security adviser, had told Mr. Bossert that “the Russians have already responded with strong threats, promising to retaliate,” according to the emails.

In his phone call with Mr. Kislyak, Mr. Flynn asked that Russia “not escalate the situation,” according to court documents released on Friday. He later related the substance of the call — including the discussion of sanctions — to a senior transition official, believed to be Ms. McFarland. A few days later, he briefed others on the transition team.

Mr. Flynn’s intervention appeared to have a dramatic effect. To the surprise of foreign policy experts, the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin, did not immediately respond with retaliatory expulsions of Americans from Moscow.

Mr. Trump praised that decision in a tweet, writing: “Great move on delay (by V. Putin) — I always knew he was very smart.”

It is uncertain how involved Mr. Trump was in the discussions among his staff members of Mr. Flynn’s conversation with the Russian ambassador. Mr. Spicer told reporters on the morning of Dec. 29 that the president-elect would be meeting with his national security team, including Ms. McFarland, that day. A phone call that included Mr. Trump, Mr. Flynn, Ms. McFarland, Mr. Priebus and Mr. Bannon was scheduled for 5 p.m., shortly after Ms. McFarland’s email exchange. It is unclear whether the call took place.

Mr. Cobb said that Mr. Trump did not know that Mr. Flynn had discussed sanctions with Mr. Kislyak in the call. After the inauguration, “Flynn specifically denied it to him, in the presence of witnesses,” he said.

Some legal experts have speculated that the contacts during the transition between Trump aides and foreign officials might violate the Logan Act, a law that prohibits private American citizens from working with a foreign government against the United States. But the act has not been used to prosecute anyone since the 19th century. Mr. Cobb said the law “certainly does not apply” to a presidential transition team.

The day after the president fired Mr. Flynn, he talked about the F.B.I. inquiry with Mr. Comey, the agency’s director. Mr. Comey has said the president urged him to drop the inquiry. “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go,” Mr. Trump said, according to a memo that Mr. Comey wrote immediately afterward. The White House has denied that account. The president fired Mr. Comey in May.

Testifying before Congress in June, Mr. Comey declined to say whether the president had fired him to impede the investigation. “I don’t think it’s for me to say whether the conversation I had with the president was an effort to obstruct,” he said. “I took it as a very disturbing thing, very concerning, but that’s a conclusion I’m sure the special counsel will work towards to try and understand what the intention was there, and whether that’s an offense.”
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2207 on: December 05, 2017, 01:58:08 PM »

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/media-meltdown-and-the-damage-it-does-to-democracy/article/2642556
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2208 on: December 06, 2017, 09:58:53 AM »

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/dec/5/brian-ross-removed-from-trump-coverage-after-suspe/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTTJWalptTmpNREZsTWpZMSIsInQiOiI5cnVtYXVjVmpYQ25tRWhSK2ZpQjFcL1ZLdFN0dFJ2ZlZzajRpQWZVY2t2eU5nMFlleVBaSjlLcHBBcWxsQVlIbzgxTWdIcEY2ZUlHdkgwUlwvSm56QTYrcVY0Uzk2ckdsUGdrc0NsOTREekhFcDFpMlVQanlpRSszXC90UUJGRjE1WCJ9
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2209 on: December 10, 2017, 02:07:13 PM »

Powerful piece;  read with care.

https://theintercept.com/2017/12/09/the-u-s-media-yesterday-suffered-its-most-humiliating-debacle-in-ages-now-refuses-all-transparency-over-what-happened/
« Last Edit: December 10, 2017, 02:10:33 PM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2210 on: December 10, 2017, 02:08:51 PM »

Second post

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqFBnGN5NRc
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 7843


« Reply #2211 on: December 11, 2017, 05:59:11 PM »

why is CNN always the station on at airports ?

I assume it is because most  airport employees are Democrats so they pick what gets played.



https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/time-get-cnn-airports-etc/
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 15536


« Reply #2212 on: December 11, 2017, 06:12:29 PM »

why is CNN always the station on at airports ?

I assume it is because most  airport employees are Democrats so they pick what gets played.



https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/time-get-cnn-airports-etc/

Imagine just how pathetic CNN's rating would be without forced viewership.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/07/06/ratings-collapse-cnn-now-losing-nick-nite-prime-time-ratings-war/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2213 on: December 11, 2017, 06:30:55 PM »

That article is five months old.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 7843


« Reply #2214 on: December 12, 2017, 09:06:10 PM »

No giant uprisings about the Jerusalem announcement and the LEFT is furious so Vox twists it to sound like Trump failed to create the violence he "wanted":


https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/5bbe7f62-dcad-30c9-95ae-a286d5c28a38/ss_trump’s-jerusalem-move-was.html

Left in medicine is S for sinister. Or from the Latin word sinnestra.
 sounds about right (no pun intended).

« Last Edit: December 12, 2017, 09:08:55 PM by ccp » Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 9484


« Reply #2215 on: December 18, 2017, 11:57:21 PM »

An interesting point made on radio today:

There have been a rash of fake news stories on major media lately.   Perhaps these fake news stories are planted in an effort to discover who the leakers in the administration are and because it's fun to suck the opposition media into a trap of reporting blatant, unforced errors. 

The WashPost won't give up their sources, but the people who gave the leaker the slightly falsified info knows who they gave the false info to.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 9484


« Reply #2216 on: December 19, 2017, 05:06:40 PM »

AP, CNN AND BLOOMBERG FACT CHECKERS CLAIMED ECONOMY COULDN'T HIT 4%

http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/268772/ap-cnn-and-bloomberg-fact-checkers-claimed-economy-daniel-greenfield

But the fact checkers and economists told us it couldn't happen.

Here's CNN.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/11/news/economy/trump-four-percent-growth-economists/index.html

Trump promises 4% growth. Economists say no way. - CNN

Donald Trump has a big promise for the U.S. economy: 4% growth.

No chance, say 11 economists surveyed by CNNMoney. And a paper published Tuesday by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco backs them up.

"No, pigs do not fly," says Robert Brusca, senior economist at FAO Economics, a research firm. "Donald Trump is dreaming."

The Republican presidential nominee made the promise in a speech in New York in September. "I believe it's time to establish a national goal of reaching 4% economic growth," he said.

So what's realistic? The San Francisco Fed estimates the "new normal" for annual economic growth to be 1.5% to 1.75%. That's far lower than the period from World War II to 2004, when growth typically hovered between 3% and 4%.

It's time to embrace the malaise. The era of greatness is done.
 
But wait, the pigs are flying.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/ap-fact-check-trump-imagines-percent-growth-51626346

AP FACT CHECK: Trump imagines 6 percent growth - AP

President Donald Trump is holding out the prospect of 6 percent growth in the U.S. economy. Put that down to puffery.

By most signs, economists say the country will be lucky to achieve consistent annual growth much over 2 percent.

A look at the president's remarks at a Cabinet meeting Wednesday:

TRUMP:

—"So we're at 3.3 percent GDP. I see no reason why we don't go to 4 percent, 5 percent, and even 6 percent."

—Speaks of GDP "getting up to 4, 5, and even 6 percent, because I think that's possible."

THE FACTS:

Federal Reserve officials and most mainstream economists expect economic growth to hew closer to 2 percent. There are no signs the economy is capable of delivering a phenomenal and rarely achieved growth rate on the order of 6 percent.

These aren't facts. They're opinions. But lefties have long ceased being able to distinguish between the two. They shout things that they feel and then insist that anyone who denies them hates science.

Trump is officially making an economic promise that will be nearly impossible to keep - Business Insider

"To get the economy back on track, President Trump has outlined a bold plan to create 25 million new American jobs in the next decade and return to 4 percent annual economic growth," reads the White House site.

The 4% GDP promise is one that Trump has made before, but now it is the official promise of the White House and the president.

The only problem is delivering on this promise will be incredibly difficult.

Currently, the US is stuck in a slow growth pattern since the financial crisis and has been unable to escape the 1.5% to 2.5% annual growth corridor over the past seven years. This is lower than the 3.1% percent average annual GDP growth we've been experiencing since 1950.

While there are a number of reasons for this — sluggish corporate investment, Americans saving more of their income, low wage growth, and more — it would take a monumental task to return the US to nearly double its current annual growth rate.

Reversing the course of this will be difficult, especially in just four years,

How about one?
http://fortune.com/2017/12/07/trump-us-gdp-growth-rate-economy-6-percent/

Trump Thinks the U.S. Could See 6% Economic Growth. The Data Says Otherwise. - Fortune

According to Bloomberg, Trump claimed that the combination of high consumer confidence, job creation, and tax cuts would create this considerable growth. Trump claimed that he sees “no reason why we don’t go to 4, 5, even 6%.”

Unfortunately, Trump didn’t explain exactly how this jump would happen, and few economists support his claim. In a Bloomberg survey of 80 economists, only one forecast showed a growth above 4%.

We have a winner.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 7843


« Reply #2217 on: December 19, 2017, 08:15:10 PM »

unless your poll is mainstream media who only asks those who pay no taxes if they are for tax cuts for the "rich":

https://www.conservativereview.com/articles/polling-shows-broad-support-for-policies-in-gop-tax-bill

PS I am for tax cuts for everyone.  But like Michael Savage (not nearly as rich however) I am going to get a tax increase and am not happy.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 7843


« Reply #2218 on: December 20, 2017, 02:11:18 PM »

"In the campaign, Trump had the best tax plan.  This isn't exactly that but it's the best plan that could get through this Corker-Flake-McCain Congress."

I think it is a very safe bet to make that  this is the last tax cut we will ever see.  Certainly in my life time.

At least for a time we rid this nation of the Obama effect.  But the Left is not going to just fade away. 

Next we need to stop this ridiculous open borders and chain migration stuff.

Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 15536


« Reply #2219 on: December 21, 2017, 08:22:38 PM »

This just proves the economy is very, very racist.


AP, CNN AND BLOOMBERG FACT CHECKERS CLAIMED ECONOMY COULDN'T HIT 4%

http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/268772/ap-cnn-and-bloomberg-fact-checkers-claimed-economy-daniel-greenfield

But the fact checkers and economists told us it couldn't happen.

Here's CNN.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/11/news/economy/trump-four-percent-growth-economists/index.html

Trump promises 4% growth. Economists say no way. - CNN

Donald Trump has a big promise for the U.S. economy: 4% growth.

No chance, say 11 economists surveyed by CNNMoney. And a paper published Tuesday by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco backs them up.

"No, pigs do not fly," says Robert Brusca, senior economist at FAO Economics, a research firm. "Donald Trump is dreaming."

The Republican presidential nominee made the promise in a speech in New York in September. "I believe it's time to establish a national goal of reaching 4% economic growth," he said.

So what's realistic? The San Francisco Fed estimates the "new normal" for annual economic growth to be 1.5% to 1.75%. That's far lower than the period from World War II to 2004, when growth typically hovered between 3% and 4%.

It's time to embrace the malaise. The era of greatness is done.
 
But wait, the pigs are flying.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/ap-fact-check-trump-imagines-percent-growth-51626346

AP FACT CHECK: Trump imagines 6 percent growth - AP

President Donald Trump is holding out the prospect of 6 percent growth in the U.S. economy. Put that down to puffery.

By most signs, economists say the country will be lucky to achieve consistent annual growth much over 2 percent.

A look at the president's remarks at a Cabinet meeting Wednesday:

TRUMP:

—"So we're at 3.3 percent GDP. I see no reason why we don't go to 4 percent, 5 percent, and even 6 percent."

—Speaks of GDP "getting up to 4, 5, and even 6 percent, because I think that's possible."

THE FACTS:

Federal Reserve officials and most mainstream economists expect economic growth to hew closer to 2 percent. There are no signs the economy is capable of delivering a phenomenal and rarely achieved growth rate on the order of 6 percent.

These aren't facts. They're opinions. But lefties have long ceased being able to distinguish between the two. They shout things that they feel and then insist that anyone who denies them hates science.

Trump is officially making an economic promise that will be nearly impossible to keep - Business Insider

"To get the economy back on track, President Trump has outlined a bold plan to create 25 million new American jobs in the next decade and return to 4 percent annual economic growth," reads the White House site.

The 4% GDP promise is one that Trump has made before, but now it is the official promise of the White House and the president.

The only problem is delivering on this promise will be incredibly difficult.

Currently, the US is stuck in a slow growth pattern since the financial crisis and has been unable to escape the 1.5% to 2.5% annual growth corridor over the past seven years. This is lower than the 3.1% percent average annual GDP growth we've been experiencing since 1950.

While there are a number of reasons for this — sluggish corporate investment, Americans saving more of their income, low wage growth, and more — it would take a monumental task to return the US to nearly double its current annual growth rate.

Reversing the course of this will be difficult, especially in just four years,

How about one?
http://fortune.com/2017/12/07/trump-us-gdp-growth-rate-economy-6-percent/

Trump Thinks the U.S. Could See 6% Economic Growth. The Data Says Otherwise. - Fortune

According to Bloomberg, Trump claimed that the combination of high consumer confidence, job creation, and tax cuts would create this considerable growth. Trump claimed that he sees “no reason why we don’t go to 4, 5, even 6%.”

Unfortunately, Trump didn’t explain exactly how this jump would happen, and few economists support his claim. In a Bloomberg survey of 80 economists, only one forecast showed a growth above 4%.

We have a winner.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 7843


« Reply #2220 on: December 22, 2017, 04:35:18 PM »

Due to no small part the MSM has in brainwashing people with "Trump's plan is VERY unpopular:

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/12/22/watch-liberals-approve-of-gop-tax-plan-disguised-as-bernie-sanders-plan/

Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2221 on: January 01, 2018, 01:33:04 PM »

https://www.dailywire.com/news/25249/wikileaks-drops-proof-proves-nytimes-colluded-joseph-curl?utm_source=shapironewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=010118-news&utm_campaign=position1
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2222 on: January 09, 2018, 10:52:44 AM »



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU7v5A5P8BM
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2223 on: January 13, 2018, 08:22:19 PM »

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/368825-media-industry-braces-for-facebook-changes?rnd=1515893216
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2224 on: January 17, 2018, 01:12:51 PM »

Interesting development.  Glick's articles may be freely posted here.

http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2018/01/17/jerusalem-post-columnist-caroline-glick-joins-breitbart-news/
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 9484


« Reply #2225 on: January 17, 2018, 04:26:35 PM »


It sounds like she had a good relationship with Andrew Breitbart, also with someone there now.  There was distinct turn after the departure of AB.  Maybe Bannon gone was part of negotiations to land this great writer and analyst and turn the publication around.  Breitbart may become a more trusted source going forward.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 9484


« Reply #2226 on: January 18, 2018, 11:05:05 AM »

Hat tip to Larry Elder radio.

Snopes says "Mostly False".  Oddly in liberal speak that means a conservative called out a liberal and it's True.

https://www.snopes.com/obama-called-libya-a-sht-show-and-media-was-silent/

"WHAT'S TRUE
President Obama reportedly used the term "shit show" in private to refer to the escalating violence in Libya following the death of Muammar al-Qaddafi."

"WHAT'S FALSE
... Obama's remarks were widely reported by the media at the time."  ?

Were there 200 mentions on CNN in the first 3 days?
--------------
If your country is 'fecalized', the issue of the reported characterization is vulgarity, not racism or accuracy.



« Last Edit: January 18, 2018, 12:38:18 PM by DougMacG » Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2227 on: January 22, 2018, 12:23:12 PM »

https://www.dailywire.com/news/26155/watch-cnn-shuts-down-multiple-democrat-lawmakers-ryan-saavedra?utm_source=shapironewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=012218-news&utm_campaign=position4
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2228 on: January 25, 2018, 05:39:44 PM »

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/photo-of-obama-louis-farrakhan-to-be-released
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2229 on: January 27, 2018, 11:36:37 AM »

Links of interest at https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/anything-could-happen-amid-newsroom-clashes-los-angeles-times-becomes-its-own-story/2018/01/26/f8c2d382-02b6-11e8-9d31-d72cf78dbeee_story.html?undefined=&utm_term=.c612da1fcf59&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1

such as http://www.niemanlab.org/2018/01/newsonomics-who-and-what-is-the-new-l-a-times-network/


 ‘Anything could happen’: Amid newsroom clashes, Los Angeles Times becomes its own story
By Paul Farhi January 26 at 6:09 PM

Passersby gaze at news photos outside the Los Angeles Times building in downtown L.A., where journalists have voted to unionize for the first time in the paper’s 136-year history. (Richard Vogel/AP)

The news has been frenetic lately for reporters at the Los Angeles Times. Massive wildfires swept a region just getting over a historic drought, followed by deadly mudslides, and then the explosive Turpin family child-abuse saga — a chain of events that tested the chops of the prizewinning newsroom.

But some of the biggest news at the Times has been coming from within its downtown headquarters. The paper — one of the largest and most important news organizations in America — has been beset by turmoil the past two weeks, prompting questions about its future.

After decades of successful resistance by management and years of demoralizing cutbacks, the Times’s journalists voted overwhelmingly last week to unionize. Before bargaining can begin, however, reporters are concerned about a plan by the Times’s management to reorganize the way the paper produces news.

Under a new “pyramid” structure proposed this month, a network of non-staff contributors would produce the bulk of the information the Times publishes online. Reporters say the paper has quietly begun hiring a cadre of editors to supervise the reorganization, which would effectively create a new company within the company.

The man who introduced the plan — blindsiding the newsroom when he presented it to an investor conference in New York — was publisher Ross Levinsohn, the fifth person to hold that title in the past five years. Last week, Levinsohn was suspended by the paper’s owner, Chicago-based Tronc, after NPR revealed a series of sexual harassment allegations against him in previous jobs. The company said it is investigating.

The state of play at the Times, as well as the existential dread swirling around it, was neatly summarized in a tweet this week by Matt Pearce, a Times national reporter and an organizer of the union effort: “Basically, anything could happen at this point at the L.A. Times and people in the newsroom could only be half surprised by it. We’re hiring [editors] that aren’t being announced to the newsroom, our publisher wants to turn us into a pyramid, and by the way, he’s under investigation.”

In fact, more shoes are dropping.


On Thursday, reporters protested after top editor Lewis D’Vorkin suspended Kimi Yoshino, the Times’s financial editor. His reason was unclear — neither party would comment — but Times reporters say D’Vorkin suspected that Yoshino had been a source for other media reports about the Times, including an unflattering profile of D’Vorkin in the Columbia Journalism Review, which dubbed him “LA journalism’s ‘Prince of Darkness.’ ”

“We were very upset to learn yesterday that Kimi was abruptly asked to take a leave of absence and not even permitted to return to her office to collect her belongings and turn off her laptop,” said a letter signed by Times business journalists and promptly disseminated online. “This treatment of Kimi is a serious cause for concern.”

A spokeswoman for Tronc said it could not comment on employee matters.

D’Vorkin, who took over as Times editor in November, is a controversial figure in media circles. At Forbes, he undertook some unorthodox steps to arrest the magazine’s declining fortunes — including setting up a network of outside contributors to write stories for Forbes.com, some unpaid and some compensated on the basis of how many readers their stories attracted. He also permitted ads that blurred the lines between promotional content and news stories.

As the Times newsroom organizing committee characterized it in a letter to Tronc’s board on Tuesday, D’Vorkin “devalued Forbes’ journalism by sullying it with unpaid contributor content, pay-for-clicks schemes and troubling presentations of advertorial.”

Only days into his new job at the Times, D’Vorkin drew the enmity of many in his newsroom by his response to complaints lodged by the Disney Co. over a Times series that detailed Disney’s influence over city officials in Anaheim, home of Disneyland. In the face of Disney executives’ protests, D’Vorkin ordered his journalists not to promote the Times’s own stories on social media. The entertainment giant is a key advertiser as well as a news source for the Times.

He also declined to reveal details of his meeting with Disney executives about the issue or to publish more than a few paragraphs about the paper’s discussions with the company, which had drawn national attention. D’Vorkin declined to comment for this article, referring a reporter to Tronc’s corporate spokesman.

The nonresponse appears to go to the heart of one of the central complaints by people at the paper: that a company engaged in communications doesn’t communicate very well with its own employees.

“It’s frustrating to hear about plans that we weren’t consulted about,” Anthony Pesce, a Times data journalist, told The Washington Post. “This paper is comprised of smart and engaged journalists who want nothing more than to see [the paper] succeed.”

Amid the tumult, the Times has produced some of the best journalism in its 136-year history. In addition to its penetrating series about Disney, it broke a huge scandal in July involving a former dean at the University of Southern California’s medical school. It has been a leader in revealing sexual harassment allegations against leading Hollywood figures, such as directors James Toback and Brett Ratner. And in 2016, it won the Pulitzer Prize for breaking news for its coverage of the mass shooting in San Bernardino, its 44th Pulitzer.

But even those triumphs have come at a price. In August, Tronc fired the paper’s four top editors following an investigation triggered by staff complaints about the handling of major stories, including those about the USC dean.


Tronc (the unusual new name is shorthand for Tribune Online Content) is an offshoot of the long-troubled Tribune Co., which emerged from bankruptcy protection in 2012. Tronc owns what had been Tribune Co.’s newspaper assets, including the Times, Baltimore Sun, Chicago Tribune and New York Daily News.

Like almost every newspaper in the United States, the Times and its parent company has been buffeted for years by a precipitous decline in advertising and the flight of subscribers. During the 1990s, the Times had more than 1,000 journalists. It now employs about 400. Still, the events of recent days seem to have left both the newsroom and its readers a bit dazed and unsure of what’s coming next.

One Times reader conveyed the bafflement in a tweet on Friday: “I subscribe to LAT b/c I think it’s impt to support my local paper, & their journalists do great work. But what’s going on there is awful. Is it helpful or counterproductive for me to cancel my subscription?”
« Last Edit: January 27, 2018, 11:39:36 AM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2230 on: January 27, 2018, 02:31:01 PM »

https://www.dailywire.com/news/26203/facebook-changing-your-newsfeed-heres-how-make-james-barrett?utm_medium=email&utm_content=012718-news&utm_campaign=position5
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2231 on: February 07, 2018, 06:07:44 PM »

https://pjmedia.com/trending/fbi-agent-former-comey-assistant-wrote-nyt-oped-quit-job-already-lined-cnn/?utm_source=PJMCoffeeBreak&utm_medium=email&utm_term=February2018

Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2232 on: February 09, 2018, 02:36:45 PM »

http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/08/how-the-media-buried-two-huge-fbi-stories-yesterday/#.Wnxnlvbl06p.twitter
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 15536


« Reply #2233 on: February 11, 2018, 04:32:06 PM »

http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/29/barack-obama-louis-farrakhan-media/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=atthedcpolitics

Not newsworthy...
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2234 on: February 12, 2018, 11:21:06 AM »

Good to see that Breitbart has taken Caroline Glick on board.  With the departure of Bannon is it becoming a more serious and more responsible source of news?
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2235 on: February 12, 2018, 11:54:44 AM »

Not always a reliable source:

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/bay-area-news-group-hammered-by-more-layoffs-resignations/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2236 on: February 14, 2018, 10:42:12 AM »

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2018/02/13/the-media-is-ignoring-ties-between-the-clinton-campaign-and-russians/?utm_term=.5c5f775d64be
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 15536


« Reply #2237 on: February 14, 2018, 01:49:47 PM »


Funny how our professional journalists make such mistakes. It almost appears that they have some sort of agenda other than the truth.
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 15536


« Reply #2238 on: February 14, 2018, 01:52:35 PM »

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/373855.php

Hidden, for some reason.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2018, 02:53:05 PM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2239 on: February 15, 2018, 02:09:00 PM »




https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=71&v=UQcCIzjz9_s
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2240 on: February 17, 2018, 03:56:57 PM »

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/17/technology/indictment-russian-tech-facebook.html?emc=edit_ta_20180217&nl=top-stories&nlid=49641193&ref=cta

To Stir Discord in 2016, Russians Turned Most Often to Facebook

By SHEERA FRENKEL and KATIE BENNERFEB. 17, 2018

Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, faces renewed questions about why the social network didn’t catch the Russian activity earlier or do more to stop it. Credit Eric Risberg/Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO — In 2014, Russians working for a shadowy firm called the Internet Research Agency started gathering American followers in online groups focused on issues like religion and immigration. Around mid-2015, the Russians began buying digital ads to spread their messages. A year later, they tapped their followers to help organize political rallies across the United States.

Their digital instrument of choice for all of these actions? Facebook and its photo-sharing site Instagram.

The social network, more than any other technology tool, was singled out on Friday by the Justice Department when prosecutors charged 13 Russians and three companies for executing a scheme to subvert the 2016 election and support Donald J. Trump’s presidential campaign. In a 37-page indictment, officials detailed how the Russians repeatedly turned to Facebook and Instagram, often using stolen identities to pose as Americans, to sow discord among the electorate by creating Facebook groups, distributing divisive ads and posting inflammatory images.

While the indictment does not accuse Facebook of any wrongdoing, it provided the first comprehensive account from the authorities of how critical the company’s platforms had been to the Russian campaign to disrupt the 2016 election. Facebook and Instagram were mentioned 41 times, while other technology that the Russians used were featured far less. Twitter was referenced nine times, YouTube once, and electronic payments company PayPal 11 times.

It is unprecedented for an American technology company to be so central to what the authorities say was a foreign scheme to commit election fraud in the United States. The indictment further batters Facebook’s image after it has spent months grappling with questions about how it was misused and why it did not act earlier to prevent that activity.

Jonathan Albright, research director at Columbia University’s Tow Center for Digital Journalism, said the indictment laid bare how effectively Facebook could be turned against the country.


“Facebook built incredibly effective tools which let Russia profile citizens here in the U.S. and figure out how to manipulate us,” Mr. Albright said. “Facebook, essentially, gave them everything they needed.” He added that many of the tools that the Russians used, including those that allow ads to be targeted and that show how widespread an ad becomes, still pervade Facebook.

Facebook, with more than two billion members on the social network alone, has long struggled with what its sites show and the kind of illicit activity it may enable, from selling unlicensed guns to broadcasting live killings. The company’s business depends on people being highly engaged with what is posted on its sites, which in turn helps make it a marquee destination for advertisers.

When suggestions first arose after the 2016 election that Facebook may have influenced the outcome, Mark Zuckerberg, the company’s chief executive, dismissed the concerns. But by last September, Facebook had disclosed that the Internet Research Agency had bought divisive ads on hot-button issues through the company. It later said 150 million Americans had seen the Russian propaganda on the social network and Instagram.

The resulting firestorm has damaged Facebook’s reputation. Company officials, along with executives from Google and YouTube, were grilled by lawmakers last fall. Facebook has since hired thousands of people to help monitor content and has worked with Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel leading the investigation into Russian election interference. It has also changed its advertising policy so that any ad that mentions a candidate’s name goes through a more stringent vetting process. Mr. Zuckerberg has vowed to not let Facebook be abused by bad actors.

Yet Facebook’s multiple mentions in Friday’s indictment renew questions of why the world’s biggest social media company didn’t catch the Russian activity earlier or do more to stop it. How effective the company’s new efforts to reduce foreign manipulation have been is also unclear.

Rob Goldman, Facebook’s vice president of advertising, waded into the discussion on Friday with a series of tweets that argued that Russia’s goal was to sow chaos among the electorate rather than to force a certain outcome in the election. On Saturday, President Trump cited those tweets as evidence that Russia’s disinformation campaign was not aimed at handing him a victory.

In Silicon Valley, where Facebook has its headquarters, some critics pilloried the company after the indictment became public.


“Mueller’s indictment underscores the central role of Facebook and other platforms in the Russian interference in 2016,” said Roger McNamee, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist who had invested early in Facebook. “In its heyday, television brought the country together, giving viewers a shared set of facts and experiences. Facebook does just the opposite, enabling every user to have a unique set of facts, driving the country apart for profit.”

Joel Kaplan, Facebook’s vice president of global policy, said in a statement that the company was grateful the government was taking action “against those who abused our service and exploited the openness of our democratic process.”

He added that Facebook was working with the Federal Bureau of Investigation ahead of this year’s midterm elections to ensure that a similar manipulation campaign would not take place. “We know we have more to do to prevent against future attacks,” he said.

Facebook has previously questioned whether law enforcement should be more involved in helping to stop the threat from nation state actors. Facebook said it worked closely with the special counsel’s investigation.

YouTube did not respond to a request for comment, while Twitter declined to comment. PayPal said in a statement that it has worked closely with law enforcement and “is intensely focused on combating and preventing the illicit use of our services.”

According to the indictment, the Internet Research Agency, created in 2014 in St. Petersburg and employing about 80 people, was given the job of interfering with elections and political processes.

The group began using American social media to achieve those aims in 2014, when it started making Facebook pages dedicated to social issues like race and religion. Over the next two years, the indictment said, the Russians stole the identities of real Americans to create fake personas and fake accounts on social media. The group then used those to populate and promote Facebook pages like United Muslims of America, Blacktivist and Secured Borders.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 7843


« Reply #2241 on: February 17, 2018, 08:48:29 PM »

"Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, faces renewed questions about why the social network didn’t catch the Russian activity earlier or do more to stop it"

LOL now it is Zuckerberg who cost Clinton the election.  When will this ever end?   cry
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2242 on: February 17, 2018, 11:21:23 PM »

May I suggest that that is not the point but rather to set up a hue and cry for FB to become the arbiter of what is Fake News?  Hence my subject line of
"Setting Facebook up to be the Ministry of Truth".
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2243 on: February 22, 2018, 10:18:04 AM »

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/22/shooting_survivor_colton_haab_cnn_gave_me_scripted_question_after_denying_question_about_armed_guards.html
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 9484


« Reply #2244 on: February 22, 2018, 10:38:02 AM »

From the previous post, CNN was caught by O'Keefe of not being a news organization, and caught again here.  Thanks for catching this.  Yet people keep watching and quoting what comes through including people who know better.
---------------------

Mentioned on the tax thread, but tax rate cuts are the perfect example of the media's main trick.  Barrage you with negative information and then poll on the popularity. 

Tax cuts are Trump coverage so therefore they are covered 95% negative on average.  It was a scam, it was crumbs, it is a tax cut for the rich, I can't remember if they got to treason on this one or not.  Then they poll, what do you think of the tax cuts?

They can move public opinion maybe 10% in the long run and more than that in the short run.  But they fully stop the truth from eventually coming out.  Ir Republicans had followed the false polls, they would have backed off of their best accomplishment.

Without media manipulation, how is this possible?



https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/gop-tax-cuts-are-turning-out-to-be-a-disaster-for-democrats/



Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 42559


« Reply #2245 on: February 22, 2018, 01:52:46 PM »

https://www.dailywire.com/news/27394/fake-news-cnns-chris-cuomo-pushes-false-story-ben-shapiro?utm_source=shapironewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=022218-news&utm_campaign=position1
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 43 44 [45] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!