Jump to content

Welcome to our forums!

Sign In or Register to gain full access to our forums. By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Photo

Tucker Carlson: 'It is Spying' to monitor Your Political Opponents and Violate Their Privacy Rights.

Ouch!

  • Please log in to reply
68 replies to this topic

#41 omahacolt

omahacolt

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,440 posts

Posted 05 April 2017 - 09:07 PM

Just to get the record clear, you really think Trump and the Russians is a bigger threat than an administration that would spy on political rivals and expose classified data to try to belittle them? Amazing!

there is zero proof that the Obama administration spied on trump.

#42 NChiefsCorner

NChiefsCorner

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,973 posts
  • LocationLiberty, Missouri

Posted 05 April 2017 - 09:10 PM

Just Susan Rice admitting that they did. :wacko:



#43 jetlord

jetlord

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,389 posts

Posted 05 April 2017 - 10:05 PM

Nailed it Maui....

 

My interesting question?

 

Is the MSM the driving force of Global Progressism or is it the DNC and the Far left in the Democratic party?

 

Who works for who?

 

w

I'd guess more the media.  The Dems have found the formula for getting and maintaining power and that's to ride on the media and other leftist groups to garner the most votes.  So the Dems and media have a symbiotic relationship.  If someone convinced them that more votes were available with a right wing agenda, they would be there in a heartbeat.  It's all about being at the top of the pyramid or leading the parade.



#44 jetlord

jetlord

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,389 posts

Posted 05 April 2017 - 10:10 PM

there is zero proof that the Obama administration spied on trump.

For every unsubstantiated charge of Trumps collusion with the Russians there's a ton of real evidence/reports that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign.  The two issues aren't even related except that the Obama sycophants want to make a smoke screen out of the Russian deal.  Someone on a talk show last night brought up the Susan Rice lies and the host immediately switched to the Trump/Russian issue.  Typical leftist avoidance of the real problem.



#45 xen

xen

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 1,525 posts

Posted 05 April 2017 - 11:27 PM

For every unsubstantiated charge of Trumps collusion with the Russians there's a ton of real evidence/reports that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign. The two issues aren't even related except that the Obama sycophants want to make a smoke screen out of the Russian deal. Someone on a talk show last night brought up the Susan Rice lies and the host immediately switched to the Trump/Russian issue. Typical leftist avoidance of the real problem.


He's playing a game. The game is called "Prove that Obama personally went to Trump tower and installed wiretaps. Anything short of that and we admit nothing".

#46 wilkie

wilkie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,700 posts
  • LocationShagri La

Posted 06 April 2017 - 01:39 AM

For every unsubstantiated charge of Trumps collusion with the Russians there's a ton of real evidence/reports that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign.  The two issues aren't even related except that the Obama sycophants want to make a smoke screen out of the Russian deal.  Someone on a talk show last night brought up the Susan Rice lies and the host immediately switched to the Trump/Russian issue.  Typical leftist avoidance of the real problem.

I have yet to see the ton of real evidence and reports that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign. What exactly is this ton of real evidence?????

#47 NChiefsCorner

NChiefsCorner

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,973 posts
  • LocationLiberty, Missouri

Posted 06 April 2017 - 01:45 AM

That's because you don't want to see it.



#48 omahacolt

omahacolt

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,440 posts

Posted 06 April 2017 - 02:02 AM

He's playing a game. The game is called "Prove that Obama personally went to Trump tower and installed wiretaps. Anything short of that and we admit nothing".

no I'm not. What evidence?

The unmasking nonsense bstud said was illegal but is not illegal or uncommon?
trump accused Obama of tapping his phones and will not prove it. Why is he saying it? Why won't he release his information?

#49 NChiefsCorner

NChiefsCorner

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,973 posts
  • LocationLiberty, Missouri

Posted 06 April 2017 - 02:10 AM

They just showed Adam Schiff all of the evidence and he's no longer talking shit. :D



#50 mex

mex

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,037 posts

Posted 06 April 2017 - 02:48 AM

This is incorrect. Newspapers in America started out as extremely partisan affairs dedicated to espousing one candidate or viewpoint. Most were hatchet jobs and the crap they spewed was infinitely worse than what we see today. Consider, for instance, the infamous James Callendar or the charge that John Adams was a secret hermaphrodite. They were basically all the national enquirer.

That's why the sedition acts were such a big deal.

The concept of an impartial press is a rather recent invention, popularized by early tv networks who were trying to pull in every viewer possible and later enshrined by the feds with the fairness doctrine in 1949. It didn't last that long in the grand scheme of things and cable killed it dead. Frankly some would argue it was all an illusion anyway.

yep I stand corrected. the newspapers when Jefferson was elected were absolutely brutal, many of them were brutal to him. Just finished a great book call Jefferson's America which explores the politics of the Louisiana Purchase, it's implementation on the world stage, and the exploits of four different teams of adventurers (of which Lewis and Clark were one) who were hired to authenticate America's claim. It was fascinating all the way around, but those New England papers raked Jefferson over the coals... with accusations akin to him eating newborn children for dinner. They were horrible.

 

The difference is, there were other newspapers that supported him, and went after the other side. That's what we lack today... the balance.



#51 mex

mex

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,037 posts

Posted 06 April 2017 - 02:52 AM

Russia obviously meddled in out election.., It doesn't take a genius to figure that out.., Steps need to be taken to assure they cannot do this in the future.., Its imperative..,

Wondering if we've ever meddled in a russian or ukrainian election...



#52 jetlord

jetlord

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,389 posts

Posted 06 April 2017 - 03:12 AM

 

The difference is, there were other newspapers that supported him, and went after the other side. That's what we lack today... the balance.

Exactly!  Several years back we visited the Lincoln Museum and some of the most interesting displays were copies of newspaper articles from 1860.  They were brutal, but they went both ways.  We can't have a watchdog press if all the mainstream is critical of one side and carries water for the other.  Fox and radio talk shows have helped, but the legacy networks and newspapers all have gone extreme left and our political process has suffered for it.



#53 xen

xen

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 1,525 posts

Posted 06 April 2017 - 03:57 AM

yep I stand corrected. the newspapers when Jefferson was elected were absolutely brutal, many of them were brutal to him. Just finished a great book call Jefferson's America which explores the politics of the Louisiana Purchase, it's implementation on the world stage, and the exploits of four different teams of adventurers (of which Lewis and Clark were one) who were hired to authenticate America's claim. It was fascinating all the way around, but those New England papers raked Jefferson over the coals... with accusations akin to him eating newborn children for dinner. They were horrible.

The difference is, there were other newspapers that supported him, and went after the other side. That's what we lack today... the balance.


There was no balance. They just said whatever they wanted and it wss usually horrible lies. Usually the so called reporters were being paid directly by candidates or their supporters.

I mean I get what you're saying I just think the whole 4th estate thing is a myth. History I think is on my side in that opinion.

They were raking Washington over the coals during his presidency. The biggest lie which many believed was that the society of Cincinnatus was going to overthrow the government and set him up as king. This was before political parties, when the notion of a political party was noxious to most people but especially the landed elite that were in charge.

#54 West

West

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,033 posts

Posted 06 April 2017 - 02:57 PM

The MSM is either the driving force of the Globalist Progressive Agenda or it is the Mouthpiece of the Globalist Progressive Agenda.

 

All the major newspapers, major networks and published newsprint ( Time, Newsweek) run the same plays at the same time.  Their ability to coordinate on both agenda and specific message is UNSURPASSED.

 

Pay more attention, fucking ESPN is 75% sports, 25% politics.

 

w


  • MAUI likes this

#55 jetlord

jetlord

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,389 posts

Posted 06 April 2017 - 03:28 PM

There was no balance. They just said whatever they wanted and it wss usually horrible lies. Usually the so called reporters were being paid directly by candidates or their supporters.

I mean I get what you're saying I just think the whole 4th estate thing is a myth. History I think is on my side in that opinion.

They were raking Washington over the coals during his presidency. The biggest lie which many believed was that the society of Cincinnatus was going to overthrow the government and set him up as king. This was before political parties, when the notion of a political party was noxious to most people but especially the landed elite that were in charge.

Historically, you're right.  But I would contend that after the formation of political parties there was some balance within the media.  For example, the Chicago Tribune was generally supportive of Reps and the Chicago Sun Times supported big city Dems.  The Hearst papers went one way and his rivals went another.  We don't see that today.  Name one major news outlet, with the exception of Murdock's empire, that isn't biased left, and not just a little bit.  Missouri has shifted from Dem to Rep in the past 40 years yet I can't remember one election or issue where the KC papers (now "paper") haven't stumped for the liberal side.  Maybe they don't have a daily conference call to decide the talking points of the day, but the result sure appears as if they walk in lockstep.  Same with the legacy TV networks plus CNN, MSNBC, and ESPN.  We're forced to go to the internet to find alternative viewpoints and try to sift out the truth from agenda driven tripe.  Shouldn't be that way.  The MSM should view all politicians with a critical eye and hold their feet to the fire, but do it in an even handed manner.


  • mex likes this

#56 mex

mex

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,037 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 03:33 AM

There was no balance. They just said whatever they wanted and it wss usually horrible lies. Usually the so called reporters were being paid directly by candidates or their supporters.

I mean I get what you're saying I just think the whole 4th estate thing is a myth. History I think is on my side in that opinion.

They were raking Washington over the coals during his presidency. The biggest lie which many believed was that the society of Cincinnatus was going to overthrow the government and set him up as king. This was before political parties, when the notion of a political party was noxious to most people but especially the landed elite that were in charge.

That's pretty funny... the Society of Cincinnatus wanting to install GW as king.  Wasn't it GW's respect for Cincinnatus (citizen, soldier, politician, then citizen again) that encouraged him to retire after just two terms, when he could have easily been king until he died... like FDR? The biggest lies are the best, I guess. 

 

The difference with the press then, or at any other time, as opposed to now, is there has never been such absolute lopsided support for one side. I mean, look at how they called Trump a misogynist... pretty much for the last four months of the campaign... and continuing today... because of the recording that was released where he's talking about an encounter with a woman... and said he grabbed her pussy.

 

How horrible!!!

 

Wasn't too long ago that bill clinton directed a TEENAGE intern to insert a cigar into her vag, while he watched and snickered... and the press told us time and again how the American people don't care about sex... they just want clinton to be left alone to run the country... yada yada yada.

 

clinton was 100x worse misogynistically than trump, but when you look at how each of the two were treated by 90% of the press, it's pretty easy to see the imbalance, which was the point of my post. 

 

the press sucks worse today than ever.



#57 mex

mex

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,037 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 03:43 AM

 but the result sure appears as if they walk in lockstep.  Same with the legacy TV networks plus CNN, MSNBC, and ESPN.  We're forced to go to the internet to find alternative viewpoints and try to sift out the truth from agenda driven tripe.  Shouldn't be that way.  The MSM should view all politicians with a critical eye and hold their feet to the fire, but do it in an even handed manner.

yep

 

and they do work together... through talking points

 

they'll use the same words and phrases... the same adjectives... it's comical

 

I remember when they teamed up against bush and every network talked about his lack of 'gravitas'. 

 

now I ask you... who in their right mind has ever... and I mean EVER... used that term... for ANYTHING. 

 

yet, three netwrks, three cable channels, 8 major newspapers and a dozen radio news channels all used that description within a matter of a few days

 

yeah... sure. 

 

they goddam well have conference calls. guaranteed.



#58 MAUI

MAUI

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,036 posts
  • LocationMaui

Posted 07 April 2017 - 05:53 AM

To West and Mex and Jet and anybody else that might remember.., A few years ago it was brought to light that there was a locked google website that was accessible only by invitation.., There were like 50 news and blog sites that somebody published a list of that were the only ones with access to it.., It read like a who's who of liberal journalism and was set up to consolidate and coordinate ideas and strategies.., I'm trying to remember what it was called.., Was wondering if anybody else recalls that..,?


  • West likes this

#59 mex

mex

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,037 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 01:07 PM

To West and Mex and Jet and anybody else that might remember.., A few years ago it was brought to light that there was a locked google website that was accessible only by invitation.., There were like 50 news and blog sites that somebody published a list of that were the only ones with access to it.., It read like a who's who of liberal journalism and was set up to consolidate and coordinate ideas and strategies.., I'm trying to remember what it was called.., Was wondering if anybody else recalls that..,?

Interesting... I had not heard of that.

 

Maybe OC can loan us the login credentials... 



#60 jetlord

jetlord

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,389 posts

Posted 07 April 2017 - 02:49 PM

To West and Mex and Jet and anybody else that might remember.., A few years ago it was brought to light that there was a locked google website that was accessible only by invitation.., There were like 50 news and blog sites that somebody published a list of that were the only ones with access to it.., It read like a who's who of liberal journalism and was set up to consolidate and coordinate ideas and strategies.., I'm trying to remember what it was called.., Was wondering if anybody else recalls that..,?

I remember that story but couldn't recall when it came out and like you, couldn't remember the name.  Wasn't there a connection with some liberal elites that formed the daily talking points?  From watching a variety of "news" sources, it's easy to believe it works that way.  Too much similarity in reports to be coincidence.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users