HuskerNation1 Posted October 12, 2016 Share Posted October 12, 2016 I already showed the video from a few weeks back when CNN grayed out a hero's shirt because he was supporting Trump. More evidence that CNN is doing shady things. This time through Donna Brazille, Hillary's team was given a debate forum question in advance. And some still question why many call CNN the Clinton News Network. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2016/10/11/then-cnn-contributor-donna-brazile-to-clinton-camp-sometimes-i-get-the-questions-in-advance/?utm_term=.59ff2e0b0da6 Link to comment
HuskerNation1 Posted October 12, 2016 Share Posted October 12, 2016 More shenanigans with CNN's focus group, this time discouraging the voices of third party supporters to be heard. You Gary Johnson fans should be upset about this one. https://alibertarianfuture.com/big-government/propaganda/cnn-censored-vp-debate-focus-group-changed-third-party-voters-to-undecided/ Link to comment
HuskerNation1 Posted October 12, 2016 Share Posted October 12, 2016 Yes more liberal bias in the media, this time with CNBC's Harwood that did the GOP primary debate that was so biased it was obvious. Surprise, surprise that the moderator has been caught sending emails to Hillary's team on what they should do and expressing his support for her. http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/11/nytcnbcs-john-harwood-advises-clinton-campaign-gloats-about-provoking-trump-at-debate/ Link to comment
HuskerNation1 Posted October 12, 2016 Share Posted October 12, 2016 And the NY Times has given Hillary Clinton to review stories before they go to press and change or remove any quotes she didn't agree with. http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/new-york-times-gave-hillary-veto/ Link to comment
ZRod Posted October 12, 2016 Share Posted October 12, 2016 You're still pushing this agenda? This is still a thing with you? You're first article is tenuous at best. The second; who knows why they chose to do that and frankly I don't care. Neither 3rd party candidate is a good or viable alternative at this point. To be honest, it's something that's been going on since cable news was created. You can see it in the documentary "Spin" about the media in the 92 election. Third; do you read these articles? There isn't really any telling of "what they should do" going on. It's just banter between the press and a campaign. "Watchout he could give you trouble", "hey this is an interesting clip with my dad and Pat B. in it", "let's get lunch!" Come on... Fourth; you really don't think this is common practice on all sides with the media and candidates? The media doesn't want to burn bridges and potentially lose interview access. Unless they are out to ruin a candidate, they are almost always going to let them review and propose edits. I was interviewed for an article and was aforded the same liberty for christ's sake... 6 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted October 12, 2016 Share Posted October 12, 2016 What a great interview. This guy is saying the same thing I have been saying for a long time. Glad someone within the conservative media is starting to say these things. 1 Link to comment
HuskerNation1 Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 You're still pushing this agenda? This is still a thing with you? You're first article is tenuous at best. The second; who knows why they chose to do that and frankly I don't care. Neither 3rd party candidate is a good or viable alternative at this point. To be honest, it's something that's been going on since cable news was created. You can see it in the documentary "Spin" about the media in the 92 election. Third; do you read these articles? There isn't really any telling of "what they should do" going on. It's just banter between the press and a campaign. "Watchout he could give you trouble", "hey this is an interesting clip with my dad and Pat B. in it", "let's get lunch!" Come on... Fourth; you really don't think this is common practice on all sides with the media and candidates? The media doesn't want to burn bridges and potentially lose interview access. Unless they are out to ruin a candidate, they are almost always going to let them review and propose edits. I was interviewed for an article and was aforded the same liberty for christ's sake... Nice dodging. If you really don't think that NBC, CNN, the Washington Post and the NY Times are in the tank for Hillary, you are simply blind. Why would Hillary Clinton be getting questions before a debate from a DNC insider who works for CNN? Why would the NY Times allow Hillary to proof stories before they publish them about her. Link to comment
HuskerNation1 Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 Here's some more evidence of bias at NBC. So with the Billy Bush tapes, NBC sat on these tapes for months and waited until 2 days before the 2nd debate to release them. If NBC really cared about ensuring that America had the best candidates in the general election, why wouldn't they have released this sooner as it appears they had these tapes during the primary season. Also, NBC planned the release of their tape with the timing of doing an NBC/WSJ poll ONLY SATURDAY AND SUNDAY which was off the normal schedule for that particular poll. And in that poll they oversampled Democrats and undersampled Independents. Link to comment
zoogs Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 "NBC sat on these tapes for months". Have anything to back that up, or...? Link to comment
HuskerNation1 Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 "NBC sat on these tapes for months". Have anything to back that up, or...? "NBC sat on these tapes for months". Have anything to back that up, or...? It's been reported on several sites and is not surprising. Eleven-year old tapes don't just miraculously appear out of nowhere except to some on here who want to continue to be naive in thinking that MSM outlets like NBC are not biased. http://www.tmz.com/2016/10/12/nbc-trump-tape-billy-bush-plan-election-debate/ Link to comment
zoogs Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/nbc-delayed-publication-of-lewd-trump-tape-because-of-lawsuit-fears/2016/10/08/a3c6850e-8db9-11e6-875e-2c1bfe943b66_story.html NBC News was aware of video footage of Donald Trump making lewd and disparaging remarks about women for nearly four days, a network executive said Saturday, but held onto the recording until lawyers finished reviewing the material. Link to comment
HuskerNation1 Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/nbc-delayed-publication-of-lewd-trump-tape-because-of-lawsuit-fears/2016/10/08/a3c6850e-8db9-11e6-875e-2c1bfe943b66_story.html NBC News was aware of video footage of Donald Trump making lewd and disparaging remarks about women for nearly four days, a network executive said Saturday, but held onto the recording until lawyers finished reviewing the material. If you really believe that this video just magically appeared in the last week, you are being completely naive. The Washington Post and NBC have been shown time and again to be in the tank for Hillary. It's no different than Wikileaks releasing the DNC video the day before the DNC convention...it was timed for maximum impact. The difference is that NBC claims to be a credible network, and some actually still believe they are credible. Link to comment
zoogs Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 Good point. I should be less naive and swallow Trump campaign talking points like this whole. Link to comment
HuskerNation1 Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 Good point. I should be less naive and swallow Trump campaign talking points like this whole. You just need to show some impartiality to be able to see this. Link to comment
zoogs Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 Good tactic. If we can agree to give equal deference to the Washington Post and TMZ/"Many people have said", then literally anything might be true. Link to comment
Recommended Posts