All right, gentleperchildren, let's review. The year is 2024 - that's two-zero-two-four, as in the 21st Century's perfect vision - and I am sorry to say the world has become a pussy-whipped, Brady Bunch version of itself, run by a bunch of still-masked clots ridden infertile senile sissies who want the Last Ukrainian to die so they can get on with the War on China, with some middle-eastern genocide on the side
All right, gentleperchildren, let's review. The year is 2024 - that's two-zero-two-four, as in the 21st Century's perfect vision - and I am sorry to say the world has become a pussy-whipped, Brady Bunch version of itself, run by a bunch of still-masked clots ridden infertile senile sissies who want the Last Ukrainian to die so they can get on with the War on China, with some middle-eastern genocide on the side
Holy crap this is difficult, isn't it? They reported it before buzzfeed. Buzzfeed was only the first to report on the contents of said document.
The document existing and people being briefed about it is not a rumor, nevermind its contents.Why should the press not report on rumors?
Well the fact that you can't even answer my questions seem to insinuate that you are arguing about an imaginary report. You gobbling up trumps pov without a second thought like the brainless sheep you are.
Again: do the documents not exist and did the intelligence agencies not brief the president on them?
Never mind its content....
I cant really get behind your thought process... im trying to but I can't. Do you just read the title of books? Hell the file could of said he had zero things compromising him?
I guess we have different standard. I wouldn't accept a book report from a child if he told be he read the title only. I expect far more from a news report.
I think you don't know what the word 'rumor' means. They did not report something overheard at a bar. Again, if this was just a rumor that the IC did not find at all credible, they would not have bothered bringing it to Executive-level attention. Do you think they brief Obama on every single smear attempt leveled at him by the right? "Mr. President, we have information that Mark Levin has called you a poopyhead." "Write me up a two-page memo and prepare a statement that my head is not made of poop."
So you don't think items the intelligence agencies brief the president on are important. You're saying that you trust the media to be the gatekeepers of what is and isn't important and st the same time are saying that the media cannot be trusted to do so because they are reporting on stuff that actually happened.
I answered the questions that were specific. I cannot answer vague questions. As in "was what comy did unethical". Because not only I had to google who is that Comey you mentioned but it turned out there are many things that he did. So I asked for clarification which you failed to deliver as of yet.
I don't see how this question even relative to what we were discussing, I never questioned the existence of no report. Are you trying to move the goalposts here?
My point still stands CNN shouldn't have reported on the particular nature of the report - it's pretty obvious why they did.
All right, gentleperchildren, let's review. The year is 2024 - that's two-zero-two-four, as in the 21st Century's perfect vision - and I am sorry to say the world has become a pussy-whipped, Brady Bunch version of itself, run by a bunch of still-masked clots ridden infertile senile sissies who want the Last Ukrainian to die so they can get on with the War on China, with some middle-eastern genocide on the side
Only the people briefed and in possession of those documents know its full contents.
Are you saying the media can only report on stuff that is 100% leaked to the last letter?
Not a very riveting news story. "The president was briefed about something, stay tuned for tomorrow when we report on another thing we can't mention."My point still stands CNN shouldn't have reported on the particular nature of the report
Last edited by zorkuus; 2017-01-15 at 08:03 PM.
So your point is networks should never report on anything ever unless every single detail has been provided and triple-checked? (See, I can strawman too.)
There was nothing 'fake' in the CNN report. No assumptions were made. Everything they reported on actually happened. The fact that it says something you don't like is irrelevant. Were you this outraged at the coverage of Comey's announcement of the renewed FBI investigation into the Clinton emails? They ended up being absolutely nothing, but that wasn't known at the time. Did you complain that every network was reporting on it? No, because nobody complained about the reporting at all. There were complaints that he shouldn't have made the announcement to begin with, but the reporting on the announcement was perfectly valid, and the reporting on this security briefing is just as valid.
In terms of comey, you believe that it was unethical of him to announce that he was investigating information on weiners pc because it was unverified that it had any evidence that any of hillarys emails were on them. You also think the media was unethical because it was relying on unverified information that Hillary had emails on wieners pc.
So because a briefing puts trump in a negative light, the media shouldnt report it. Keep following gbtrump without a thought in your head. I'm sorry someone evsaid something that put your master in a negative light, but I know it's easier just to believe in him as infallible. Makes life easier when you don't have to think.