Intel: Russia has Compromising info on Trump.

[Noxx79]

*rolls eyes*
They just reported about the briefing and what was in it. They didn't "paint" Trump in any way at all. Isn't it what you and your fellow Ds were raging all about in this thread? That CNN just reported the fact of report being in existence?

No it's what trump is raging about. Do you not even know what CNN reported? Are you actually arguing about something you have no knowledge about?

[Wells]

Trust them with our information if their database idea ever pans out. Not to mention they seem to be awfully anti-leak although only when it comes to Trump. Strange...

They got pissy about the Panama Papers too. Guess why.

[Elim Garak]

You're not answering my questions.was what comy did unethical? Does the document not exist and were people not briefed on it?

What exactly was CNN wrong about?

What particular Comey action are you talking about exactly?

And I already explained what was wrong about CNN. Exactly.

[primalmatter]

Oh my god, why don't people read the damn thread before posting.

CNN reported on the security briefing prepared for Obama and Trump regarding allegations of Russian influence on Trump. They did not report at all on the contents of the dossier Buzzfeed later released, and still have not. It is not fake news to report on a security briefing, and if the dossier had already been investigated and proven fake, the briefing would never have taken place. There is no rumor, and the dossier does have sources and is under investigation.

Nothing you are saying is true. If you disagree with the paragraph above, be specific and provide a link proving it.

It isn't something they should of touched to start with let buzzfeed be buzzfeed. I don't find the whole reporting on a report to be a shield. You might and I can't change your mind on that if you do.

[LaserSharkDFB]

It isn't something they should of touched to start with let buzzfeed be buzzfeed. I don't find the whole reporting on a report to be a shield. You might and I can't change your mind on that if you do.

CNN reported it before Buzzfeed released their documents. Why shouldn't they report on a matter of national security that was important enough to be relayed to the President and President Elect? And what about doing that makes it fake news?

[Elim Garak]

No it's what trump is raging about. Do you not even know what CNN reported? Are you actually arguing about something you have no knowledge about?

I fail to see your point here. What is it you are trying to convey here?

[primalmatter]

CNN reported it before Buzzfeed released their documents. Why shouldn't they report on a matter of national security that was important enough to be relayed to the President and President Elect? And what about doing that makes it fake news?

Why should the press not report on rumors?

I think if you have to ask that I can't explain to you the issue.

[zorkuus]

It isn't something they should of touched to start with let buzzfeed be buzzfeed.

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.

Why should the press not report on rumors?

The document existing and people being briefed about it is not a rumor, nevermind its contents.

[Noxx79]

I fail to see your point here. What is it you are trying to convey here?

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?

[primalmatter]

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.

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.

[LaserSharkDFB]

Why should the press not report on rumors?

I think if you have to ask that I can't explain to you the issue.

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."

[primalmatter]

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 your point is we should just follow assumptions and not ask for facts...?

[Noxx79]

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.

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.

[Elim Garak]

Well the fact that you can't even answer my questions

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.

Again: do the documents not exist and did the intelligence agencies not brief the president on them?

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.

[zorkuus]

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.

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?

My point still stands CNN shouldn't have reported on the particular nature of the report

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."

[Wells]

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.

You seem to be conflating the CNN report with Buzzfeed's.

[primalmatter]

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?

Yes. That is the standard I hold the media too. I know it isn't always possible and I expect corrections when mistakes occur but yes that is my standard.

[LaserSharkDFB]

So your point is we should just follow assumptions and not ask for facts...?

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.

[zorkuus]

Yes. That is the standard I hold the media too.

It's an impossible standard.

[Noxx79]

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.

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.