Media melting down over Trump referring to a reporter as "sleaze".

Trump's concern with the press seems to be only how it relates to himself. If he broadened his disdain for the press to include all the other ways press is used as a propaganda tool, that would be one thing, but this appears to be a setup for a press that ultimately bows to Trump and learns to never put his feet to the fire. You know, dictator stuff.

a reply to: BlueAjah
By the way, I made a mistake in one of my earlier posts. I thought that donations weren't made to veterans organisations until after the Washington post article. Instead it should have been the $1m donation that Trump personally promised to make. Apologies.
As for the press conference, this explains a great deal.

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: ladyinwaiting

Nope. That's the meek way that everyone else deals with false accusations from the media. It does nothing to stop them. That's what I meant above. The media never gets called out for their tactics. Finally someone is telling them straight out that their bs is flat out wrong, and they should not be lying to get ratings.

The situation was not some one on one interview where a journalist asked a question, and gave Trump a chance to respond. It was full on attack by the media, stating things as fact that were not facts.

Whatttt? And you think Trump is the only one they do that to? No, Babe, your man is not unique in that regard, nor is he exempt from scrutiny. He's one of the gang and he's going to be completely and utterly raked over the coals, like Clinton will be. Brace yourself. You ain't seen nothing til the skeletons start flying out of the closet. Like everybody else, some will be true, some will be false, but they are all guaranteed to be ugly.

We already know Clinton's - so (yawn) that will be a do-over. The woman's been scrutinized for decades. But who knows the secrets that will be revealed about his royal highness Trump? Should be interesting, and it sure will keep those on the Trump Blindness Train busy!

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: ugmold

originally posted by: xuenchen
LOL

He really told those guys what side their bread is buttered on didn't he.

Yes he is a bit like Kim Jong Un, when Elected these "Journalists" will probably just disappear.

My Gawd !!

What ARE you suggesting ?

Trump is the one suggesting here., and treating those that question him with a character assault. His lack of composure is frightening. He acts like a spoiled brat, how dare anyone question the Great and Powerful tRump? Sometimes I wonder if you are Hannity, you have similar styles.

I suggest we look for a better Candidate with Composure, say Mr Sanders.

originally posted by: ugmold

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: ugmold

originally posted by: xuenchen
LOL

He really told those guys what side their bread is buttered on didn't he.

Yes he is a bit like Kim Jong Un, when Elected these "Journalists" will probably just disappear.

My Gawd !!

What ARE you suggesting ?

Trump is the one suggesting here., and treating those that question him with a character assault. His lack of composure is frightening. He acts like a spoiled brat, how dare anyone question the Great and Powerful tRump? Sometimes I wonder if you are Hannity, you have similar styles.

I suggest we look for a better Candidate with Composure, say Mr Sanders.

Frankly the thought of Trumpster going into a negotiating room with Putin scares me. If he blows his top when reporters ask him easy to middling questions, what would he be like at the G7?

a reply to: BlueAjah
I would say yes, that is true, however there are certain things that cannot be denied.

All politicians lie about what they can accomplish if elected. And some of the things that Trump has stated, would be dangerous opening up a legal door that should not be opened up and would be abused.

While in Dallas Fort/Worth in Feb of 2016, he stated he wants to expand the laws to make it easier to sue the media for liable anything in print or spoken. Apart from that it would lose in a court of law, until the laws and court cases are over turned. But that in itself would be a point of attack against the First amendment itself. Open that law up to be that easy and what group could not sue another for such, based on what all is stated. They think that there is a social problem now, he does that and it would be a free for all in the courts, as lawsuits are brought against this or that group, even politicians.

And where would the transparency be, if he gets his way and forces all those who would be on his staff or working for the executive branch if they have to sign a non disclosure agreement. There are people who think that Snowden was a hero for what he did, but if Trump did that, then no one can be forced to testify in any case against a potential presidential Trump without fear of a reprisal, nor would the public stand for not being allowed to know what all is going on. Gone will be the days of a whistle blower for fear of the consequences under a Trump presidency if he gets his way.

So Donald Trump fights Fire with Fire and people are shocked?

The Medias claim to "Report the Truth" is a Lie for decades now.

Their opinions have been openly bought by Big Business interests since before I was born.

Great to see the table turned.

Fun to see opinions that seem to suggest he is the only US citizen who doesn't deserve the protection of the First Amendment.

I wonder if he has been reading Noam Chomsky?

a reply to: BlueAjah

They knew where the money went. Millions had already been distributed, as they knew, and millions more pledged would still be distributed.

Trump’s Veterans Story Doesn’t Match Up With the Dates on His Own Checks

The newswire reached out to all 41 different groups the presumptive GOP nominee name-checked at the press conference and, of the 30 that responded, “about half said they had received checks from Trump just last week,” roughly four months after the fundraiser in question and weeks after reporters began pressing Trump to document the donations.

It gets worse: Several of those checks, including the personal one for $1 million that Trump cut himself, were dated May 24, 2016, aka the very same day that Trump faced pointed questions from the Washington Post about both the amount of money he raised at his January fundraiser and the amount that had made its way to veterans charities.

In recent weeks, Trump and his campaign repeatedly declined to give new details about how much they have given away.

“Why should I give you records?” Trump said in an interview with The Post this month. “I don’t have to give you records.”

Paul Rieckhoff, founder of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, said Trump’s refusal to divulge how much of the money he had distributed raised questions about whether the candidate intended the fundraiser primarily as a public-relations effort for himself.

“That’s just shady. Right? No matter how you cut it, that’s just shady,” Rieckhoff said. “If he was going to make it right, a couple of weeks before Memorial Day would be a good time to do it. It behooves him, not just politically but ethically, to come forward and account for this money.”

Trump provided no official way for charities to apply for the money. Groups around the country still tried, sending letters and hitting up local veterans-for-Trump leaders.

It looks like what it looks like I think. But, whatever - the part of your post that interested me was that you felt journalists shouldn't even ask. This man is running for president. Nobody should ask your boy Donny any hard questions?