Fox News anchor Chris Wallace warns viewers: Trump crossed the line in latest attack on media

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
It's a tweet. Life must be pretty good in the Twitter bubble if a tweet is cause for outrage and indignation.

Trump trolled Wallace and other parrots, and you deserve it.

Do we want journalists that can be triggered/trolled by a tweet?

That sounds familiar, doesn't it?

It should sound familiar idiots just put him into office.

originally posted by: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

The press is stating that some criticisms have "crossed the line".

They are determining what anyone can say about them.

Not really, attacking freedom of the press is an attack against American principles. You are American right?

When someone lies to you or about you do you not get offended some news is fake news if you believe everything without searching multimedia sources then that makes you sheeple just because it's on the news or the net doesn't make it real

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

He was elected to say outlandish crap, though.

No he wasn't. The President is supposed to present a dignified persona to the public and other nations. Not to run his mouth like some crackhead.

a reply to: buster2010

THis is your opinion. But the folks who voted for him tend to have a different opinion.

The media is scare, they no longer get the respect that they used to hold dear, at least back in the days, their power has been taken away, but guess by who, the public, Trump is just mirroring what the people is telling and talking about, no really making assumptions he is just extending the existing ones, the people has the media now in the spot light and wants accountability it has them by their balls.

Is the people the one that raises the questions, is the people the one that rates and supports and now is not happening.

Neither the president or the media are invincible the people is the one that makes boths.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: alphabetaone


I'm pretty sure this is one of those times.

I'm equally as sure you're not, since time and again you continue on with your drivel without addressing the few simple examples I posed to you. What is the justification for a sitting President of The united States making such (verifiably false) outlandish claims to his constituency?

a reply to: marg6043

Trump is pushing less accountability not more. He gets up on stage and lies, he lies a lot. He makes up terrorist attacks all the time. He claims the sky is green. He denies the reality to the extent that he can be in a rain storm and he claims God is diverting rain away from him so he won't get wet.

When he gets called on this, and these types of things get pointed out he says FAKE NEWS. He doesn't address the points. he doesn't debate, he doesn't offer his own version of the facts. He just claims it's fake, and that the media business is failing. He did this to all his opponents in the campaign, and he's doing it to the media now.

That doesn't create accountability, it takes it away, because it frames the debate about fake vs real, not fact vs "alternative" fact.

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

He was elected to say outlandish crap, though.

No he wasn't. The President is supposed to present a dignified persona to the public and other nations. Not to run his mouth like some crackhead.

The president, and their persona changes with each person. Most Presidents are pretty colorful characters, dignified is not the word I would use to describe the vast majority of them.

In this case, the people who elected Trump elected him on the basis of the fact that he runs his mouth, acts like a jackass, is aggressive, and is an ultra nationalist. They wanted someone who would get dirty, destroy tradition, and burn everything to the ground.

So far, that's precisely what they're getting.

That said, I would still argue... the President wears many hats, and being a private citizen is not one of them. Unlike every President before him, Trump didn't sign any early EO's dealing with ethics, and the man has never exactly been an ethical or moral character either... he's pure sleazy 80's businessman. That's why he's promoting his own private business while in office, and why he's doing it on occasion for other businesses. I do wonder if Congress or the courts will start checking the President on those actions. That includes using his platform to attack private businesses, which in this case is the press.

It's ironic that the left is always complaining about the rich and powerful, yet they are so eager to go along and agree with the media, which is owned and controlled by the same rich and powerful people that they always complain about. Can they not see how they are being played for fools? Useful idiots I believe would be the term to describe them.

a reply to: alphabetaone

the president doesn't need t justify his remarks.

Man!

He's not your bitch.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: alphabetaone

the president doesn't need t justify his remarks.

Man!

He's not your bitch.

Yes, he really does.

But let's leave that aside because it's unimportant....I wasn't asking the president to justify his remarks, I was asking you what justification there could be for the president fabricating items to fit his talking points, of which, you seem to be trying to dodge, but I will keep asking until you either a) acquiesce that you have no justification b) decide to abandon this thread, or c) continue to dodge.

The choice is yours.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Basically, the press is censoring what anyone (even the president) can say about them.

Help! Help! The most powerful man in the world is being repressed! LMAO

a reply to: alphabetaone

And you can keep shouting, "Squirrel!" and I won't play.

This is about the MSM having a hissy because the president disrespected them.

For what it's worth, the media knows they're being played. It's hard to know what can and can't be reported though. Newspapers and cable news are now dealing with situations where they get contacted by people in government and offered a story and some documents. The media runs it, and the person who contacted them as well as the documents were falsified. Just so others can claim fake news.

What you're witnessing isn't an attempt to put the media back in line. It's an attempt to subvert it.

a reply to: Aazadan

It was subverted long ago.

Its a pay to play system, but you aren't paying cash. Its more of a back scratch. "Don't run these stories, call us with these stories, and our PR teams will hand you some prepared articles to submit daily".

And that is how it works.

Maybe not exclusively. But frequently.

a reply to: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

The media cracks me up... They want to bitch about being protected by the first amendment while going after people who accuse them of fake media, seemingly to forget the 1st amendment also protects the people calling them fake news.

Secondly if the media weren't hell bent on destroying Trump by using false / misleading info they would not be accused of this. Take for instance the BS reporting about Trumps comments on Sweden. The media intentionally lopped off the remainder of his statement to make it would like he was referring to a terror attack when in reality he was talking about the number of immigrants they have taken in.

pic.twitter.com/w6wAxEsuus

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: alphabetaone

And you can keep shouting, "Squirrel!" and I won't play.

This is about the MSM having a hissy because the president disrespected them.

I'm not shouting squirrel, I'm asking you a direct question which you keep dodging.
What justification there could be for the president fabricating items to fit his talking points?

a reply to: Xcathdra

Nope.

If the statements about "fake news" aren't true (and in many cases, they aren't) then it is slander and/or libel to say it is particularly in public in front of an audience.

Every right has reasonable limitations.

You read Mr. Trump's comments and it's clear to you, somehow, that he was talking about a tv show he watched.

Many, including myself and many in the press, wondered just what the heck happened in Sweden "last night" that was similar to what happened in Germany (presumably, the Dec. 19 attacks in Berlin.)

Are you really saying that criticism (based on opinion perhaps) of the President is an attack?

If so, where was your concern in the last 8 years about the President being attacked in the media?

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Aazadan

It was subverted long ago.

Its a pay to play system, but you aren't paying cash. Its more of a back scratch. "Don't run these stories, call us with these stories, and our PR teams will hand you some prepared articles to submit daily".

And that is how it works.

Maybe not exclusively. But frequently.

OR you don't get access and those other "news" stations get all the access.

It's similar to the marriage between corporations and government.. They both benefit one side from money the other side from laws.. They both benefit in a way the American voters can't compensate for. We can't give the government that money we don't have it.. We can't give those corporations those laws we don't make them..

so we are side lined by nice talking liars..

Until we truly get money out of politics, we are screwed.

Well unless we figure out a way for people to matter more than money?

any ideas?


I know what Trump said.. I know what he meant. It's the same thing as the geek not being able to debate the jock.. the jock is the media.. You have all the data, but you sound stupid with "gotcha" questions. And the jock wins.

Trump is giving them heat back, and bullies don't know what to do with that, they can't handle it.
I think that's a great thing.. Especially with the washington post head getting a 600 million deal with the CIA... And many people on CNN having a history with the CIA..

And the German press saying many of their stories were written by the CIA..

I can link all those when I'm less tired if anyone wants, but search what I said..

I'm too old to listen to people who change the story line because of vested interests and pretend it's the truth.

These people are using psy op techniques I was around in 2006.

IF they were on the up and up with the american people their ratings would be through the roof. But they are all going down the drain to varied and different sources reporting mainly on youtube.. To pretend they get the last word on what is really going on would be absolutely absurd..

Just watch for the next time they go after Hershey or Nestle or Glaxo Smith Cline or whatever.. They won't.. Those people already bought the next year of "news"

a reply to: Gryphon66

Yup

The attack comes when the media intentionally leaves out facts in order to paint a false image. Like not giving Trumps complete statement on immigration in Sweden and then falsely pushing a terrorist attack that never happened, a terrorist attack Trump never mentioned but somehow the media claimed he did.