Trump Leadership Shines Again

[Hestia11 572]

1 minute ago, admin_270 said:

That's what I'm saying! They are simply reporting an anonymous claim. They haven't done any sort of adequate investigation into it.

You literally have no proof behind that, so it's not a credible discussion to get into. Unless you're somehow in the Atlantic or the AP's news room, you don't know. And I don't know. So it's best not to discuss whether they've done "Any investigation". 

[admin_270 843]

2 minutes ago, Hestia11 said:

You literally have no proof behind that, so it's not a credible discussion to get into. Unless you're somehow in the Atlantic or the AP's news room, you don't know. And I don't know. So it's best not to discuss whether they've done "Any investigation". 

So do you think they interviewed all those people, got quotes, and then decided not to run them?

[Conservative Elector 2 333]

By the way, why do this credible sources unveil their information, which is awful when true, just now? Why did they wait, I mean it would have been a shocker at any time, so it would have been their duty to speak out immediately. For me that's a political motivated move, even when true, because they calculated to release the information during the campaign period. Hiding something awful for two years, doesn't make you much better than the perpetrator.

[Patine 469]

4 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

By the way, why do this credible sources unveil their information, which is awful when true, just now? Why did they wait, I mean it would have been a shocker at any time, so it would have been their duty to speak out immediately. For me that's a political motivated move, even when true, because they calculated to release the information during the campaign period. Hiding something awful for two years, doesn't make you much better than the perpetrator.

Because it's American media. As I've said, all of their outlets are this blatantly disingenuous, sensationalist, and unethical, regardless of "ideological slant," (the fact that those are so completely undisguised and in one's face is also a real huge blow to any credibility there, as well).

[Conservative Elector 2 333]

1 minute ago, Patine said:

Because it's American media. As I've said, all of their outlets are this blatantly disingenuous, sensationalist, and unethical, regardless of "ideological slant," (the fact that those are so completely undisguised and in one's face is also a real huge blow to any credibility there, as well).

Yeah, but that one is even more on the sources than on the media, which I hardly defend. The media can't report something they are not told unless the whole story is fake and made up by the media itself.

[Patine 469]

Just now, Conservative Elector 2 said:

Yeah, but that one is even more on the sources than on the media, which I hardly defend. The media can't report something they are not told unless the whole story is fake and made up by the media itself.

Again, this isn't atypical or out of the ordinary for the snake-in-the-grass, post Cronkite American news media, regardless of ideological leaning. Please, stop pretending it's some unprecedented and shocking new escalation of lack of integrity that proves some new (and partisan) trend.

[Conservative Elector 2 333]

7 minutes ago, Patine said:

Again, this isn't atypical or out of the ordinary for the snake-in-the-grass, post Cronkite American news media, regardless of ideological leaning. Please, stop pretending it's some unprecedented and shocking new escalation of lack of integrity that proves some new (and partisan) trend.

Ah, I am not so sure about that. The story is labelled as a new low of Trump, so yes it's also damaging to the sources and the media when hidden for two years, isn't it? 

Regarding partisan tactics: Yes, I believe most mainstream media is left-wing. I never got the whole newly popping up feud of Trump with Fox News, I certainly think it's stupid, but yeah I don't think Fox News is part of the mainstream media, as you might be viewed as a pariah outside the US when relying on it. It's probably also not that popular here, so perhaps people wouldn't even know Fox News. I don't know how much Austrians are aware of American news outlets. Anyway yes my impression is, left-wing media is quite in and is rarely criticized publicly.

[Patine 469]

1 minute ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

Ah, I am not so sure about that. The story is labelled as a new low of Trump, so yes it's also damaging to the sources and the media when hidden for two years, isn't it? 

Regarding partisan tactics: Yes, I believe most mainstream media is left-wing. I never got the whole newly popping up feud of Trump with Fox News, I certainly think it's stupid, but yeah I don't think Fox News is part of the mainstream media, as you might be viewed as a pariah outside the US when relying on it. It's probably also not that popular here, so perhaps people wouldn't even know Fox News. I don't know how much Austrians are aware of American news outlets. Anyway yes my impression is, left-wing media is quite in and is rarely criticized publicly.

If mainstream U.S. media was "left-wing," what major political party would they support? It seems that you, like many people, actually believe the  Democratic Party of the United States is a full-out left-wing party with a powerful far-left-extremist wing. This just isn't so, and is the distorted viewpoint advanced by disingenuous liars and propaganda artists like Rush Limbaugh, Glen Back, Bill O'Reilly, Ann Counter, Tucker Carlson, and their ilk - none of whom seem to have any credible education in political science. The Democratic Party of the United States is, ideologically and in terms of it's significant elected members of real power and influence, centre-right to centrist to centre-left at the furthest. And there is no far-left-extremist wing of great influence - just, as I said above, some mild Social Democrats, ideologically, as we'd call them in Canada and Europe. The "radical left-wing," of American politics is protesters, social media influencers, NGO's, and bloggers - NOT the Democratic Party of the Untied States, who are not even under threat of their platform being hijacked by this actual left-wing, nor do they ever REALLY given them MUCH at all - just a few parsimonious crumbs from their table. You need a sense of perspective and proportion here.

[vcczar 1,224]

Conservative Fox News is now the 4th media outlet confirm that story that Trump called dead US soldiers losers and suckers. 
 

@admin_270 @Conservative Elector 2 

[vcczar 1,224]

The anonymous source might be John Kelly. Trump was randomly attacking him at a conference today. 

[admin_270 843]

35 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Conservative Fox News is now the 4th media outlet confirm that story that Trump called dead US soldiers losers and suckers. 
 

@admin_270 @Conservative Elector 2 

What do you mean by 'confirm'? That there is an anonymous source claiming that?

[admin_270 843]

34 minutes ago, vcczar said:

The anonymous source might be John Kelly.

Sounds right - he is indeed a 4-star.

[vcczar 1,224]

43 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

What do you mean by 'confirm'? That there is an anonymous source claiming that?

Fox News's National Security Reporter confirmed the anonymous sources. 

“I’ve spoken with two U.S. senior officials who were on the trip to France who confirmed to me key details in The Atlantic article and the quotes attributed to the president,” Griffin said.

According to Griffin’s sources, one of whom she said was a former Trump administration official, “The president would say about American veterans, ‘What’s in it for them? They don’t make any money.'”

Griffin also said one of her sources said, “It was a character flaw of the President. He could not understand why someone would die for their country, not worth it.”

“Regarding the French trip to mark the end of WWI, according to this former official, the president was not in a good mood,” Griffin continued. “French President Macron had said something that made him mad, he questioned why he had to go to two cemeteries. ‘Why do I have to do two?’ His staff explained he could cancel, but he was warned they — they press — are going to kill you for this. The president was mad as a hornet when they did, according to this source.”

 

Here's Mayor Pete using Fox against Fox:

https://twitter.com/tweber/status/1302021294712553476?s=20

[admin_270 843]

1 hour ago, vcczar said:

Fox News's National Security Reporter confirmed the anonymous sources. 

“I’ve spoken with two U.S. senior officials who were on the trip to France who confirmed to me key details in The Atlantic article and the quotes attributed to the president,” Griffin said.

According to Griffin’s sources, one of whom she said was a former Trump administration official, “The president would say about American veterans, ‘What’s in it for them? They don’t make any money.'”

Griffin also said one of her sources said, “It was a character flaw of the President. He could not understand why someone would die for their country, not worth it.”

“Regarding the French trip to mark the end of WWI, according to this former official, the president was not in a good mood,” Griffin continued. “French President Macron had said something that made him mad, he questioned why he had to go to two cemeteries. ‘Why do I have to do two?’ His staff explained he could cancel, but he was warned they — they press — are going to kill you for this. The president was mad as a hornet when they did, according to this source.”

 

Here's Mayor Pete using Fox against Fox:

https://twitter.com/tweber/status/1302021294712553476?s=20

Not clear here if this is simply repeating the same anonymous claims, or different people. If different, the parts quoted aren't about the President's hair and rain.

[vcczar 1,224]

10 hours ago, admin_270 said:

Not clear here if this is simply repeating the same anonymous claims, or different people. If different, the parts quoted aren't about the President's hair and rain.

Yeah, I don't know how much of it was confirmed since it is said that only key details were confirmed. The new part is the part about Trump being in a bad mood that he was requested to visit two cemeteries. I'm not sure if Fox wants to let its viewers no what parts were confirmed or not. I could see them not wanting to be clear on that since it might alienate their viewers.

[pilight 237]

58 minutes ago, vcczar said:

I'm not sure if Fox wants to let its viewers no what parts were confirmed or not. I could see them not wanting to be clear on that since it might alienate their viewers.

That's what journalism is all about...

[PringlesN7 162]

If this is true, then shame is all I can say. I wouldn't be surprised if it was. Trump was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and isn't worthy of bashing American heroes like John McCain, and those veterans. 

[Actinguy 862]

On 9/4/2020 at 12:11 AM, admin_270 said:

Sounds ridiculous. All anonymous sources. Trump has denied.

If there's harder evidence, or someone wants to go on the record, then I would take the claims more seriously.

Trump himself is on record publicly mocking POWs and attacking a Gold Star family (the parents of a US soldier who died in combat). 

[Patine 469]

12 hours ago, pilight said:

That's what journalism is all about...

No, let me correct you here. That's what AMERICAN journalism is all about...

[Reagan04 658]

12 hours ago, Patine said:

No, let me correct you here. That's what AMERICAN journalism is all about...

It’s not much better up north Mr. CBC.

[Conservative Elector 2 333]

On 9/4/2020 at 4:34 PM, Hestia11 said:

You can say some are better than others, or whatever, but seven times is enough. Combined they should be enough. 

Well, I believe the quality of an excuse or distancing statement matters as well. The quality signals whether it is meant sincere or not. Likewise, I think it needs a strong condemnation of the KKK and Alt-Right movement as well, but Trump failed here most likely.

[Hestia11 572]

22 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

Well, I believe the quality of an excuse or distancing statement matters as well.

You literally said some were better than others, which means some were good. 

[admin_270 843]

14 hours ago, Actinguy said:

Trump himself is on record publicly mocking POWs

You mean McCain? Ya, he doesn't like McCain. I can believe he's said pretty rough stuff about McCain in private.

[Conservative Elector 2 333]

24 minutes ago, Hestia11 said:

You literally said some were better than others, which means some were good. 

Yes, and I meant it that way. I try to value when something's good even when I might be biased towards Republican talking points. I am not in the stage of fundamental opposition.

 

[vcczar 1,224]

41 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

You mean McCain? Ya, he doesn't like McCain. I can believe he's said pretty rough stuff about McCain in private.

and in public