In this case it is Trump's accusation of the MSM.

The thing is no one reads this shit outside of strong liberal strongholds. Most Americans don't give a shit and aren't paying attention to anything outside of their tiny sphere of life.  When he lowers taxes, he'll coast to reelection.  People will tune back in in 3 years and there will be concrete proof one way or another.  I mean it's not like liberals actually have a successful national candidate they can run. Maybe Hillary will go for the Mayor's job and try to roll that into another run at the White house. Though I imagine she's going to have more then a few sessions in front of congress/FBI to deal with in the mean time.

Posted By: mattradd

In this case it is Trump's accusation of the MSM.  
   
 P.S. Oh, and Ed, before you make the charge: "No, more fake news from Nolan McCaskill," try googling "Trump enemy of the people," and see how many other news sources reported on it!

Trumps lies a lot and the Press should call him out for it.

...in 1917!!!

How is this fake news?>>>>>

Many of the media reports on this tweet are giving the impression that Trump thinks or has said that ALL of the Press is the enemy of the American people. The qualifying prefix "FAKE" Press is being ignored by many.

Which would be pretty much EVERY SINGLE source of media that dares to report exactly what he says and does.  ABC, NBC, MSNBC, Reuters, NYT, WaPo, WSJ, the Hill, the nation, PBS, the Guardian, The BBC.....et al

If i was advising him i would have told him to not go there.

Just a small note, the Duke lacrosse story was more a function of an overzealous official prosecuting the case than a story fabricated by the media. Highly recommend the ESPN 30 for 30 on this, the title of which escapes me right now. Now returning to your regularly scheduled political programming...

They had those kids found guilty WAY before the facts were in.

Yes, you said that, after you said: "No, more fake news from Nolan McCaskill" You can contest the headline, but the news was not fake news. As I have pointed out to you. Hell, even Priebus is telling you to take Trump seriously!

The press makes mistakes. They get called on it. They're forced to retract and apologize. This happens.  I seriously can't believe you're still bringing up Dan Rather's reporting from that many years ago. (Dan retracted and he has apologized, repeatedly. GTFOI)

While the 30/30 report was excellent, it was broadcast well in arrears. The NYT, ESPN, Duke student paper, faculty (how about their letter damning those kids?)  and especially all the local papers and tv jumped on the "boys must of done it" train. While the media didn't fabricate "Duke Lacrosse," NONE of them stood up and said "wait a minute let's dig into this a bit" until far too late. And while Nifong paid a price, the Duke AD is now at LSU, the Duke president, despite the university settling out of court for millions skated (btw anyone recall his statements prior to trial?) and of course the kids can never get their lives back and the coach had his career ruined as well. Yes, Nifong was to blame. But the media at best watched and did nothing while many cheered him on. The ESPN piece was basically their trying to reclaim their rep years after the lawyers busted the case wide open. While the media didn't fabricate this story they aided and allowed it by being unwilling to discover the truth instead of jumping on Nifongs train of lies.  

This discussion about the Free Press and the First Amendment is far bigger and more important than just Trump but his campaign and election have simply accelerated the issue.

I've never claimed the tweet never happened, only that the fake prefix gets dropped when excoriating Trump.

You are indeed correct and right on point. The press, by in large, particularly the MSM news agencies Trump mentioned, and Dan Rather did and do both. Guess what Trump never does? You're right! He never does either. Something the Trump supporters conveniently ignore.

On that we can agree. And, in the same vein, lacking a President that has at least some minimum amount of trust will most certainly be our undoing, as well.  

Rathers expert and research team was telling him NOT to run the story and he did so anyway. That is NOT a mistake. That is a deliberate attack to bring down a candidacy.

There is also a conservative slant to other media. So what? That is how a free press works. As I said, the press gets it wrong sometimes. Sometimes there may even be malevolent intent. But the problem here is not that there are stories or ongoing narratives in the news media that were unfair to republican/conservative presidents. There have also been stories or ongoing narratives that have been unfair to democratic/Liberal presidents.  

they have found no evidence of criminal wrongdoing. Whether Flynn's behavior was inappropriate is different a question. Flynn was acting as civilian at the time---and, whether or not he crossed a legal line, he was certainly walking a fine line.  

The news has been full of harsher definitions of "inappropriate" that all seem to be wrong.

Go complain to someone else.

So, you determine what is inappropriate, what is political, when they are separate issues, and when they overlap? Tell that to the majority, in the linked poll, who want Flynn investigated. Sounds to me like they suspect he may have done something inappropriate; perhaps even illegal!  

I was talking about the things he's said in general, not to any specific event. No President or anyone is going to point to negative coverage, even when it's fair, and then say, "Now there's some great reporting".

1. No investigation has “cleared” Flynn, except the investigation conducted by Larry, More, and Curly Joe aka Donald Trump and [pick any two flunkies]. The Congressional investigation has not even begun beyond staffer review as far as I can tell.

to avoid engaging in activities that while, perhaps, are not technically against any rules or laws, could present an appearance of impropriety. I see no reason why someone in Flynn’s position should not be held to a similar standard.

Please go back to Start and do not collect $200, read the entire conversation and then get back to us. "Inappropriate" context had nothing to do with the VP.

Keep back peddling. Pretty soon you'll be back at the top of the hill.

I vote; just go!

I lol'd on that one. One thing one finds with Ed, any discussion with him is like the old shell game where you have to pick which shell the pea is under. He's always going the change the pea to make certain he wins and you lose. And, just like in the old shell game, he's very dishonest; in this case intellectually, in his endeavor.

As you soundly state, DOING something inappropriate and "giving the appearance of acting inappropriately" are two vastly different things.  

Not only did Flynn do something that clearly appears to be inappropriate, his behavior WAS inappropriate. If he had not created the appearance of impropriety, by actually behaving inappropriately, he would still have a job---would he not?

His inappropriate action was not telling the truth to Pence about his earlier appropriate actions with the Russian Ambassador.  

Yeah…Flynn, the NSA, lied to the Vice pres, Chief of staff, and then the Pres. To say that is inappropriate is being very generous.  

His job was NSA nominee. His job was to get prepared to takeover on day one. He talked to security officials from dozens of countries, just like all of his preceding NSA NOMINEES. The only reason this incident is even on the radar is due to fake reports (ZERO EVIDENCE) that Trump had something to do with Russians attempts at hacking DNC email and the unproven (ZERO EVIDENCE) that Trump made promises to the Russians regarding sanctions as some sort of quid pro quo. Let's visit once again after Flynn is indicted.