General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCheck Out Dan Rather's Comments on FB Today Regarding Trump!
Folks, if you want a simple test about false equivalency in the coverage of this election, let's try this little experiment. Imagine if it was Hillary Clinton who was praising Vladimir Putin. Imagine if her campaign advisors had close ties to Russia. Imagine if her business interests and investors were unknown, but there was strong suspicion that her potentially shaky corporate empire was bolstered by Russian money. And imagine if she refused to release her tax returns. In what kind of media landscape do you think we would be living? How much would we be hearing about this on cable news? What would the likes of Sean Hannity be saying? Or even the headlines in the New York Times? I think these questions answer themselves.
As a reporter, you often try to survey the landscape like an explorer, looking for streams flowing into larger rivers, and a river flowing into a much bigger sea. That's when you can sense there is the potential bombshell of a story. And there is no question in my mind that Donald Trump and his ties to Russia are such a story. This report (shared here) by a seasoned investigative journalist that there may be back channel dealings between a Trump campaign official and the Russian government are but the latest serious allegations in a very long and troubling string of news.
Russia must be considered a top national security concern by our next president. Just this past week you had U.S. intelligence suggesting that Russian warplanes bombed an aid convoy in Syre. And you have the two top-ranking Democrats on the Congressional intelligence panels saying that, based on briefings they have received, they believe Russian intelligence officers are trying to tamper with this presidential election. And they believe those orders are coming from the top of the Russian government. Of course this is on top of such things as Russian action in Ukraine and Trump publicly questioning our responsibilities to our NATO allies.
There was a time when the GOP leaders couldn't criticize President Obama enough for not standing strong in the face of Russian aggression. Just a couple years ago House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) went on Fox News and said this: Putin is playing chess and I think we are playing marbles, and I dont think its even close,...Theyve been running circles around us, and I think its the naïve position on the National Security Council and the presidents advisers that if we just keep giving things to Russia, theyll wake up and say, boy the United States isn't all that bad. That is completely missing the motivations of why Russia does what Russia does.
Where are those voices now? Why aren't there more headlines about this? And finally, what do we really know about Donald Trump and his motivations in regards to Russia? I know this issue can get lost in all the inferno swirling around this election, but to paraphrase the congressman from earlier, this ain't a game of marbles.
```````````````
U.S. intel officials probe ties between Trump adviser and Kremlin
https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-s-intel-officials-probe-ties-between-trump-adviser-and-kremlin-175046002.html?soc_src=mail&soc_trk=ma
tblue37
(65,409 posts)justhanginon
(3,290 posts)napi21
(45,806 posts)Dan Rather/ was one of the best and fired because he DARED to write a story that was very negative story about Shrub! There have been many TV personalities relegated to the same fate.
And those remaining scream "LIBERAL MEDIA!"
Nitram
(22,822 posts)I believe the story was essentially true, but no solid evidence has ever been found too back it up.
napi21
(45,806 posts)money involved, do ya?
Alameda
(1,895 posts)....the evidence was (it seems) purposely forged so as to make Rather look bad....and undermine the credibility of the report. It worked, everyone concentrated on that, not the substance of the report....which was verified.
Nitram
(22,822 posts)Bush's lies about his National Guard "service." Bush knows, we know, but we may never be able to prove it because so many record "went missing."
Ruffhowse
(1,442 posts)world wide wally
(21,744 posts)Russia and Putin just because their boy Trump stands to make a few bucks from Russia.
Tell your Trump voter friends exactly that as they wave their American flags, scream "America first", and then vote for the Russian guy.
42bambi
(1,753 posts)calimary
(81,323 posts)That experiment should be played out in everybody's mind. OR if not, the media should be POINTING THAT OUT.
Let's play a game, folks! Imagine if it was Hillary doing and saying all these things, surrounding herself with aides and associates who were neck-deep in shady money dealings with foreign operatives, some of those operatives NOT our friends. What would you think if Hillary was up to this shit, these Ponzi schemes, these "business deals," with these sketchy people. What if she were dealing routinely with crooks and international manipulators and money-launderers? What if the Russians were into HER, financially, up to her neck?
Oh the roars of outrage! Oh, the calls for her her on a pike! Oh, the calls to start building a gallows with her name on it in the middle of the Washington Mall! But somehow nobody minds it when The Donald has done these things, and been in bed with some pretty funky folks.
#DoubleStandard
Dark n Stormy Knight
(9,771 posts)Last edited Sat Sep 24, 2016, 04:06 PM - Edit history (1)
and killed a man in the resulting crash. Certainly we'd have seen a far different level of exposure and outrage than we did with first lady Laura Bush.
Link for anyone who doesn't know the story.
calimary
(81,323 posts)Yeah, makes me think of all that crap the wrong-wingers spun about how Hillary somehow had Vince Foster killed, or killed him herself, or had an army of little green men go after him and zap him to death or whatever the crappola-du-jour was. In Laura Bush, we actually did have a First Lady who killed somebody.
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)onecent
(6,096 posts)K & R
mainstreetonce
(4,178 posts)Hill yes!
Skittles
(153,169 posts)I am a person
AnotherMother4Peace
(4,247 posts)LuckyLib
(6,819 posts)Hillary would be hung out to dry.
randome
(34,845 posts)"If he says nice things about me, I'll say nice things about him." That, alone, should disqualify this clown.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]
Takket
(21,578 posts)Sure, the United States might be run from the Kremlin if Trump wins, but hey, Hillary put some e-mails on a server she wasn't supposed to, now THAT is a story!
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)Nitram
(22,822 posts)Gabi Hayes
(28,795 posts)but a cheesy intel series as well, extolling among other cretins, Bush 43 for his astute capture of Sadaam Hussein, all the while NEVER mentioning the false pretenses that surrounded the criminal invasion of his country, or the profound damage it did to ours, as well as the rest of the world.
Hats off, Zucker! you should give Rogers and Corey L a sitcom after this is over.
JI7
(89,252 posts)TomCADem
(17,390 posts)...would folks demand that she withdraw or apologize? Would they say she was disqualified? If so, but they try to normalize it for Trump, then that is a false equivalency.
lark
(23,120 posts)it's one of the truly scary things about him. There are so many heinous traitorous things he; done or wants to do, but this one is very important. That and a quick answer and pivot on emails are critical for HR to in the debate tomorrow.