Donald Trump offers Jeff Sessions attorney general post

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seamus_L
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
pnewton said:
They linked their supporting evidence. Two of the links lead back to other articles they have at their** own** site, the third to similar** blog**. So, no, I am not inclined to believe such stories. The logic is that what they say is true because they said so twice, and so did their friends. Sure CNN might have made a mistake, but at least they do some journalism there and not this sort of self-supporting, circular logic.

I am not impressed with conservative complaints against media when their own sources are so, so bad. I have seen so many get suckered in by just blatantly stupid reasoning, as well as completely fraudulent stories. Sites like this make HuffPo look like Pulitzer quality.
Click to expand...
Whether you believe it or not doesn’t matter. Was the story accurate?
CNN doesn’t make mistakes in this regard. They have shown an overwhelming bias in favor progressivism.
 
JonNC said:
I’ll let you cite a news story from Breitbart that was false first. To be clear, an opinion piece is not a news report. Breitbart does both.
Click to expand...
But often they will present opinion as if it were fact. But here are some instances:

When Obama nominating federal prosecutor Loretta Lynch to be Attorney General, Breitbart, anxious to smear the nomination, reported that she had represented the Clintons during Whitewater. She hadn’t. They got the wrong Loretta Lynch. When the mistake was pointed out to them, they still left the story up for quite a while.

In January of this year Breitbart posted the headline ‘Free Beacon’ Founder: Trump is the Politics of ‘Fear, Paranoia, Nativism’. It was another case of mistaken identity. Apparently they do that a lot.

Breitbart posted that Chuck Hagel had received funding from a group called “Friends of Hamas”. It was totally false, but it did cause him some trouble before it was cleared up.

I could go on, but really, Breitbart is so far from responsible journalism that it should be relegated to the checkout line with the other supermarket tabloids. They publish “opinion” too.
 
JonNC said:
Whether you believe it or not doesn’t matter. Was the story accurate?
CNN doesn’t make mistakes in this regard. They have shown an overwhelming bias in favor progressivism.
Click to expand...
It is the opinion of Townhall that CNN gave the wrong impression. Townhall did not catch CNN is a falsehood.
 
JonNC said:
Whether you believe it or not doesn’t matter. Was the story accurate?
CNN doesn’t make mistakes in this regard. They have shown an overwhelming bias in favor progressivism.
Click to expand...
You want me to say if it is accurate whether I believe it or not? Okay. :rotfl:

I worry about this country’s capacity for critical thinking. At least now I understand how we could have ended up where we did with this election.
 
pnewton said:
You want me to say if it is accurate whether I believe it or not? Okay. :rotfl:

I worry about this country’s capacity for critical thinking. At least now I understand how we could have ended up where we did with this election.
Click to expand...
Well, yes. You claimed, not that they were right or wrong, but that you didn’t believe it because of the source. That’s a typically progressive approach, but it isn’t particularly good critical thinking. Either Townhall accurately presented the story, or they didn’t. Your biased opinion is irrelevant. If one doesn’t believe the source, one seeks another source.

We got to this result in the election because, on the one hand, this was a candidate who, despite his level of success in business, is a crude individual, while on the other hand there was a corrupt, untrustworthy individual who planned to double down on the failed policies of the current regime. We picked crudeness.
 
JonNC said:
Whether you believe it or not doesn’t matter. Was the story accurate?
CNN doesn’t make mistakes in this regard. They have shown an overwhelming bias in favor progressivism.
Click to expand...
Bias would be giving one candidate more free airtime than another. Trump and his supporters shouldn’t cry foul in this regard IMO. Trump has been on the major networks for the past 30 years and those who have followed him know that he himself can be progressive at times. And incoherent at others.
 
ProVobis said:
Bias would be giving one candidate more free airtime than another. Trump and his supporters shouldn’t cry foul in this regard IMO. Trump has been on the major networks for the past 30 years and those who have followed him know that he himself can be progressive at times. And incoherent at others.
Click to expand...
No. Bias would be intentionally presenting one candidate in a positive light, generally, while presenting the other in a negative light, generally. Both candidates couldn’t help but be presented in a negative light, but the bias was clearly in the Democrats’ favor.

EDIT. Actually, you’re probably correct, as well. Johnson and Stein might claim bias against their respective candidacies, since they were pretty much ignored
 
JonNC said:
So, CNN was right. Really?
Click to expand...
They were not shown to have posted something false. This is in contrast to where I showed three different articles posted on Breitbart that were factually false - and they eventually took them down. There is no comparison.
 
JonNC said:
Well, yes. You claimed, not that they were right or wrong, but that you didn’t believe it because of the source. That’s a typically progressive approach, but it isn’t particularly good critical thinking. Either Townhall accurately presented the story, or they didn’t.
Click to expand...
That is hard to say, since the questionable part of the Townhall article was not their facts, but their opinions. And of course you can’t call any one’s opinions wrong. You just shouldn’t label those opinions as news.
We got to this result in the election because, on the one hand, this was a candidate who, despite his level of success in business, is a crude individual, while on the other hand there was a corrupt, untrustworthy individual…
Click to expand...
The characterization of Clinton is opinion, not fact. So you would be a better reporter if you added “in my opinion” after that characterization.
 
JonNC said:
No. Bias would be intentionally presenting one candidate in a positive light, generally, while presenting the other in a negative light, generally. Both candidates couldn’t help but be presented in a negative light, but the bias was clearly in the Democrats’ favor.
Click to expand...
There is no question that many of those working in the media are biased. And usually in favor of the progressive view. And that bias does have some effect on things like the choice of stories, or how much time to give to this story or that. But that type of bias is small potatoes compared to outright misinformation posted to deliberately deceive. Most good journalists fight their personal biases and strive to uphold decent journalistic standards with regard to truth.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
That is hard to say, since the questionable part of the Townhall article was not their facts, but their opinions. And of course you can’t call any one’s opinions wrong. You just shouldn’t label those opinions as news.

The characterization of Clinton is opinion, not fact. So you would be a better reporter if you added “in my opinion” after that characterization.
Click to expand...
And the characterizations of Bannon and Sessions and Trump as racists, etc. are opinions, too.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
There is no question that many of those working in the media are biased. And usually in favor of the progressive view. And that bias does have some effect on things like the choice of stories, or how much time to give to this story or that. But that type of bias is small potatoes compared to outright misinformation posted to deliberately deceive. Most good journalists fight their personal biases and strive to uphold decent journalistic standards with regard to truth.
Click to expand...
And it seems there are few good journalists anymore. In my opinion, the false accusations, the collusion between the Clinton operatives and media, the slanting of polls, are far more than small potatoes
 
JonNC said:
And it seems there are few good journalists anymore.
Click to expand...
It may seem that way to you. To me it seems there are many good journalist. They are part of what is called the “mainstream media”.
In my opinion, the false accusations, the collusion between the Clinton operatives and media, the slanting of polls, are far more than small potatoes
Click to expand...
Except for the mention of Clinton, I thought you were talking about Breitbart there for a while.
 
Little_Sheep said:
You’ll never hear another word from the Trump administration about prosecuting Hillary. It was nothing but political grandstanding and he knows that. He’s glad it worked, of course…
Click to expand...
Trump stated on the 60 minutes interview a week ago that he doesn’t want to hurt Hillary or Bill because they are “good people.” Good people! What a change of tune, even for Trump. And now with Romney talking with Trump about the cabinet position of SOS (as well as Cruz), is there any one of these politicians who has a shred of moral fiber and consistency left in them? As cynical as I had been before this election cycle, I now feel it is almost useless to vote for the presidency any more, insofar as the two major parties are concerned.
 
JonNC said:
And the characterizations of Bannon and Sessions and Trump as racists, etc. are opinions, too.
Click to expand...
But they are informed opinions. Has Sessions said or done racist things as a Senator since his racist remarks 30 years ago? People can change, but has he? (Honest question.)
 
meltzerboy said:
But they are informed opinions. Has Sessions said or done racist things as a Senator since his racist remarks 30 years ago? People can change, but has he? (Honest question.)
Click to expand...
I don’t know if you saw my previous post about Sen. Sessions. In a nutshell: he is known as a man of great integrity, walked, arms linked, with John Lewis at the 50th anniversary of the march to Selma, is spoken of well by the current Democratic, African American U.S. Attorney here in Mobile (where Sessions and I both live), was instrumental in bankrupting the United Klans of America as a result of lawsuits after the hanging of a young black man years ago, filed desegregation lawsuits in Alabama, voted in favor of the 30 year extension of the Civil Rights Act, and voted to confirm Eric Holder.

He is very conservative, and I don’t agree with his hardline immigration position; however, he is as incorruptible a man as you will find, and has been, in my opinion, unfairly painted as a racist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top