Yet Another Media Tale Collapses

[AUFAN78 3,925]

In sum, the media claims that were repeated over and over and over as proven fact — and even confirmed by "fact-checkers” — were completely false. 

Over and over we see the central truth: the corporate outlets that most loudly and shrilly denounce “disinformation” — to the point of demanding online censorship and de-platforming in the name of combating it — are, in fact, the ones who spread disinformation most frequently and destructively. It is hard to count how many times they have spread major fake stories in the Trump years. For that reason, they have nobody but themselves to blame for the utter collapse in trust and faith on the part of the public, which has rightfully concluded they cannot and should not be believed.

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/yet-another-media-tale-trump-tear

[CoffeeTiger 5,145]

I'll give you credit. Greenwald is a slightly better source than the New York Post Tabloid, and I'll agree that it appears the news agencies likely didn't do their full due diligence when they ran with this story. 

 

I'm not sure how true to fact all the findings are as the IG admits they didn't interview white house staff or the secret service related to this event, they focused only on the Park Police, and are a review of that one agencies actions and motivations that day. I think the findings do prove that

1) the park police were present already to aid in getting a fence erected and wasn't there just because of Trump. 

2) The Report seems to try to say the Police had no idea Trump was coming till he actually showed up, but the report also says Bill Bar showed up to the park a few moments before Trump came and specifically told the park police leadership on scene that Trump was about to come and that the protestors needed to be removed...but the report tries to  say that this didn't change any of the plans the police already had made?

....So in summary the police didn't know trump was coming...until they did know...but even if they did know, it didn't change anything and they reacted the same way they would have as if the president wasn't about to stroll through? Those are interesting findings.

 

Ultimately, I believe the media did jump the gun and shouldn't have directly associated the event only with Trumps stupid upside down Bible stunt before they had all the facts, but I also acknowledge this knowing that the IG report was self admittedly limited in scope  and didn't include an investigation into the secret service, white house staff, or other police agencies that were present for the event. that could and would have been responsible for stepping up the violence used against the protestors for Trumps arrival. 

I'd say the report shows the original media narrative wasn't 100% accurate and should have been investigated better, but I don't believe it proves that Trump's arrival had nothing to do with the ultimate response against the protestors that day, 

Edited June 10, 2021 by CoffeeTiger

[DKW 86 7,433]

Greenwald and Taibbi have become two of my favorite writers. They take longer and get to the details.

These days, most "news" is a 15 minute run thru the "Spin Cycle" so that it fits the narrative. Trump has been a disaster for 34 Years. He didnt start being one in 2011 or 2015. The idiots in the media were too busy kissing his ass for 30 years or so so they could get an interview with him so they could let him bloviate on his stupid views while the media groveled for his attention. American Media are, in fact, the morons. They claim everyone else in America  are the dumb ones, and for the most part they may be right. But, I think anyone that pays attention has to openly question what passes for news for the last 20 years or so.

[AUFAN78 3,925]

45 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

I'll give you credit. Greenwald is a slightly better source than the New York Post Tabloid, and I'll agree that it appears the news agencies likely didn't do their full due diligence when they ran with this story. 

 

I'm not sure how true to fact all the findings are as the IG admits they didn't interview white house staff or the secret service related to this event, they focused only on the Park Police, and are a review of that one agencies actions and motivations that day. I think the findings do prove that

1) the park police were present already to aid in getting a fence erected and wasn't there just because of Trump. 

2) The Report seems to try to say the Police had no idea Trump was coming till he actually showed up, but the report also says Bill Bar showed up to the park a few moments before Trump came and specifically told the park police leadership on scene that Trump was about to come and that the protestors needed to be removed...but the report tries to  say that this didn't change any of the plans the police already had made?

....So in summary the police didn't know trump was coming...until they did know...but even if they did know, it didn't change anything and they reacted the same way they would have as if the president wasn't about to stroll through? Those are interesting findings.

 

Ultimately, I believe the media did jump the gun and shouldn't have directly associated the event only with Trumps stupid upside down Bible stunt before they had all the facts, but I also acknowledge this knowing that the IG report was self admittedly limited in scope  and didn't include an investigation into the secret service, white house staff, or other police agencies that were present for the event. that could and would have been responsible for stepping up the violence used against the protestors for Trumps arrival. 

I'd say the report shows the original media narrative wasn't 100% accurate and should have been investigated better, but I don't believe it proves that Trump's arrival had nothing to do with the ultimate response against the protestors that day, 

Well they are both better than the garbage that intentionally lied. I don't think I need to resubmit the list as it is clearly referenced in the article. And their reputations as garbage brought solely on themselves. And yet many wonder why the media isn't trusted? Amazing.

Note the WAPO fact checker.  Don't try and defend them. Really.

[AUFAN78 3,925]

7 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

Greenwald and Taibbi have become two of my favorite writers. They take longer and get to the details.

I agree. Throwbacks to days of real facts. 

[aubiefifty 16,842]

78 you throw anything not fox under the bus but you had no problem believing trumps bull**** for years. the scary part is i am afraid you believe the propaganda they feed you.

[AUFAN78 3,925]

6 hours ago, aubiefifty said:

78 you throw anything not fox under the bus but you had no problem believing trumps bull**** for years. the scary part is i am afraid you believe the propaganda they feed you.

I don't do Fox regularly except maybe an occasional random YouTube vid. If they are complicit in the lies discussed in the OP then by all means call it out. Certainly won't hurt my feelings. I am more than a bit tired of media intentionally dividing this country. I don't feel any source is off the table, so I look forward to your Fox report on this subject. 

[aubiefifty 16,842]

9 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

I don't do Fox regularly except maybe an occasional random YouTube vid. If they are complicit in the lies discussed in the OP then by all means call it out. Certainly won't hurt my feelings. I am more than a bit tired of media intentionally dividing this country. I don't feel any source is off the table, so I look forward to your Fox report on this subject. 

hell 78 we might have more in common than i thought. just for the record you are like me you hate to lose an argument and often stubborn. but at the end of the day we might differ on things but we both loved and served our country and want her to do well. and i can say the military honestly gave me more than i ever gave them. i have never forgotten that.