Jan 12, 2005
14,324
1,627
126
#1
CNN tried to run an anti-Trump story about the border wall. They enlisted the help of a local television station and reporter, but when CNN found that the local reports favored Trump's position, that physical barriers do work, CNN abandoned it.

Quote from San Diego's KUSI, the station enlisted by CNN: "We believe CNN declined a report from KUSI because we informed them that most Border Patrol agents we have spoken to told us the barrier does in fact work.”

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainme...ve-but-backed-off-when-response-favored-trump

https://www.kusi.com/cnn-requests-k...es-our-reporter-after-finding-out-wall-works/

https://www.newsweek.com/kusi-borde...-government-shutdown-us-mexico-border-1288109

I don't get why the wall is such a big deal. Prominent Democrats have called for physical barriers in the past. But because Trump wants it the party of obstruction abandons logic for feelings. Par for the course for partisan liberals, agenda > America.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
59,479
817
126
#2
lol, look who didn't read his own links again:

Networks like CNN often change coverage plans at the last moment with no specific agenda. And stations that have taken a particular political stance, as KUSI seems to have done on the issue of the border wall, are often not considered suitable for news covverage that aims for objectivity.
Another self-own thread from Spidey!
 

Starbuck1975

Diamond Member
Jan 6, 2005
9,811
130
126
#3
CNN is hardly biased. They ran a few stories quite critical of Pelosi’s and Schumer’s “American Gothic” rebuttal to Trump’s speech.
 
Jan 12, 2005
14,324
1,627
126
#5
lol, look who didn't read his own links again:



Another self-own thread from Spidey!

You try so hard. Just happens to be a story that was abandoned that showed Trump to be in the right. Nothing to see here, keep your head buried in the sand.
 
Jan 12, 2005
14,324
1,627
126
#6
CNN is hardly biased. They ran a few stories quite critical of Pelosi’s and Schumer’s “American Gothic” rebuttal to Trump’s speech.

Yea, the story that ran an expose on a dog's ear looking like Trump and purposely edited a video of Trump in Japan to make it look much different than what actually happened isn't biased because they have some token critical stories about the left. Sure. :)

I used to go to Fox every day to see what fear they were peddling about Obama, now CNN does the exact same thing about Trump.
 
Feb 4, 2009
18,859
278
126
#7
You try so hard. Just happens to be a story that was abandoned that showed Trump to be in the right. Nothing to see here, keep your head buried in the sand.
So why hasn’t the wall been built before today? Why is the wall a critical need at this moment vs the previous 23 months?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
59,479
817
126
#8
You try so hard. Just happens to be a story that was abandoned that showed Trump to be in the right. Nothing to see here, keep your head buried in the sand.
It's not my fault your own links you provided as evidence said that KUSI had no evidence for its position and that such decisions are common based on the merits. It's your fault.

Your own evidence disproved your argument. Another hilarious self-own. This is why you should read shit before posting it, haha.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
63,299
212
126
#9
I don't know how anything can be biased because everything has a rose colored tint.
 
Jan 12, 2005
14,324
1,627
126
#10
It's not my fault your own links you provided as evidence said that KUSI had no evidence for its position and that such decisions are common based on the merits. It's your fault.

Your own evidence disproved your argument. Another hilarious self-own. This is why you should read shit before posting it, haha.

I like how you selectively disregard the meat of the story. I mean, there are only links to multiple news outlets saying that CNN abandoned the idea when it turned pro-Trump's position. Nothing to see here. You're quite the Baghdad Bob. You should contact these news outlets and let them know there is no story here.
 
Jan 25, 2011
13,155
601
146
#11
Heh. CNN refuses to use a political report from a media organization. Gets accused of being biased for not using a political piece.
 
Jan 25, 2011
13,155
601
146
#12
I like how you selectively disregard the meat of the story. I mean, there are only links to multiple news outlets saying that CNN abandoned the idea when it turned pro-Trump's position. Nothing to see here. You're quite the Baghdad Bob.
Nothing needs to be considered beyond

And stations that have taken a particular political stance, as KUSI seems to have done on the issue of the border wall
That's the end of it. They didn't use a politically motivated piece.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
59,479
817
126
#13
I like how you selectively disregard the meat of the story. I mean, there are only links to multiple news outlets saying that CNN abandoned the idea when it turned pro-Trump's position. Nothing to see here. You're quite the Baghdad Bob.
No, there are links to multiple news outlets saying KUSI said that while providing no evidence. One of those news outlets also said that refusing to use sources that appear to have taken a political position as KUSI did is commonplace.

You got busted for not reading your own links, lol.
 
Jan 12, 2005
14,324
1,627
126
#14
No, there are links to multiple news outlets saying KUSI said that while providing no evidence. One of those news outlets also said that refusing to use sources that appear to have taken a political position as KUSI did is commonplace.

You got busted for not reading your own links, lol.

I did read, the story is still there. If this was a non story it wouldn't exist. KUSI's interviews didn't jibe with CNN's bias, so it was flushed.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
59,479
817
126
#15
Well, from what I understand illegal immigration is way up recently.
There aren't any 2018 numbers available from what I know but in 2017 DHS reported that illegal immigration was at the lowest level they had ever recorded.

So... the opposite.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
59,479
817
126
#18
No, CNN said it is a non-story. Everyone else is running a story on it.
With Newsweek's story specifically stating that decisions such as CNNs are commonplace and have nothing to do with bias.

Your other sources are KUSI itself making the claim without evidence and Fox News repeating KUSI's claim and nothing more.

You owned yourself yet again, dummy!
 
Jan 12, 2005
14,324
1,627
126
#19
With Newsweek's story specifically stating that decisions such as CNNs are commonplace and have nothing to do with bias.

You owned yourself yet again, dummy!

<sigh> You are sad. CNN is saying that this is a non-story because they didn't use it. Others are suggesting that it is because CNN bias. CNN's bias is well established. Like I said, keep your head in the sand.
 
Oct 18, 2013
11,179
158
126
#20
There aren't any 2018 numbers available from what I know but in 2017 DHS reported that illegal immigration was at the lowest level they had ever recorded.

So... the opposite.
NPR

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/illegal-immigration-statistics/

On a monthly basis, the apprehensions decreased significantly during the first six months of Trump’s tenure and then began to rise. The number was actually higher in November (the most recent month for which the U.S. Customs and Border Protection has published figures) than it was when Trump was sworn in.
 

dyna

Senior member
Oct 20, 2006
727
5
91
#22
No, there are links to multiple news outlets saying KUSI said that while providing no evidence. One of those news outlets also said that refusing to use sources that appear to have taken a political position as KUSI did is commonplace.

You got busted for not reading your own links, lol.
The spirit of those articles is that it is reported that CNN did not cover the story, there is no self ownage. Do you really think CNN wants to report a story that the wall is effective? It seems like you are the one that is busted or self owned.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
59,479
817
126
#23
<sigh> You are sad. CNN is saying that this is a non-story because they didn't use it. Others are suggesting that it is because CNN bias. CNN's bias is well established. Like I said, keep your head in the sand.
lol, the sad person here is the guy who didn't read his own links and accidentally owned himself.
 
Jan 12, 2005
14,324
1,627
126
#25
The spirit of those articles is that it is reported that CNN did not cover the story, there is no self ownage. Do you really think CNN wants to report a story that the wall is effective? It seems like you are the one that is busted or self owned.

Of course news stations don't use everything, some stories will get changed, cut and/or edited as needed. That seems to be the claim he thinks somehow "owns" me. No one is questioning that news sources will add and remove stories, that isn't the issue. What is the issue is that in this instance it is being suggested that a story was abandoned due to anti-Trump bias. He's having a tough time comprehending this.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY