Trump is running a survey on the media!

[jackstar7]

How will Fox present this in a Fair and Balanced way?

 

[woolfe9998]

To get 300+ EC votes when everyone was proclaiming it was going to be a landslide for Clinton is a monster win. He never stated he had the largest amount of EC votes since Reagan, but proclaimed it the biggest win since Raygun because it was forecasted as a lock for Clinton. His win represents a radical shift in recent voting trends and ideology. It's nice that you highlighted numbers but that's not what the subject of his point. Do you understand English??? Derrr Derrrr Derrrrr. I'm sure your next rebuttal will be calling me a racist Nazi.

The Patriots winning the Superbowl over the Failcons is a big win. It's not a big win because they scored 34 points, but a big win because it didn't seem like they had a chance to win because of Brady being suspended, ATL having an awesome offense, and an insurmountable lead. Duh, Winning!

Someone else called this a spin. I call it lie. He directly stated what you claim he did not state. The meaning of "the biggest electoral college win since Ronald Reagan" is clear and unambiguous. When Trump was called out by a reporter on this, he didn't respond by saying, "what I meant was that I beat expectations more than anyone since Reagan." He just said, "someone gave me that information" as if it was someone else's fault that what he said was untrue.

 

[MongGrel]

pissgate was proven false. Passport and travel records confirmed that some of the "involved" were never in Russia.

Quack.

 

[Brainonska511]

Someone else called this a spin. I call it lie. He directly stated what you claim he did not state. The meaning of "the biggest electoral college win since Ronald Reagan" is clear and unambiguous.

I was feeling magnanimous.

 

[MajinCry]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/10/politics/russia-dossier-update/

Give a timestamp where they report on it, as I just watched the whole video, and it's not even mentioned once.

Or are you trying to say that Trump only contacts Russia, in order to have Russian sex slaves urinate on him? In which case, source please.

 

[Bowfinger]

pissgate was proven false. Passport and travel records confirmed that some of the "involved" were never in Russia.

No, it was not. The dossier contained a variety of intel reports about Trump and people connected to Trump. Exactly one of those reports was proven to be a case of mistaken identity: the Michael Cohen who met with Russians in Prague was NOT Trump's attorney, but was a random European guy also named Michael Cohen. None of the other reports in this dossier have been proven false, and some have since been corroborated.

Saying the whole dossier was proven false based on one incorrect report would be just as dishonest and dumb as calling CNN "fake news" because some tiny fraction of its stories have contained factual errors. Oh, wait. You do that, too. Your attacks against CNN are asinine.

 

[Chiropteran]

Give a timestamp where they report on it, as I just watched the whole video, and it's not even mentioned once.

Or are you trying to say that Trump only contacts Russia, in order to have Russian sex slaves urinate on him? In which case, source please.

You don't need to look past the title
"US investigators corroborate some aspects of the Russia dossier"

Or do you think it's some other dossier, other than the one referenced in pissgate?

 

[antihelten]

pissgate was proven false. Passport and travel records confirmed that some of the "involved" were never in Russia.

How in the world would passports and travel records prove pissgate wrong, when the only details mentioned in the dossier in relation to the alleged incident is that it took place in 2013 at the Ritz Hilton Hotel, and the only named person involved is Trump himself (and we know for a fact that Trump was in Russia in 2013, in relation to Miss Universe, and we also know that he was at the Ritz Hotel since he participated in a music video there)?

I believe the passport stuff you are refering to is a completely different incidence from the dossier involving a Michael Cohen. It just so happens that Trump has a lawyer named Michael Cohen who denied that the details about him in the dossier were accurate, but it is being claimed that the dossier was actually referring to a different Michael Cohen.

This is everything the dossier says about pissgate:

According to Source D, where s/he had been present, TRUMP's (perverted) conduct in Moscow included hiring the presidential suite of the Ritz Carlton Hotel, where he knew President and Mrs. OBAMA (whom he hated) had stayed on one of their official trips to Russia, and defiling the bed where they had slept by employing a number of prostitutes to perform a "golden showers" (urination) show in front of him. The hotel was known to be under FSB control with microphones and concealed cameras in all the main rooms to record anything they wanted to.

...

The Moscow Ritz Carlton episode involving Trump reported above was confirmed by Source E, a senior (western) member of staff at the hotel, who said that s/he and several of the staff were aware of it at the time and subsequently. S/he believed it had happened in 2013. Source E provided an introduction for a company ethnic Russian operative to Source F, a female staffer at the hotel when Trump had stayed there, who also confirmed the story.

 

[Chiropteran]

No, it was not. The dossier contained a variety of intel reports about Trump and people connected to Trump. Exactly one of those reports was proven to be a case of mistaken identity: the Michael Cohen who met with Russians in Prague was NOT Trump's attorney, but was a random European guy also named Michael Cohen. None of the other reports in this dossier have been proven false, and some have since been corroborated.

That proves CNN is not doing the most basic checks to verify anything. CNN is either laughably incompetent, or corrupt to the core. Take your pick.

 

[MajinCry]

You don't need to look past the title
"US investigators corroborate some aspects of the Russia dossier"

Or do you think it's some other dossier, other than the one referenced in pissgate?

And the timestamp on them reporting about Trump being urinated on by sex slaves is...?

 

[antihelten]

You don't need to look past the title
"US investigators corroborate some aspects of the Russia dossier"

Or do you think it's some other dossier, other than the one referenced in pissgate?

Pissgate is (a tiny) part of the Russia dossier, not the other way around, so CNN talking about some aspects of the dossier doesn't necessarily entail them talking about pissgate.

Here's a link to the full Dossier if you're interested. It's 35 pages and only about a third of a page talks about pissgate (it's on page 2).

That proves CNN is not doing the most basic checks to verify anything. CNN is either laughably incompetent, or corrupt to the core. Take your pick.

When did CNN ever claim that the Michael Cohen named in the dossier was Trumps lawyer?

 

[Bowfinger]

That proves CNN is not doing the most basic checks to verify anything. CNN is either laughably incompetent, or corrupt to the core. Take your pick.

No, I'll take door #3 -- you live in a bubble of alternative facts. CNN never stated every detail in the dossier was accurate. Moreover, they didn't report the details of the many different reports in the dossier. They merely reported that the dossier existed, and it was alleged to contain incriminating information the Russian government could use to influence Trump. Both claims are accurate.

If you are so desperate to find incompetent and corrupt media, I suggest you focus on the right-wing advocacy media and the propaganda blogs that cater to the right-wing fringe (e.g., Breitbart, Daily Caller, American Thinker, etc.) Their entire business model is reporting speculation, innuendo, and outright lies as fact. Somehow I suspect you won't see this, however. I'm guessing you're one of rubes that falls for their propaganda, again and again and again.

 

[woolfe9998]

That proves CNN is not doing the most basic checks to verify anything. CNN is either laughably incompetent, or corrupt to the core. Take your pick.

Please link to where CNN said a single word about Michael Cohen in its reporting about this dossier. Here is CNN's initial article on the dossier:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/donald-trump-intelligence-report-russia/

Have at it. And feel free to search for other articles from CNN about the dossier. I challenge you to find anything in any of them which is not accurate. Time to put up or shut up.

 

[Grooveriding]

That proves CNN is not doing the most basic checks to verify anything. CNN is either laughably incompetent, or corrupt to the core. Take your pick.

Did you complete your survey?

 

[zinfamous]

That proves CNN is not doing the most basic checks to verify anything. CNN is either laughably incompetent, or corrupt to the core. Take your pick.

or you're just a toadstool. I already took my pick.

 

[Ns1]

Is this real?

 

[Grooveriding]

If it is, that is just more madness. We're not getting the results we want, help us skew our poll. If Trump tries to cite whatever bullshit results they get from this, he's going to make a damn fool of himself, for the umpteenth time.

It will only sell to the drones who have had their minds broken by the Trump propaganda already.

It looks fake to me though. The ... following the one sentence looks like an internet speech thing to me.

 

[sdifox]

You don't need to look past the title
"US investigators corroborate some aspects of the Russia dossier"

Or do you think it's some other dossier, other than the one referenced in pissgate?

So you admit that there is corroboration on the dossier. Ergo not fake like you stipulated. Go stand in the corner.

 

[Vic]

The imbecile has lost his damn mind

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/832708293516632065

I don't see how that can't be considered a violation of the 1st amendment.

 

[sdifox]

I don't see how that can't be considered a violation of the 1st amendment.

Why? Trump can say whatever he wants.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

LOL. I took that survey, I hope they read my answers. Well at least have someone read for drumpf, cause

 

[brycejones]

That proves I am not doing the most basic checks to verify anything. I am either laughably incompetent, or corrupt to the core. Take your pick.

Sorry had to correct your statement a bit.

 

[Vic]

Why? Trump can say whatever he wants.

The Constitution does not allow the President unlimited powers. By declaring, in his official capacity, the media to be the enemy of the American people, he is acting as the government to abridge upon the freedom of the press.
And even ignoring the possible legal implications, this is incredibly irresponsible leadership. Astonishingly so in fact. I don't believe that there is any 'fake news' that could possibly be as damning towards his fitness to be President as his own words.

 

[brycejones]

LOL. I took that survey, I hope they read my answers. Well at least have someone read for drumpf, cause

Based on your answers you have been added to THE LIST. Your place in the reeducation center is being prepared.

 

[sdifox]

The Constitution does not allow the President unlimited powers. By declaring, in his official capacity, the media to be the enemy of the American people, he is acting as the government to abridge upon the freedom of the press.
And even ignoring the possible legal implications, this is incredibly irresponsible leadership. Astonishingly so in fact. I don't believe that there is any 'fake news' that could possibly be as damning towards his fitness to be President as his own words.

He can say whatever he wants. Unless he enacts laws, it is just freedom of expression, dumb as it may be.