Why You Need Trusted News Sources

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 830
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I’m not defending Trump or his policies, but at least the Potus has open access by the press...he may answer, he may ignore them, he may tell the to F off, but at least he has the guts to be in front

Now we all have to quit quoting him so we never have to see a post from him.

The only Rock I see here is the heads of the people that think a single news source provides anything but biased reporting. most of the american news outlets are owned by a single company with a

Posted Images

15 hours ago, deicer said:

Politico. Yep they certainly do carry some weight....as in dead weight.... Just another far left rag you present as fact. Check out the bios on some of the top people in the organization. All Democrat who worked for past Democrat Presidents in one way or another. 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Rex Murphy: Suppressing the Biden stories is a journalistic crime of historic proportions

It is an exhibition of blatant and massive bias during the exercise of the most central event of every democracy — the election of its leaders

As I write it is now the seventh day — and a bare two weeks till the presidential vote — that Twitter, Facebook and their co-operative partners in the television networks and mainline newspapers have smothered or refused to print or broadcast the devastating reports concerning the dealings of Hunter Biden and his father, presidential candidate Joe Biden.

The suppression of a major, no, an explosive and potentially result-changing news story by 90 per cent of the establishment media, is a journalistic crime.


It is the willing, the voluntary adoption by a (once) free press of the practice of information control that up to this period has been the hallmark, solely, of tinpot tyrannies, Communist governments everywhere, and most notably in the modern era the present information-throttling government of China.

It is the willing adoption by a (once) free press of information control


It is an exhibition of blatant, undeniable and massive bias during the exercise of the most central event of every democracy — the election of its leaders. A great swathe of the media of the United States is deliberately — by refusing to exercise its proper function, and by acting as guardian and accessory to the campaign of its favourite, Mr. Biden — nullifying its purpose, wrecking its prestige and standing with the public, and practicing the single largest dereliction of its democratic function since the founding of the republic

All under the specious, hollow anti-morality of “If it hurts Donald Trump, it is not only justifiable, but righteous.”

A child of five, or the mute beasts of the field would find tongue to tell you that if some equally potentially damaging story placed Donald Trump Jr. in its crosshairs and implicated his father, it would be crowding the screens of Facebook and Twitter; the Washington Post and the New York Times would have exhausted the nation’s supply of newsprint with special and interminable reports of its every minutiae; and television’s main talking-heads would be choking with the zeal to report it and damnify Trump.

Trump_rally.jpg?quality=100&strip=all&w= U.S. President Donald Trump arrives to hold a Make America Great Again rally as he campaigns at Erie International Airport in Erie, Penn., on Oct. 20, 2020. PHOTO BY SAUL LOEB/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES

Speaking of the Washington Post, recall its so sanctimonious motto: Democracy dies in darkness. Two weeks before a presidential election, the Washington Post and its rigorous editors have turned off the lights.

Should anyone want something of an honest, independent and clear view of what is happening, turn to the recent utterances of Jonathan Turley, a legal scholar, professor at George Washington University Law School, and frequent witness at U.S. Congressional proceedings about constitutional and statutory issues.

Prof. Turley is NOT a Trump supporter. He is something far more significant and singular in these partisan-insane times — a fair and intelligent mind. Here’s just a few of his observations — which up until recent days would be the views of everyone with the slightest understanding of democracy and a free press:

“… The companies’ actions are an outrageous example of open censorship and bias. It shows how companies effectively can become state media working for one party.

“… The point is that free speech allows us to call out those who say false or reckless things without Twitter engaging in private censorship. As soon as these companies embraced censorship, it put social media on the slippery slope of biased and selective speech controls.

“… Despite a letter (signed by) dozens of former officials saying this is Russian disinformation, the FBI reportedly has confirmed that it has the laptop and it is not Russian disinformation” (my emphasis).

There are others of equal standing making the same points. I’d add a few of my own. Where are the journalism schools and their mentor-professors? Why are they not howling in outrage at a canonical violation of the standards of objectivity and fair-dealing, the hallmarks of an independent press?

Presidential_debate_preparations.jpg?qua Candidate stand-ins stand onstage in the debate hall ahead of the final U.S. presidential debate at Belmont University in Nashville, Tenn., on Oct. 21, 2020. The debate is scheduled for Thursday Oct. 22. PHOTO BY LUKE SHARRETT/BLOOMBERG

Why are the journalistic associations of every democracy, so self-applauding at their annual shindigs, not condemning the iron hand of Big Tech in choosing what a free people may and may not see and post about? Big Tech deciding it must leverage an election?

There is so much more, but it surely should be enough just to note that we have here an open-and-shut case of journalistic failure, publicly enacted — almost boastful in its blatancy — and the great organs of the press float on as if nothing were unusual.

As a final note, this is obviously an American story. But give a thought to how much coverage the Canadian media have given to every Trump tale, and now ask where is the Biden equivalent. Check CBC or CTV, which has lived on Trump coverage, for coverage on Biden and son.

Also, once Big Tech finds it can run an election in one country, it will probably develop an appetite to run those in others.

And since Justin Trudeau is obviously agitating for an election in Canada (more on that next time) we should pay great attention to the grand mischiefs and sad practices being engineered by the Silicon Valley sultans to the south of us.





Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't help but wonder what would have happened if a well known liberal woman were the target of this little scam.

I'm just cynical enough to believe that those rubbing their hands in glee would be outraged.... OUTRAGED at the very notion of her being set up that way, #me too would be all abuzz with it. 


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, JDunkin said:

What do you think De-icer? Is what they describe in the previous post justified because Trump is a threat. If you believe that, then you and those who think like you truly are the threat, no matter what excuses you have.

This is a dark period in the history of mainstream media objectivity. And the left is responsible for it.

This isn't a left or right issue.  Both sides are doing it.

What you are seeing is a repeat of 2016 where potentially damaging 'intel' is released just prior to the election.

And as you see with the latest Guiliani story, they are all deviants.  It's the power, or perceived power that does it to them.

So now we have competing narratives.  One damaging story on each side.

It's up to the voters to see who they feel is more corrupt.

I just wonder what the qanon types will think though with a pedo in trump's inner circle?

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, deicer said:

And as you see with the latest Guiliani story, they are all deviants

The fact that you push crap theories like this without any proof or context ( and probably believe it ) simply confirms you have ZERO credibility to anyone on this forum. You are here for one reason and one reason only...to be a **bleep** disturber...you need help !!

Deicer personified...




Edited by Jaydee
Link to post
Share on other sites

The movie comes out tomorrow and we'll see it in all it's glory.

And before you say I have zero accountability, ask yourself this question.

What was Rudi doing going into the bedroom in the first place?  As a lawyer, political advisor, and high profile person, don't you think he'd have the smarts to keep 'it' above board?  

Maybe you should question your choice of leadership.

Same People.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites


To head off the inevitable question of whether or not Baron Cohen deceptively corners innocents into indefensible positions: All the man is doing is handing people a shovel. It’s not his fault that they get straight to digging their own graves. This hard truth is best illustrated in a late-film scene involving a certain someone in Trump’s orbit who I won’t name, even though I cannot imagine the news cycle not spoiling the gross fun before the movie starts streaming this Friday. The moment has to be seen to be believed.

Link to post
Share on other sites


That is another fraudulent lie. Both sides are doing what? Covering up the biggest political scandal of the election. No coverage of the whole Biden emails and meeting with the Ukrainians which was the whole reason for the impeachment which is turning out to prove Trump right in what he did. Yet your simple response is 'Both sides are doing it'.

The mainstream media is covering up this huge potential scandal while they leap on anything to do with Trump. And the Washington Post has the gall to try and tell us that democracy Dies in Darkness when they are the darkness in terms of media coverage/or intentional lack of it.

Meanwhile, they will give loads of coverage to Guiliani being a pervert. A man who is not even running for office. 

The mainstream media truly has become The Enemy of the People. And so are the supporters of their policies like you.

Both sides have their perverts.  They follow the leader.

Schizophrenic Troll...



Link to post
Share on other sites

JDunkin said...

So now, the person who embraces the left and all their caring of the under-privileged (or supposed caring) is now calling me Schizophrenic. Which proves even more what a fraud he is. Here is what the left teaches us is morally correct(when they are not using the same terms against conservatives). And of course, it badmouths Trump in the article. That is fine, but as I have repeated before, the left is just as bad as we see in De-icer. Which means they are frauds.


Why It's Time to Stop Casually Calling People 'Schizophrenic' and 'Bipolar'


Experts point out how offensive and harmful this can be to those who actually live with the conditions.

Isn't it strange when you put up the definitions for schizophrenic/sociopathic/psychopathic you tick most of the boxes?

Now you want to cry like a lefty that you're offended, after you start name calling?


Link to post
Share on other sites

JDunkin said:

Now you see how disgusting your fake behaviour is. Pretending every little thing is some sort of a micro-aggression, I figure I might as well pretend to be offended as well at your schizophrenia accusation. What a fraud you are. 

And by the way, if you take the time to look at psychological analysis, you will see that you have fallen well short.

Vote based on policy, not the frauds fake statements which never discuss the policy in detail.

You offend over how many lives on this forum and you play victim?



Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations, you are even giving yourself away by reverting to your previous schizophrenic writing style!

Yes, the cages were built during the Obama administration, however, it's trump that has created the orphans.


Separations under past administrations rare, systematic under Trump

Generally, a child and an adult who arrive together at the border can be separated when border officials cannot establish the custodial relationship; when they believe the custodian may be a threat to the child; or when the custodian is being detained for prosecution.

Immigration experts have told us that family separations were relatively rare under Obama and other past administrations. They did not happen at nearly the scale that they did under the Trump administration.

George W. Bush’s Operation Streamline referred for prosecution immigrants who crossed into the country illegally, but made exceptions for adults traveling with children. The Obama administration initially kept families together in detention, but after losing a legal challenge, released families out of detention after holding them for a limited time.

Trump said, “When I became president, President Obama had a separation policy. I didn’t have it. He had it.”

The Obama administration did not have a policy to separate families arriving illegally at the border. Family separations rarely happened under the Obama administration, which sought to keep families together in detention. Then, based on a court decision, it released families together out of detention.

Separations under Trump happened systematically as a result of his administration’s policy to prosecute all adults crossing the border illegally. After mounting public pressure and criticism, Trump signed an executive order to stop separating families. Around 2,800 children have been reunited with their families because a court ordered the Trump administration to do so.

Trump repeatedly attempts to change the narrative about family separations, but the facts remain the same. Obama did not pass down to Trump a policy to separate families.

Trump’s claim is inaccurate. We rate it False.



Edited by deicer
Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, a trumpian deflection because you have no truth.  Just like the conspiracy theories about Hillary, no basis of truth and no indictments after how many investigations?  Unlike the truth that investigations into trump have multiple convictions.

Here's more for you...


Trump's Final Campaign Strategy Is To Spread A Bunch Of Misinformation About Joe Biden, His Son, And Ukraine

You’d have to really be paying deep attention to just understand Trump’s insinuations during the final presidential debate. Here’s what we know to actually be true.

President Donald Trump, behind in the polls and running out of time and opportunities to directly hit his challenger Joe Biden, resorted to a convoluted tale of misinformation and baseless conspiracy theories at Thursday night’s debate involving the former vice president’s record on Ukraine and his son’s work with an energy company there.

For two weeks Trump and his supporters have latched on with new vigor to the narrative — enabled in part by the opinion sections of Rupert Murdoch’s two main US newspapers — that involves stolen emails and screenshots of DMs of questionable provenance. To give an idea of just how confused the narrative is, hours after the Wall Street Journal’s op-ed section published a piece blasting Biden Thursday night, its news division essentially published a debunk.


One would need to live in the minute-to-minute nitty-gritty and questionable details — spread mostly on Twitter and on far-right websites — to make any sense of the allegations. Trump, however, tried to mainstream the claims during the final presidential debate of 2020, using the accusations to insinuate that the Biden family is deeply corrupt.

The claims are a hallmark of Trump’s political style: They take accusations frequently lobbed at him (in this case, corruption) and flip them onto his opponent, while serving as a distraction from reality (in this case, his administration’s failure to contain the coronavirus pandemic).

Trump has seen millions of dollars flow into his companies from those effectively lobbying him, as reported by the New York Times, something there’s no comparable evidence for with Biden. Trump and his allies ran a similar playbook against Hillary Clinton and her emails in 2016, but with a narrative that didn’t require a character map to begin to understand.

Still, Trump’s strategy of going after Biden via his son has not worked beyond his base, despite his best efforts over the past year and a half and despite early concerns from Democratic voters that this could turn into the “lock her up” of 2020. The stories have gained little traction outside the far-right bubble, and the Trump campaign itself veered away from these attacks over the summer.


On Thursday, Trump again claimed Biden, as vice president, fired the prosecutor general of Ukraine in order to save his son Hunter and the Ukrainian energy company, Burisma, from legal troubles. He blamed the Obama–Biden administration for Ukraine losing the Crimean Peninsula to Russia. And he stated that he had been tougher on Russia than any prior president.

Trump's attacks are false.

Trump said that Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company on whose board Hunter sat, does not have the best reputation in the world — and he’s right there: The company has faced allegations of corruption for years. But he’s very wrong in claiming that Biden ordered then–Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko to fire then–prosecutor general Viktor Shokin in order to keep Burisma and Hunter from facing corruption charges. In fact, in addition to Biden, the rest of the US political establishment, the European Union, the International Monetary Fund, Ukrainian anti-corruption organizations — and just about every civil society organization working on pro-democracy reforms — wanted Shokin, who served from February 2015 to March 2016, fired.

As Daria Kaleniuk, executive director of Ukraine’s Anticorruption Action Center (AntAC), and former Ukrainian prosecutors have pointed out, investigations into Burisma and its owner Mykola Zlochevsky were actually obstructed and shelved by Shokin.

Julio Cortez / AP

Former vice president Joe Biden during the final presidential debate.


The president also said during Thursday’s debate that Biden personally had received $3.5 million from the wife of Moscow's former mayor. Trump’s campaign and Senate Republicans have alleged that $3.5 million was transferred from the former Moscow mayor's wife to a company connected to Hunter Biden, not the former vice president. But the alleged money transfer has not been verified and there’s no evidence that any money from the Russians went to Hunter Biden, much less his father.

Trump also claimed former president Barack Obama and Biden “allowed” Crimea to be annexed by Russia. In fact, Russia covertly invaded the Black Sea peninsula with special operations and military forces, plunging Europe into one of its deepest crises since the end of the Cold War. Within weeks, it forced Crimea’s residents to vote in a tainted referendum under threat of armed forces.

Trump himself said during the 2016 campaign that he would consider recognizing Russia's invasion and illegal annexation of Crimea because he believed the vote — even under Russian occupation — was legitimate, a move that would have upended US policy. He never did, but his disdain for Ukraine and its people would be exposed during last year’s impeachment saga, which stemmed from Trump pressuring Ukaininan President Volodymyr Zelensky to open investigations into the Bidens’ Ukraine work.

According to Kurt Volker, the former US envoy for Ukraine who testified in the House of Representatives’ impeachment investigation into the president, Trump said that Ukraine was “a corrupt country, full of terrible people.”

During Thursday’s debate, Trump also claimed for the umpteenth time that he has been tougher on Russia than any previous president, pointing to US sanctions against Russian individuals and entities, as well as arms sales to Ukraine.

Indeed, Trump broke with Obama-era policy in sending lethal Javelin anti-tank missile systems and missiles to Ukraine. But it was his decision to link nearly $400 million in security assistance to Ukraine to his request for a favor from Zelensky to help his reelection, which ultimately led to the impeachment saga.

Moreover, Ukrainian soldiers on the front line of the country’s war against Russia and its separatist proxies told BuzzFeed News last November that the Javelins have not been used in their fight. What has made a major difference, they said, were counter-battery radar systems, night vision goggles, and other nonlethal equipment sent by the Obama administration.

Trump raised Hunter Biden and Ukraine again in an unrelated segment of the debate, which was intended to focus on race in America.

"They’re calling you a corrupt politician," he said to Biden.

“Nobody’s calling me that,” Biden snapped back at Trump.

“I want to stay on the issue of race,” moderator Kristen Welker interrupted, after several minutes of this back-and-forth.

Last fall and in the lead-up to the Democratic primaries, the Trump campaign relentlessly brought up Hunter Biden’s time working in Ukraine and their allegations that the former vice president had acted inappropriately on his son’s behalf.

Those attacks initially appeared to be making some dents, with even Democratic voters on the campaign trail questioning Biden about how he would handle the allegations effectively if Trump was determined to continue with them through the general election. Biden initially struggled to respond calmly when reporters and voters raised questions about his son, but even his vehement defenses of his son did not seem to play badly among Democratic voters.

The Hunter-centric attacks dropped off by the time Biden won the Democratic nomination, the Trump campaign focusing instead on trying to paint Biden as slow and senile. Trump had all but abandoned that strategy over the summer, only to resurrect it about a month out from Election Day, as Ukrainian operatives close to his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani pushed new allegations and after Senate Republicans released a report rehashing unsubstantiated claims.

Trump’s Republican allies have complained that the media is ignoring the allegations — but in the lead-up to the first presidential debate, Republican strategists questioned the effectiveness of focusing on Hunter Biden when they saw a clearer opportunity for Trump to hit Biden on law enforcement, taxes, and the Supreme Court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

JDunkin said:

Funny how the Russian collusion thing got massive coverage of what turned out to be no evidence collusion according to the Mueller report with the mainstream fake news media giving wall to wall coverage but then there is this story which may or may not be true and there is no coverage. Because people like de-icer are frauds that tailor the coverage to hurt Trump. 

While you once again deflect, doesn't it give you pause that no legitimate news agency took up the story?  Even the New York Post reporters balked at putting their names on the byline because of the lack of verification.

Again, like your personas, nothing of substance.


Link to post
Share on other sites

JDunkin said:

And guess what folks. That magazine was The Atlantic. You know, the one that had un-named sources for the big explosive idea that Trump bad-mouthed soldiers which all the fake news(including de-icer) covered endlessly.

Because they are all frauds.

So how are the case counts and deaths working out now in those 'fraudulent' cases?


"For many people, public health doesn't matter until it matters to them," Dr. Schmidtke said. "Meaning that they know someone in their family or social network who has gotten sick, had complications, or passed away."

She said that if people don't see a rise in their own communities, they don't believe it's happening. 


Link to post
Share on other sites

With this story, follow up on the links...


Rudy Giuliani recently gave a story to The New York Post which has spawned several half-baked conspiracy theories related to Joe Biden and Ukraine.

The story was rejected by several news outlets, including Fox News, due to doubts about its credibility.

But when it was published by the Post, many far-right conservatives on Twitter used it as evidence of a massive conspiracy involving the Democratic Presidential candidate.

This is pretty damning. Bannon & Giuliani met with NY Post editors to drop their Hunter Biden story. Veteran report… https://t.co/CgXpPytklj
— Don Moynihan (@Don Moynihan)1603058049.0

Just days later, however, Giuliani explained his decision to give the story to the Post in a New York Times interview, saying. The report revealed:

"Mr. Giuliani said he chose The Post because 'either nobody else would take it, or if they took it, they would spend all the time they could to try to contradict it before they put it out.'"
Pondering which paragraph is more incredible. The lead, where we learn why the reporter who wrote the NY Post story… https://t.co/Kb4PcCyGxM
— Steve Inskeep (@Steve Inskeep)1603059536.0

Essentially, Giuliani says he took the story to The New York Post because he knew they wouldn't check the accuracy of its facts before publishing it.



@NPRinskeep I’d like to thank all the journalists and newsrooms who recognized that the real story is how a politic… https://t.co/3SbJwxp1Cg
— Hoke (@Hoke)1603123478.0


@NPRinskeep If a media company wants to identify themselves as a news outlet, they should be subject to an audit th… https://t.co/PsqTClMolX
— D. M. Patrimonio (@D. M. Patrimonio)1603107654.0

Considering some of the things Giuliani has attempted to pass off as "facts" in the past, this revelation shouldn't be especially surprising.

@NPRinskeep In light of this, I suppose social media giants that restricted access to the story were acting responsibly.
— Michaleen (@Michaleen)1603060059.0

Giuliani was also recently exposed as a useful but unwitting part of Russia's attempts to spread misinformation in the United States.

“Thanks to some stunning new reporting in the Washington Post, we now know that Rudy Giuliani was identified by Uni… https://t.co/e4xRj4jCeh
— Deadline White House (@Deadline White House)1602881952.0


? TRUMP was told by national security adviser O’BRIEN that Rudy Giuliani’s anti-Biden info should be considered con… https://t.co/8J8QItNrqV
— Kyle Cheney (@Kyle Cheney)1602804364.0
On the New York Post's Hunter Biden coverage, @michelleinbklyn writes: "If there’s an important story here, it’s al… https://t.co/DwyookB9eH
— New York Times Opinion (@New York Times Opinion)1603174745.0


Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe on Monday said that Hunter Biden’s laptop “is not part of some Rus… https://t.co/AMyQjoZQey
— Rudy W. Giuliani (@Rudy W. Giuliani)1603116600.0


PROTIP: If Rudy Giuliani is your source for a story on Hunter Biden, it's probably Russian propaganda.
— Mieke Eoyang (@Mieke Eoyang)1603124090.0

Fortunately, it seems many voters have learned their lesson over the past four years. Just because Rudy Giuliani claims something, that doesn't make it true.

Link to post
Share on other sites

JDunkin said:

Rudy is a pervert. Although keep in mind that the pervert saved thousands of lives from the black and other communities in NYC by lowering the crime with tough policies while fraud like de-icer and the new mayor of NYC have implemented policies resulting in an increasing amount of crime and deaths in those communities.

However, like the man De-icer the Fraud would have voted for, Bill Clinton, Guiliani is a pervert. But De-icer and the left are the frauds because they pretend that nothing happens on their side while amplifying what happens on the other side.

Meanwhile, the thousand of lives saved by Guiliani through his policies continue on. That is the difference between voting on policy and voting for frauds like de-icer and friends.

Once again while agreeing with my premise that all politicians are greasy, you have to personalise the attack because,,,,

That's just who you are!


Link to post
Share on other sites

JDunkin said:


Probably not all greasy but enough of them are to make it accurate as a general statement. 

Which is why people should vote based on policy rather than fraudulent attempts to only show one side as greasy and pretend(or ignore) that the other is not and then use it as a way to try to give that as a reason to vote or not vote for a party/person.


Isn't that the point though?  When you look at who you support and their policies, it shows not only what you believe in, but what you support.

You have clearly shown that you support violence when it is against 'lefties', and you have shown that you have a policy of fabricating premises and then trying to attach them to those you see as opponents.  

That is what you have done for years under different personas.  

Not wanting to speak for you, what is your policy choice and what do you feel it will benefit society?



Link to post
Share on other sites

Why you need trusted news sources...


Conservatives Go Nuts With Theories After Biden Flips Dairy Queen Blizzard Upside Down In Viral Video

Oct. 16, 2020

In honor of National Dessert Day, Presidential Candidate Joe Biden took to Twitter to turn a Blizzard upside down, reenacting the classic Dairy Queen ad campaign.

It was quickly revealed how many people on Twitter weren't up to date on their ice-cream related references.



Needless to say, Twitter's far-right took things a step further, claiming Biden's tweet was part of some sort of evil conspiracy.



If there's one thing right wing keyboard warriors knew about Joe Biden after seeing him with a DQ Blizzard, it's that he's going to jail.



Most Americans on Twitter seemed to understand Biden's reference.





You may criticize Joe Biden for many things, but misunderstanding ice cream is not one of them.


Perhaps it's time we had a President who loves DQ Blizzards as much as we do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.