Retired admiral, commander of bin Laden raid, slams Trump's sentiments on media

Interesting you mentioning book burning; http://www.rawstory.com/2012/10/banned-books-week-i-was-forced-to-participate-in-a-book-burning/

 

Here we have a supposed liberal talking about "the left" as if it a foreign entity and spouting right wing talking points.

I think we should judge his current comments and ignore his claims about his supposed liberal past

 

What does a military man know about the media? He must be trying to get a job at CNN.

 

They are ridiculous and disturbing but also too insignificant to be dangerous.

I am more concerned by the actions of those in power, like Mr Heine's original quote referring to the Catholic Church's burning of Islamic language texts in the lead up to the Spanish Inquisition, and its more familiar setting in Opernplatz, Berlin, the site of the Nazi anti-Semitic book burning in the early 1930's.

Powers change, but the tactics they use and the eventual conclusions of such actions repeat through history.

 

"We"? Who's that then?

Wake up: the left is not liberal. Its just left wing. Stalin was left wing.

Liberal is neither left or right wing.

 

It's FOX and Breitbart against the land of the sane and living. These are ALT right outlets with no credibility whatsoever.

 

Well,no, the Press has not lost it's integrity--just because trump says it,doesn't make it so---maybe with trump supporters, but,not with political junkie'a like me--
My opinion is trump is attempting to put the press in a bad light so that once the truth comes out about his Russian involvements, he has already established with his base that all the news outlets are wrong---that's what dictators do----
I would be extremely disappointed with journalist's if they did not report on the lies & misinformation trump has a propensity of doing----That is where they would lose credibility with me--Here is one example of the hundreds out there of what trump says as opposed to actual reporting-----" I had the biggest Inaugural crowd ever"------Well, NO, he didn't-I know it is a silly example,him making a "huge" deal of this,but making his Press Secretary (on his first appearance as Press secretary)come out & lie, not only lie, but angrily lie ( talking about losing credibility-Because of Spicer doing this, I don't believe anything he says to this day)
I watched the inauguration, I "saw" with my own eyes & what were the reporters supposed to do, not report on what a colossal lie trump was perpetrating ---because whether you think it is fake news or not---trump made it news because he was wrong----

 

"The press respected the office ..." ?

I'm sorry, but did you live in a cave? The Press tore into Carter for the whole Billygate mess. The Press went after Nixon for Watergate. The Press jumped all over Reagan for Iran-Contra. The press had a field day with Clinton in the Monica Lewinsky affair.

And I think you may be conflating "News" with "opinion". When CNN or Fox reports a breaking headline - that is news. When Rachel Maddow or Hannity comment on
that news, it's opinion. The problem with a 24 hr. information stations like CNN or Fox is that the Opinion parts get all the attention, so any actual news that gets reported gets lost in the discussion.

So Trump and his supporters better put on their Big Boy pants - having the press come after you is something that comes with the job.

 

Good post............

Trump doesn't know the difference between News and Opinion either.

 

Censorship might be a great buzzword, but isn't a relevant or accurate characterization of Trump's battle with fake news. Trump has every right to call out the media, they aren't a protected class. And, as far as I can tell, Trump hasn't prevented them from doing what they've always done, has he?
Personally, I'd like to preserve the phase "enemies of the people" to be used more carefully, so, I more or less agree with the retired admiral viewpoint.

 

Donald Trump has UNREASONABLY attacked two pillars of our Republic and democratic institution...the electoral process and the media. He is a not-especially-intelligent child in a man's body...causing unnecessary damage to the essentials of our system of government.

During the run-up to the election he was described by Democrats, Republicans, Independent, liberals and conservatives as uniquely unqualified to hold the office. The people who felt that way were correct.

But he won...fair and square and is now the president.

We have to hope the Republic survives him and the useful idiots who support him.

 

Sadly, your position is just a demonstration of the huge problem developing in our society, where people see just what they want to see and deceive themselves. Trump isn't perfect, and thankfully not a politician. Anyone can call anyone a liar- for no reason, or over a mistaken choice of words, or by twisting them or taking out of context. This can be made into a stupid string of endless arguments where nothing gets done... and in the meantime, the river of life and progress continues while we fall behind doing nothing. We didn't get in the mess we're in by taking care of business, but by incompetence and stupidity. Fact is if you aren't making mistakes, you aren't getting anything done. If the Trump haters hadn't turned a blind eye to the opposition they supported and really looked under the table, they would have been horrified- I know that what I found in the Clinton history made me think that there was something along the line of organized crime here, and like Al Capone, skillfully enough done that it couldn't be legally prosecuted. Of course when the circumstantial evidence grossly exceeds reasonable doubt, you have to be very blind to ignore it. The double standard is actually the primary argument of the left- they have an excuse for all their failures and BS beliefs, they buy the manure their candidates feed them, but demand everyone else be perfect- AND pay their bills. How convenient for them. Too bad it doesn't work in real life.

Trump won, and did so in unprecedented fashion- beating all competition, media, polls and "experts" using 1/3 the money and 1/3 the staff of Clinton. What ever you think he is as a winner- what do you call the losers? I call them Losers. When they whine and complain, I call them Poor Losers. When they try to damage the ability of the president to do his job, I call them Poor Americans as well.

People who don't know how to succeed, don't how to make things really work- or are too lazy to do it for themselves- are all experts on how it should be done. It is ridiculous to argue with them, like trying to deal with a spoiled child throwing tantrums. Waste of time.

 

"Respecting the office" doesn't mean you won't ask real questions- hard as the subject may be. It means you don't make an ass of yourself doing it, that you are looking for answers- not attempting character assassination, not attempting to make something trivial into the next political circus. That is disrespect. Rude, belligerent, abusive- that IS disrespect, and it is totally unprofessional when it's called news or journaism. With this president, when you pick a fight, you get a fight. Unlike the last few presidents, this one has a spine, and what it takes to back it up.

When you look at the left wing media like CNN and see they have 12 front page articles and nine of them are about Trump, and all 9 are crap stories about issues of no consequence- that is political propaganda, not journalism. THEY chose that path. If they don't like the label it deserves, they should have chosen to handle it differently.

 

"My position is a demonstration a huge problem" What,expecting the truth? If that's a problem then put me at the head of the line?
Your" opinion" about organized crime,circumstancial evidence,-or " a rose by any other name is still a rose"---"your opinion"
Well, one first has to believe that trump won---I do not believe that---I do believe that trump colluted with a foreign government to interfer with the soveighnty of our election process & in so, took away our "choice"to decide----I can't think of anything more----- "Un-American----

 

Try thinking instead of concluding that what you want to believe is automatically true. BIG difference. I realize that is probably not within your current capacity. That isn't a personbal insult, it's an observation. Hope it gets better.

 

Of course you can take the position of me concluding what I want to believe,because the Intelligence & FBI investigations are still ongoing---I'll give you that----However, there is enough "evidence" for the Congress to have Congressional hearings to find out----there is enough "Evidence" for continuing investigations from the FBI & Intelligence---So, there's that----
Oh, MO is that it was an insult, but whatever-----
My position started election night---I worked on the HILLARY campaign,I worked on the VAN ( OBAMA'S voting data processing program that has been perfected to pin point accuracy)I did the hard work boots on the ground to get the data,So,"WE" do know that that program was hacked,so does everybody,it was in the news, "WE" do know that numbers were "somehow" skewed-----So,my conclusions are based on more than speculation----we are so" hoping" the FBI & Intelligence can prove it--

 

Yet YOU have made conclusions about the truth of a story that is still ongoing. Pot meet Kettle. Guess your "capacity" is lacking as well.

 

Sorry - but I can't get myself feeling sorry for poor, little Mr. Trump when it comes to propogating fake news stories - the King of the Birthers doesn't get to
whine about being the target of "fake news".

 

And of course you are buying what they feed you.
Try doing some checking on HC. For example, on prime event was a Scandanavian company that was having no luck getting state department approval for a business arrangement. They never hired speakers, and then hired Bill Clinton to give two-20 minutes talks... for $750,000.00. shortly after the arrangement, the state department roadblocks disappeared. Now- once is suspicious, but when such things keep happening, it gets pretty clear why the money is rolling in. Start with the book "Clinton Cash" for a long list.

Then, there are the articles covering the many mysterious deaths of people close to the Clintons. As one author puts it- how many people does the average person know in a lifetime who meet with mysterious, untimely demise? Of course, that is no more than a handful. Some authors on this subject list 90 for the Clintons. All supposition, just coincidence.
There is less question about the personality of Hillary in private, where secret service and various others have described how the public Hillary and the private on are vastly different.
Then, there is the morality issue. Seems common knowledge that the Clintons have an open marriage, the HC is bisexual and not overly particular. There is a black prostitute who claims to have a son by Bill, and has no problem taking a DNA test to prove it. You read these stories, and even if you discount them 90%- It's shocking enough that you know this is not something that could ever be trusted.

NO politicians tell you the truth. They don't tell themselves the truth- they rationalize virtually everything. They violate their oath of office, their ethics and their fiduciary duty everyday, and because this is a universal conduct- they don't clean their own house. For example, congress was exposed a few years back for insider trading, which is illegal and hundreds go to prison for it. They used the information about laws, property and tax changes to invest before the public knew, and got fat on it. When the story broke, they played dumb and said, yes, that is a loophole and we must fix it. So they passed a new law. After the dust settled a year, they went back and amended the law, to put the investment data of the members of congress undercover- virtually inaccessible so it couldn't be investigated again. Passing that took 30 seconds and was done with unanimous approval, even though half the house wasn't present. The only way to fire, or immediately remove a member of congress is by vote of congress- in other words, they alone have the power to clean their own house. So- how many congressmen have been removed? In the last 150 years- two. They run a tight ship. That is politics, the congress you are trusting. That is the government that lies to you, steals from you, spies on you and fails to take care of business while it's telling you how great things are. That is what got us in the mess we are in.

Do they tell you different? of course they do- that is what immoral people do; tell you what serves their purpose. They like people who don't question- and they fear skeptics who do. I am a skeptic.

Now if you can't afford to look under a few rocks to learn the truth, you will remain safe in the illusion that all is well.... and not notice you have been snowed.

 

How can I be buying what they are feeding me----when I was the" one" doing the work?And because I was there & you weren't, you are making the assumptions,not me!
I find it remarkable that you are doing more disparaging on HILLARY to try to get me to see things in your light,than defending trump---which is what the OP is about---
Oh, you bet,can't deny there is corruption in Government---One of the ways to fight corruption,get involved, hold our Representatives Accountable--which is exactly what I have been doing for a very long time now---only difference is ----NOW,you all say I'm whining,sour grapes,get over it,nothing to see here---I highly disagree----

 

Yea, the deplorable Democrats, Republicans, Independents, liberals and conservatives who voted for him who just happen not to live in liberal, progressive enclaves. You know, the ones who occupy 85% of the country.

 

In order to deport an illegal alien they are charged by ICE with the crime of either unlawful entry into the USA or overstaying on a visa if they had one. So technically all illegal immigrants are criminals even if they have not been formerly charged and in that respect the NYT is 100% correct in believing that is what Trump meant.

Of course it is perfectly probable that Trump himself doesn't have a clue what he is talking about but that does not mean that he gets to change what he actually said and accuse the NYT of "lying" when it did nothing of the sort. The NYT did not "mislead" either. It accurately reported what Trump actually said and used the literal meaning of his words.

Trump flings around baseless accusations of lying but the hard facts prove that he outright lies or tells half lies on the order of 80% of the time.

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

When it comes to choosing which of those two are more credible the NYT wins hands down.

 

I'll gladly defer to your superior knowledge on the subject, and therefore, barring any following clarification on Trump's part prior to the NYT article, I fully concur with your conclusion.

 

Yeah, the 26% of eligible voters who voted for Donald Trump.