You aren't a Mod. You have ZERO authority to tell others what to post. Feel free to report any PF Rule violations that you notice. In other words, Give the internet Cop Routine a rest. As to the OP topic of "Fake News", over 95% of it is manufactured by the RW to feed the RW.
WHAT???? It seems you have some kind of difficulty understanding this. The chyron is saying that Barr is full of crap. Mueller isn't helping Barr! If Mueller saw a need to redact, he would have done it, and he didn't because the AG was supposed to hand it over to the Judiciary Committees, UNREDACTED, after reviewing the report. You don't seem to be accustomed to dealing with logic.
I don't need to play internet cop. Moderators are not "cops". They work as judges, voting for consensus on infractions. You don't even know that. I was a moderator ar large political forum for over 3 years. I had the offer to do it here years ago and turned it down. Here you are pulling some bullshit number our of your ass, and as usual you will never back it up. Fake News is real. It has been exposed. CNN and MSNBC's ratings prove it along with the Mueller Report. Even though they spent over $20M and came up with nothing, people like you won't ever accept how thoroughly you were lied to by your heroes at MSNBC and CNN. Here's a great video for all who want to be entertained by the FAKE NEWS CNN Media.
^^^ The alternate universe Leftists live in is amazing. The chryon "fact checks" Maddow and confirms what the rest responsible outlets are reporting. Mueller IS helping out with the redactions. Maddow is lying and being exposed by her own network in real time. Because it was widely reported throughout the media that Mueller is helping Barr with the review and redactions. Let me help you out with a link that proves me right and you misguided. https://www.bing.com/search?q=Muell...the+review+and+redactions&pc=MOZI&form=MOZLBR You can thank me now.
Since you are thoroughly biased against Maddow, I will reject your comments. But regarding the report, I see no indication that Mueller is "helping out with the redactions". And the bottom line is that IF the complete, unredacted report is not seen by any Democrats and the House Judiciary Committee, it is a Republican coverup that refuses transparency.
Just read the article and the report. If considered using critical thinking, it seems like it raises more questions than answers: 1. The study was based on the definition of 'fake news' as being "...any piece of misinformation intended to sway and confuse the public". How do they identify this? Does an article/report from MSNBC or Fox that was factually correct, but interpreted from a specific narrative, fall into that category? If not, I would question the validity of their conclusions. Fake News is not just about spreading misinformation. It is also about how the mainstream media has gotten away from just reporting and is now telling people how they should think about something. All networks are guilty of this. It is not journalism. 2. They said that only 10% of FB users forward "fake news" and those 65 years or older older are most likely to do so. First off, they only used a based of 1,191 FB users....so that means only 119 of those forwarded the "fake news". It is not surprising that most of those 119 are older, as many people 65 years or older are often retired and can spend considerable time on FB. They also tend to be more political minded than younger people. I would say that the source of their polling (Facebook) and the small sample size is providing misleading information.
The part I bolded makes little sense. Barr is under NO legal obligation to turn over the report to Congress. However, it appears that Barr is willing to submit the report as soon as he makes it so it conforms to LAW. The WH is not even going to read the report and make recommendation for redaction, which is normally a courtesy offered. The Committees can petition to see the whole unredacted report, but that would be a judges decision to determine if any specific committee has the need. In the end, though, I have little doubt that the Judiciary committees and Intelligence committees of both the House and the Senate will be allowed to review the whole unredacted report.
The real takeaway from your post is how you keep posting studies made by obviously biased sources trying to propagandize made up crap. The real truth is that the younger you are, the more gullible you are. Because experience teaches. Every time one of you leftists begins with "A recent study says" my eyes roll back in my head from total boredom. Saul Alinsky is dead and we read your playbook. Get some new material.
LOL, says those taken in by 2 years of fake news about fake collusion. What a hoot. You just can't make this stuff up.
To maintain that a sitting president cannot be indicted, and then to withhold evidence of wrongdoing from Congress because the president cannot be charged, is to convert D.O.J. policy into the means for a cover-up. The Judiciary Committee regularly deals with classified information every bit as much as the AG does, and more. That is their job. So the question comes up as to exactly why investigate and write up a report if no one but the AG is going to see it. If no Democrats see it in it's full, unredacted form, it's a cover up that requires no transparency. So withholding the report from the J.C. is a coverup. What is Barr hiding if not bad news for the administration? Concealment is not going to stand.
That is Barr's opinion...and everybody is entitled to their opinions. However, there is no indication that he is acting on his opinions and many indications that he is acting based on laws. Because it is the law and based on long standing set policies. These are not rules that were created for this specific case. In fact, the Democrats themselves changed many of the laws pertaining to issues like this right after things did not go their way after the Bill Clinton fiasco. Just because the laws do not work in your favor, that does not mean there is any cover-up.
question I have who are the ones that are deciding what is Fake News? and because this article was written by the liberal bias LA times I'm safe to say some liberal organization made that decision like UCLA willing to bet they didn't count the 2 years of Trump/Russia collusion news articles as fake news
now this is priceless listen here buddy do you really want me to dig up the hundreds of post you have made scolding forum members that bring up Obama in a thread that the topic isn't about Obama you know people with integrity aren't double standard hypocrites that you display on a daily basis and why you aren't take serious in any discussion
It's cover-up if it lacks transparency. Tell me your version of why Mueller would write a report to be seen only by the AG.
I already looked at the links and only found one from a RW source that says Mueller is working with Barr. So I doubt it. Oh? There are provisions for sharing it with qualified Congressmen who have top level security clearances.
Don't forget the 17 intelligence agencies fake news. Even Hillary ran with the fake news. And Bill Maher still believes it.
Because it is the LAW. The Special Counsel reports to the AG is it is the AG that assigns the SC and provided the SC with it's authority. Once the SC reports to the AG, the AG must insure that any release of the report complies with LAW. That even applies to releasing it to Congress. However, I have little doubt that some members of Congress have already had access to the full report. These would be members of Congress that already have the authorization and clearance to do so. However, these members would likely only be allowed into a room with the report to read it and could not release anything they read or that they had even read it. This is the normal procedures for sensitive documents or documents not ready for public release because of LAW. All of this whining and crying to release the document is nothing more than political posturing. Heck, the Democrats where calling for it's release even before the report was even issued. Nobody has said that the report would not be released. Barr has publicly stated that he would release the report to Congress, but he needed to redact those portions REQUIRED BY LAW. Barr also stated that he would redact only those items REQUIRED BY LAW and any portion that Mueller or the intelligence community recommended be redacted. Normally for reports like this, the WH is allowed to review and recommend redaction based on "Executive Privilege". The WH declined and Barr said the WH is recommending no additional redactions. Just because the report is not released on YOUR timeline or the timeline of those politically maneuvering, that does not mean that there will be no transparency. Give it time....you will get to read the report.
