Monday, January 02, 2017

Fake news? Even they can't define it

MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, NYT's  Sopan Deb and NYT's Maggie Haberman had the same set of facts.

They argue with one another over what they mean.

And Joe brings up "fake news."

For the record, we think Joe Scarborough is correct -- Maggie Haberman did describe him as a "reveler."






  •  3 hours ago
    "Deb reported something that wasn’t true because it fit his own preconceived notions. That is 'fake news'"
    398 replies59 retweets136 likes



  •  3 hours ago
    Yes it is. Facts still matter to some.

    it seems the reporter said and Mika were partying with Trump. If that's untrue, that's why Joe is firing back
    175 replies20 retweets122 likes



  •  3 hours ago
    Facts are stubborn things.
    225 replies41 retweets171 likes



  •  3 hours ago
    Yes. I find that people misrepresenting others and lying is indeed corrosive. I know you agree with me that facts matter.

    It really stinks to watch others continue help ruin the reputation of your industry. But fighting each other about only hurts the democracy
    319 replies57 retweets219 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    I'm just not spending another year being lied about over objectively verifiable facts.

    . you good man?
    156 replies11 retweets149 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    I'm good. I'm not lying about other people or painting their work in a false light so everything's great.

    . you good man?
    80 replies11 retweets84 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    Is this what Bill Clinton meant when he said we're in a post-fact world?

    Note to NYT Editors: this is Day 2 your future employee sends out misleading tweets. Today, its worse bc he knows the facts but continues.
    104 replies20 retweets117 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    Note to NYT Editors: this is Day 2 your future employee sends out misleading tweets. Today, its worse bc he knows the facts but continues.
    This Tweet is unavailable.
    172 replies43 retweets135 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    You get caught lying then double down and triple down. You know the truth and yet you just can't stop sending out snide tweets. Wow.

    This sure looks like an ideal location to have a journalistic meeting about an interview on NYE, . Look forward to seeing the result.
    175 replies27 retweets126 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    Oh, you're back. What's your lie of the day?

    This sure looks like an ideal location to have a journalistic meeting about an interview on NYE, . Look forward to seeing the result.
    80 replies20 retweets100 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    Uh, no. I'm in street clothes obstructed by "a tall wine glass".

    . So... this was a 'black-tie' interview?
    70 replies3 retweets45 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    Someone showed you a picture. You email and text me when you have questions. You should've done it in this situation and checked your story.

    You're in a photo standing among revelers. I'm not sure what's inaccurate. I also didn't and don't think it's a big deal.
    123 replies14 retweets82 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    Pick. Up. The. Phone. And. Ask. I'm went where the USSS directed me to the foot of the stairs. I'm standing with the PEOTUS going upstairs.

    You're in a photo standing among revelers. I'm not sure what's inaccurate. I also didn't and don't think it's a big deal.
    93 replies6 retweets69 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    Your editor should as well.

    I do have an issue with one NYT reporter painting me in a false light without calling me, & a future NYT reporter adding another false fact.
    49 replies7 retweets69 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    I do have an issue with one NYT reporter painting me in a false light without calling me, & a future NYT reporter adding another false fact.
    This Tweet is unavailable.
    58 replies17 retweets65 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    Several reporters said you should've called to confirm I was a "reveler" at a party I did not attend, was not invited to & not dressed for.

    You said on Twitter last night you had no issue with the story. Did something change?
    114 replies13 retweets66 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    More: Maggie Haberman did not try to contact me before putting me in a story saying I was a "reveler" at Trump's NYE party. I was not.

    More
    183 replies36 retweets108 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    Notice the stairs behind us. We walked up them after being guided to Trump. Hopefully, a video will emerge from the grassy knoll.

    Here's at Mar-a-Lago on NYE. That's Joe directly behind the tall wine glass:
    98 replies15 retweets81 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    Great journalistic work on your part. This is critical to America and the world. I'm "behind a wine glass" for 30 seconds. Good God!

    Here's at Mar-a-Lago on NYE. That's Joe directly behind the tall wine glass:
    71 replies14 retweets83 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    Yes Michael. As stated yesterday, security took us to Trump, he introduced us to a 10 yr old boy, and we walked upstairs a minute later.

    Here's at Mar-a-Lago on NYE. That's Joe directly behind the tall wine glass:
    81 replies11 retweets52 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    . I am confident that if people had been lying about you on facts proven objectively false, you would push back as well.
    76 replies9 retweets80 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    . He lies, doubles down on that lie, won't admit he was wrong...and you compare me to Trump? Now THAT is revealing.
    71 replies7 retweets64 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    . Do you have no shame?
    41 replies5 retweets37 likes



  •  4 hours ago
    . Notably absent from your piece was the fact the tweet was false. He makes up a fact, adds a snide attack, and you blame me?
    32 replies7 retweets47 likes




    2.  20 hours ago
      Btw, my issue is not with your story. It's with the mischaracterization of it by someone else that we were "partying." All good.

      You never talked to Trump in public among the crowd?
      330 replies21 retweets127 likes



    3.  20 hours ago
      The Secret Service guided us to the foot of the stairs, we met him, he introduced us to a 10 year old kid, then we walked upstairs.

      You never talked to Trump in public among the crowd?
      131 replies10 retweets72 likes



    4.  20 hours ago
      6. And I'm glad I didn't stay. Groundhog Day with the kids was great. And Mariah Carey...Good God. A fitting coda to 2016.

      they literally were among the revelers. As in, in the crowd. Doesn't mean they stayed all night etc.
      79 replies4 retweets88 likes



    5.  20 hours ago
      Just FYI.

      they literally were among the revelers. As in, in the crowd. Doesn't mean they stayed all night etc.
      55 replies4 retweets33 likes



    6.  20 hours ago
      4. We pushed our way through the crowd to the meeting. 5. Not only did we not stay all night with the "revelers." We didn't stay 1 minute.

      they literally were among the revelers. As in, in the crowd. Doesn't mean they stayed all night etc.
      88 replies7 retweets49 likes



    7.  20 hours ago
      2. That required walking around and through "revelers". 3. We were stopped for about 30 seconds by well wishers.

      they literally were among the revelers. As in, in the crowd. Doesn't mean they stayed all night etc.
      58 replies11 retweets41 likes



    8.  20 hours ago
      Maggie, I've clearly stated that: 1. I walked straight from the metal detectors to the meeting.

      they literally were among the revelers. As in, in the crowd. Doesn't mean they stayed all night etc.
      65 replies9 retweets39 likes


















    Posted by at

    Arianna's curbed mutt

    How big of a loser do you have to be for Arianna Huffington to ditch you?

    A pretty big loser.


    And Peter Daou is one.

    Last September, Jason Horowitz (NEW YORK TIMES) wrote about the outrage machine David Brock and his boy pal Peter Daou were working for Hillary Clinton and how David took direction from Hillary Clinton's campaign while Daou attempted to lead it.

    That's not being independent.

    Nor is it being sane because who wants to be a whore?

    Apparently, Peter Daou does.



     7 hours ago
    There are two sides here: 1. Our intelligence analysts who risk their lives for us 2. A hostile foreign power Now read the tweet below...

    McCain and his friend on the Left keep screaming about but they never discuss evidence of WHAT was hacked?
    27 replies250 retweets412 likes









    There are two sides here?

    Did he learn that while fighting in Lebanon?

    Possibly.

    And that might also be why he's so ignorant of American history.

    Gore Vidal explained in "The State of the Union: 1980" (first published in ESQUIRE, collected in IMPERIAL AMERICA: REFLECTIONS ON THE UNITED STATES OF AMNESIA):

    Those born since World War II have been taught to believe that the CIA has always been an integral part of American life.  They don't know that the agency is only thirty-three years old, that it is essentially illegal not only in its activities (overthrowing a Chilean president here, an Iranian prime minister there) but also in its charter.  The Constitution requires that "a regular Statement of Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all Public Money shall be published from time to time."  The CIA does no such thing: it spends billions of dollars exactly as it pleases.  Although forbidden by law to operate inside the United States, the CIA has spied on American citizens at home, in merry competition with numerous other intelligence agencies whose single interest is the control of the American people in the name of freedom.

    Or how about Howard Zinn (from THE HOWARD ZINN READER), "The CIA ran a program of assassination, torture and imprisonment in Vietnam between 1967 and 1971, called Operation Phoenix, headed by the present CIA director William Colby, who admitted over 20,000 Vietnamese civilians were executed without trial. That is a blood bath, by any definition."

    Daou is an ahistorical idiot who'd do well to study up on a person or organization before offering a knee-jerk and asinine defense.





    Posted by at
    Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
    Creative Commons License
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
     
    Poll1 { display:none; }