Never any media bias - well maybe just a little. All the time.

How many people from the White House and/or Congressional staffers were in that photo since a significant number of the Patriot players decided to skip the ceremony.

Poor little rich guy being picked on again.

GRR Spartan wrote:How many people from the White House and/or Congressional staffers were in that photo since a significant number of the Patriot players decided to skip the ceremony.

Poor little rich guy being picked on again.

funny watching fragile right wing snowflakes implode.

GRR Spartan wrote:How many people from the White House and/or Congressional staffers were in that photo since a significant number of the Patriot players decided to skip the ceremony.

Poor little rich guy being picked on again.

My guess is the Patriots chartered a plane. For every player that skipped the ceremony, a Patriots' employee jumped on the plane (which is fine, and probably kind of cool for them). The story (if it is one) is that a bunch of Patriots' players didn't go...it was probably the same (or close to) total amount of players/personnel.

NigelUno wrote:

GRR Spartan wrote:How many people from the White House and/or Congressional staffers were in that photo since a significant number of the Patriot players decided to skip the ceremony.

Poor little rich guy being picked on again.

My guess is the Patriots chartered a plane. For every player that skipped the ceremony, a Patriots' employee jumped on the plane (which is fine, and probably kind of cool for them). The story (if it is one) is that a bunch of Patriots' players didn't go...it was probably the same (or close to) total amount of players/personnel.

knowing the insecure snowflake sexual predator president with a toddler-like need for attention, half of the people in the picture are White House employees.

Lots of people here to defend what the person that tweeted won't.

Colin Campbell‏Verified account @colincampbell
More
NYT Sports editor gave me a pretty effusive statement on that Trump/Patriots-crowd-size-comparison tweet:

LooseGoose wrote:Lots of people here to defend what the person that tweeted won't.

Colin Campbell‏Verified account @colincampbell
More
NYT Sports editor gave me a pretty effusive statement on that Trump/Patriots-crowd-size-comparison tweet:

I hope you and Trump will recover from this.

Do you think Trump will correct all his twitter mistakes/lies?

Will you rest easy tonight knowing that some assistant to the assistant equipment manager that took air out of the footballs made his way to the White House instead of Brady? Gosh. I sure hope so.

NigelUno wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:Lots of people here to defend what the person that tweeted won't.

Colin Campbell‏Verified account @colincampbell
More
NYT Sports editor gave me a pretty effusive statement on that Trump/Patriots-crowd-size-comparison tweet:

I hope you and Trump will recover from this.

Do you think Trump will correct all his twitter mistakes/lies?

Will you rest easy tonight knowing that some assistant to the assistant equipment manager that took air out of the footballs made his way to the White House instead of Brady? Gosh. I sure hope so.

did you hear that the sexual predator lost the popular vote by 3 million? and that 3 million people voted illegally? According to the sexual predator..

waiting on Goosechev to hold the president to the same moral equivalent that he holds a bunch of idiots in the mainstream media to.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

I hope you and Trump will recover from this.

Do you think Trump will correct all his twitter mistakes/lies?

Will you rest easy tonight knowing that some assistant to the assistant equipment manager that took air out of the footballs made his way to the White House instead of Brady? Gosh. I sure hope so.

did you hear that the sexual predator lost the popular vote by 3 million? and that 3 million people voted illegally? According to the sexual predator..

waiting on Goosechev to hold the president to the same moral equivalent that he holds a bunch of idiots in the mainstream media to.

He did lose California by 4 million so he won real America by a million.

http://maddox.xmission.com/c.cgi?u=alt_news_sucks

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:http://maddox.xmission.com/c.cgi?u=alt_news_sucks

The only one I recognize from that list is InfoWars.

I'm not so sure Arkin knows, probably still thinks she is Native American.

WHY IS NBC LYING ABOUT ELIZABETH WARREN? In a story headlined Trump Again Derides Elizabeth Warren as ‘Pocahontas,’ NBC’s Daniel Arkin writes: “President Donald Trump returned to one of his most derogatory insults Friday, referring to Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren as ‘Pocahontas’ — a jab at her Native American ancestry.”

Now I’m sure that Arkin knows that this isn’t a jab at her “Native American ancestry,” but at her fake Native American ancestry. So why pretend otherwise? To make Trump look bad. Which I guess explains why more people trust Trump than the media after 100 days.

Heh. I mean I guess this could be considered bias. I'd probably call it "super fucking dumb" but maybe bias is applicable too.

LooseGoose wrote:I'm not so sure Arkin knows, probably still thinks she is Native American.

WHY IS NBC LYING ABOUT ELIZABETH WARREN? In a story headlined Trump Again Derides Elizabeth Warren as ‘Pocahontas,’ NBC’s Daniel Arkin writes: “President Donald Trump returned to one of his most derogatory insults Friday, referring to Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren as ‘Pocahontas’ — a jab at her Native American ancestry.”

Now I’m sure that Arkin knows that this isn’t a jab at her “Native American ancestry,” but at her fake Native American ancestry. So why pretend otherwise? To make Trump look bad. Which I guess explains why more people trust Trump than the media after 100 days.

There's nothing worse than someone wishing they were something they aren't. I typically furrow my brow at "cultural appropriation" but there's few things more offensive than a white guy doing the whole dog and pony show. That cringey feeling you get watching a white guy rap or use the word 'nigga' without a hint of irony.

Jesus...

Remember the good old days when an infrastructure bill was too expensive and deficits were a big deal.

Bias - book review department.

Is the man in the high tower with orange hair getting picked on again while his family schmoozes foreign investors?

This is definitely the top story of the day.

I'm sorry, I should have specified. That's from the straight shooters over at Fox News.

Let's take a quick swing on over to Fox News to see what they're talking about...

Oh! Conspiracy theories! Cool!

Hillary is killing people again?? I thought she would've learned after Benghazi.. but, no!!

for the life of me, I can't understand why people watch the mainstream media (except for, maybe, the entertainment value)

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:This is definitely the top story of the day.

Hannity seemed to think the threat to national security was the leak (and not Trump mouthing off).

NigelUno wrote:Hannity seemed to think the threat to national security was the leak (and not Trump mouthing off).

the gravity he lends to modern day journalism is nothing less than impressive and unparalleled..

McMasters gave a non-denial denial. He didn't deny what was in the WaPo story. He denied items not in the story. He's not saying Trump shared information with the Russians that was so sensitive the NSA and CIA chose not to share with our allies much less Russia unless we are now allied with Russia.

The President barred US media from the meeting with the Russian dignitaries. The photographer was from TASS. Another set of ears from the state owned Russian media.

Bottom line is we have a rank amateur who thinks he's always right.

Who was in the meeting when the decision was made to fire FBI Director Comey? Trump, Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner and the head of Trump's private security. It would be funny as a sitcom but this is about our country.

McMasters said it was "wholly appropriate" for Trump to release the info. Then why is it a big deal to find out who leaked that he spilled the info?

And why didn't he say it was "wholly appropriate" last night?

bump.. reminder that it was the mainstream media and the intellectually vulnerable people who believe what they read/watch that got the sexual predator elected.

Harvard study on news coverage basis

A new report from Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy analyzes news coverage of President Trump’s first 100 days in office.

The report is based on an analysis of news reports in the print editions of The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post, the main newscasts of CBS, CNN, Fox News, and NBC, and three European news outlets (The UK’s Financial Times and BBC, and Germany’s ARD).

Trump has received unsparing coverage for most weeks of his presidency, without a single major topic where Trump’s coverage, on balance, was more positive than negative, setting a new standard for unfavorable press coverage of a president.
Fox was the only news outlet in the study that came close to giving Trump positive coverage overall, however, there was variation in the tone of Fox’s coverage depending on the topic.

Interesting.

CheesySpartan wrote:Harvard study on news coverage basis

A new report from Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy analyzes news coverage of President Trump’s first 100 days in office.

The report is based on an analysis of news reports in the print editions of The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post, the main newscasts of CBS, CNN, Fox News, and NBC, and three European news outlets (The UK’s Financial Times and BBC, and Germany’s ARD).

Trump has received unsparing coverage for most weeks of his presidency, without a single major topic where Trump’s coverage, on balance, was more positive than negative, setting a new standard for unfavorable press coverage of a president.
Fox was the only news outlet in the study that came close to giving Trump positive coverage overall, however, there was variation in the tone of Fox’s coverage depending on the topic.

Interesting.

Seems like you would get more unfavorable coverage if you did more unfavorable things. I wonder if they factored that in.

NigelUno wrote:

CheesySpartan wrote:Harvard study on news coverage basis



Interesting.

Seems like you would get more unfavorable coverage if you did more unfavorable things. I wonder if they factored that in.

I for one can't believe that more people aren't being positive about blindly giving secrets to Russia or firing an FBI director because he won't stop investigating you. It's baffling.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I for one can't believe that more people aren't being positive about blindly giving secrets to Russia or firing an FBI director because he won't stop investigating you. It's baffling.

I could spend time pointing where similar actions by the previous administration did not bring similar negative coverage.

That would be a waste of time since #1 - you wouldn't believe it even with the facts presented to you. #2 - that would be tribal.

Impeach Trump!!! Make America great again!!!

LooseGoose wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I for one can't believe that more people aren't being positive about blindly giving secrets to Russia or firing an FBI director because he won't stop investigating you. It's baffling.

I could spend time pointing where similar actions by the previous administration did not bring similar negative coverage.

That would be a waste of time since #1 - you wouldn't believe it even with the facts presented to you. #2 - that would be tribal.

Impeach Trump!!! Make America great again!!!

You tried (and failed miserably) to make a correlation with Trump firing Comey.

You really want to try again?

LooseGoose wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I for one can't believe that more people aren't being positive about blindly giving secrets to Russia or firing an FBI director because he won't stop investigating you. It's baffling.

I could spend time pointing where similar actions by the previous administration did not bring similar negative coverage.

That would be a waste of time since #1 - you wouldn't believe it even with the facts presented to you. #2 - that would be tribal.

Impeach Trump!!!    Make America great again!!!

You do that constantly. Thanks for taking a break from that for once. Seriously.

NigelUno wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

I could spend time pointing where similar actions by the previous administration did not bring similar negative coverage.

That would be a waste of time since #1 - you wouldn't believe it even with the facts presented to you. #2 - that would be tribal.

Impeach Trump!!! Make America great again!!!

You tried (and failed miserably) to make a correlation with Trump firing Comey.

You really want to try again?

No, he doesn't. He's off the wall wrong. But he hasn't tried to have a real conversation on this board in months. It's a joke even bothering to try to talk to him anymore.

LooseGoose wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I for one can't believe that more people aren't being positive about blindly giving secrets to Russia or firing an FBI director because he won't stop investigating you. It's baffling.

I could spend time pointing where similar actions by the previous administration did not bring similar negative coverage.

That would be a waste of time since #1 - you wouldn't believe it even with the facts presented to you. #2 - that would be tribal.

Impeach Trump!!! Make America great again!!!

I know, right? You would never be tribal and try to pass off the "fact" that Trump fired Comey because Rosenstein recommended it...

I don't read this thread all the time. Was this story discussed? Damn that Liberal media!

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/sinclair-requires-tv-stations-including-komo-to-air-segments-that-tilt-to-the-right/?utm_content=buffer0ddaf&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=owned_buffer_f_m