Author Topic: Report: Trump's loans from Deutsche Bank co-signed by Russian oligarchs?!  (Read 2104 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Vermont Green

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4562
  • Tommy Points: 382
Lawrence O'Donnell is no more "News" than Sean Hannity.  Both are "columnists" meaning they can say whatever they want.  It does not excuse getting this story wrong or at least premature.

I doubt we have heard the last of this.  Any conservatives doing the fake news victory lap had best be careful.  This may well be true, just not yet confirmed.  Trump is a liar so his denial doesn't mean much.



Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 39152
  • Tommy Points: -27342
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Lawrence O'Donnell is no more "News" than Sean Hannity.  Both are "columnists" meaning they can say whatever they want.  It does not excuse getting this story wrong or at least premature.

When somebody presents something as news, though, it should be real and vetted.  Neither O'Donnell nor his "source" have ever seen the documents in question, and NBC News couldn't verify the story.  Rachel Maddow obviously knew this was coming, as well.  None of them cared before going to air with this.

We've seen media across the spectrum be careless and/or intentionally misleading with stories.  I don't know what the answer is.  A "free press" should be free from government interference, but should it be free to publish lies? 
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Offline trickybilly

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4298
  • Tommy Points: 488
Already Proven to be FALSE....I keep telling you guys to quit falling for these B.S. LIES.

https://twitter.com/Lawrence/status/1166800943272353792

Ha, you posted this before I had a chance.  How many on the left  were praying it was true.

Just another brick in the fake news wall.

Just because he admits he made an error in his handling of the leak, doesn't neccesarily make it false. Big difference.

Remember, when the guy you don't like has power, you are going to want for journos to be able  report leaks.

That's what an open democracy is built on. Unless of course you don't want to live in an open democracy.
"Gimme the ball, gimme the ball". Freddy Quimby, 1994.

Offline liam

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16928
  • Tommy Points: 1128
Lawrence O'Donnell is no more "News" than Sean Hannity.  Both are "columnists" meaning they can say whatever they want.  It does not excuse getting this story wrong or at least premature.

When somebody presents something as news, though, it should be real and vetted.  Neither O'Donnell nor his "source" have ever seen the documents in question, and NBC News couldn't verify the story.  Rachel Maddow obviously knew this was coming, as well.  None of them cared before going to air with this.

We've seen media across the spectrum be careless and/or intentionally misleading with stories.  I don't know what the answer is.  A "free press" should be free from government interference, but should it be free to publish lies?

Should the President be free to publish lies?

Offline trickybilly

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4298
  • Tommy Points: 488
Lawrence O'Donnell is no more "News" than Sean Hannity.  Both are "columnists" meaning they can say whatever they want.  It does not excuse getting this story wrong or at least premature.

When somebody presents something as news, though, it should be real and vetted.  Neither O'Donnell nor his "source" have ever seen the documents in question, and NBC News couldn't verify the story.  Rachel Maddow obviously knew this was coming, as well.  None of them cared before going to air with this.

We've seen media across the spectrum be careless and/or intentionally misleading with stories.  I don't know what the answer is.  A "free press" should be free from government interference, but should it be free to publish lies?

Should the President be free to publish lies?

Like what carries more weight:

"Some people are saying..."

or

"I have a confirmed source within a bank who has seen the information"

Trump was the master of this: he tweeted that he had "inside information which proves Obama wasn't born in Hawaii". That turned out to be false. Nothing EVER said to retract, water down, or walk back the remarks.

Conversely, you have a journalist admitting that he hasn't followed guidelines (presumably they need to see hard evidence, rather than just talking to a staffer who claims to have seen something), apologising, and offering to make a very embarrassing and public climb down on national television...

Trump has some many people hoodwinked on this fake news **** it's depressing.

I actually quite like many aspects of Trump's foreign policy, and I can understand why a lot of people like his policies. But this inability of his supporters to see this one truly dangerous thing he is doing is mind-blowing.
"Gimme the ball, gimme the ball". Freddy Quimby, 1994.

Offline trickybilly

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4298
  • Tommy Points: 488
Lawrence O'Donnell is no more "News" than Sean Hannity.  Both are "columnists" meaning they can say whatever they want.  It does not excuse getting this story wrong or at least premature.

When somebody presents something as news, though, it should be real and vetted.  Neither O'Donnell nor his "source" have ever seen the documents in question, and NBC News couldn't verify the story.  Rachel Maddow obviously knew this was coming, as well.  None of them cared before going to air with this.

We've seen media across the spectrum be careless and/or intentionally misleading with stories.  I don't know what the answer is.  A "free press" should be free from government interference, but should it be free to publish lies?

You would literally have to remove half the internet if you wanted to stop the publication of lies. Also, people will get into "what is a lie?"

I think that it's a bit unfair to compare O"donnell with Hannity. Have you EVER seen Hannity climb down from a previously held viewpoint or story in the face of changing circumstances?
"Gimme the ball, gimme the ball". Freddy Quimby, 1994.

Online Celtics4ever

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17732
  • Tommy Points: 1170
Quote
Should the President be free to publish lies?

Nope, but neither should the media who are supposed to keep him accountable not try to tear him down and make up stuff to bring down our executive office.   The fourth estate has failed us, I wish some of you younger guys could have seen Walter Cronkite back in the day now that was a newsman.  He was called the "most trusted man in America".

Now days many of the media have serious ethical problems and are just as bad as they president they try to tear down or support respectively.

Offline Vox_Populi

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4077
  • Tommy Points: 271
The media will continue to be able to publish 'lies' as long as the average American is uninterested in rigorously investigating the validility of [dang]ing reports unless they like the target of them. This is obviously true for celebrities as well.

Offline Vermont Green

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4562
  • Tommy Points: 382
Lawrence O'Donnell is no more "News" than Sean Hannity.  Both are "columnists" meaning they can say whatever they want. It does not excuse getting this story wrong or at least premature.

When somebody presents something as news, though, it should be real and vetted.  Neither O'Donnell nor his "source" have ever seen the documents in question, and NBC News couldn't verify the story.  Rachel Maddow obviously knew this was coming, as well.  None of them cared before going to air with this.

We've seen media across the spectrum be careless and/or intentionally misleading with stories.  I don't know what the answer is.  A "free press" should be free from government interference, but should it be free to publish lies?

I am not defending this in any way as I specifically said.  I am just pointing out that there is a difference between Lester Holt reporting this on the evening news and O'Donnell discussing it on his show.  Either way though, he jumped the gun and should not have.

I remember when Roy Moore sent a fake women claiming to have had an abortion to the Washington Post to try and get them to print a false story.  They sniffed it out.  O'Donnell and everyone else should be equally cautious.  Larry was not in this case. 

I know this sounds very paranoid but I would not doubt that the Russians are trying to plant fake stories to undermine the US Press.  These days you cannot trust or believe anything.  Exactly the way the Russians want it.

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19874
  • Tommy Points: 2217
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
Lol it was Larry O'Donnell with a single source? Still not surprised if it wound up being true but the last story he broke was when he publicly announced he wanted to punch Tagg Romney in the face. Time to fire him, breaking the two-source rule alone is enough.


I remember when Roy Moore sent a fake women claiming to have had an abortion to the Washington Post to try and get them to print a false story.  They sniffed it out.

That was extremely passionate and sincere honesty in media advocate James O'Keefe, who oddly enough still tried to smear the Post for it even though they clearly showed they were more than capable of sniffing out a fake accuser. Think he was probably working with Moore but can't remember how well that was established.

Offline Rosco917

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5298
  • Tommy Points: 445
The name of the game is the "Left onto the Right." It's a never ending game going on electronically 24/7 every day, every second. 

True or not...each side throws as much garbage against the wall as possible to see what actually sticks. What sticks is then called ammo, or NEWS.

To win the game you need to capture the White House, the Senate, and the House. That's called winning the triple crown, it's worth Trillions of dollars. You get to play with OPM. (Other Peoples Money) in the form of tax receipts.

The fans or followers of this "game" support their team by merely paying attention or tuning in. Both the left and the right, also have super dedicated followers called patrons who donate funds to their favorite team, but it's the casual watchers who create "audience share" by just simply tuning in. It's those casual watchers that the league... called American Politics actually covet.

Audience share is then used to sell advertising. Which is how the players and teams are then super well compensated...we're talking about billions and billions of dollars for the major players. Which is the impetuous for their careers.

When the game we love is taking a break during the doldrums of summer, we sometimes turn to the game mentioned above. Some of us enjoy baseball, except when the Sox are loosing lol.

I love games.

 

Offline mmmmm

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4063
  • Tommy Points: 689
Lol it was Larry O'Donnell with a single source? Still not surprised if it wound up being true but the last story he broke was when he publicly announced he wanted to punch Tagg Romney in the face. Time to fire him, breaking the two-source rule alone is enough.


I remember when Roy Moore sent a fake women claiming to have had an abortion to the Washington Post to try and get them to print a false story.  They sniffed it out.

That was extremely passionate and sincere honesty in media advocate James O'Keefe, who oddly enough still tried to smear the Post for it even though they clearly showed they were more than capable of sniffing out a fake accuser. Think he was probably working with Moore but can't remember how well that was established.

Yes, that was a failed 'sting' attempt by O'Keefe's Project Veritas, who have tried numerous such ethically challenged shenanigans and who was once convicted for entering a Senator's office using a false identity.   I'm amazed how you found a way to include the words 'sincere honesty' in the same sentence as 'James O'Keefe'.  That may never happen again in our lifetimes.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30145
  • Tommy Points: 2281
Maybe he was getting a loan to buy Greenland ? ???

Offline nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37995
  • Tommy Points: 6188
Maybe he was getting a loan to buy Greenland ? ???
Oh you didn't hear? No Trump doesn't want to buy Greenland. He wants to trade Puerto Rico for it.

I hope that daft dope doesn't expect any of the 5+ million Puertorican Americans to vote for him.

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30145
  • Tommy Points: 2281
Maybe he was getting a loan to buy Greenland ? ???
Oh you didn't hear? No Trump doesn't want to buy Greenland. He wants to trade Puerto Rico for it.

I hope that daft dope doesn't expect any of the 5+ million Puertorican Americans to vote for him.

probably be a good deal for the US .    ;)..... I think everything is negotiable.....how about swapping Long Island ( plus the Kardashians) for Greenland .   NYC would bank rupt Denmark in less than a year and cause Denmark to fold as country.   

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsStrong Forums.

Community

Signup to win FREE tickets

* indicates required