CNN - It's Time The Alternative Media Declared War On The Media - That Means You!

[Yallow]

I watched a few moments of the Paul Ryan "Town Hall" last night. This hour long propaganda fest was heavily promoted, and CNN did all they could to make Paul Ryan look legitimate. It truly made me sick hearing all that distortion, and garbage. I mean physically ill.

Here is the problem. Every single thing (related to policy) Paul Ryan said was pure bullshit. Everything the Republican Party does is to DIRECTLY benefit the filthy rich. They spew all this "conservative" garbage, and babble on non stop about anything they can think of to sound like real politicians, to keep the lemmings following them. The media never challenges their insane disastrous economic trickle down, pro-corporate legislation, or their attacks on the powerless, which is pretty much 99% of America.

The media is more of a problem than the Republicans.

Time we all POINTED IT OUT NON-STOP.

DO IT!!!!

My friends. Do all you can to put the Liar Enablers (corporate media) on the spot. They let Trump tell whopper after whopper without even blinking. The corporate owned media is our country's biggest problem, and no one is talking about it. This I fully realized once I heard Ryan spewing his right wing lies in prime time. Please help.

Pushing back on the endless lies is our job since the press won't do it.

[ladym55]

1. I agree with you

M$M has been a serious problem for a very long time. I point it out regularly to the point that I annoy people. I do get concerned when progressives consume CNN, the NY Times, and npr without a question.

[SheriffBob]

2. I agree too

The mainstream media is largely responsible for today's problems.

The bean counters control it. Most of their news is hype and fear inducing. journalism.

Also too many freaking commercials.

[mari48218]

3. Exactly

I watch in disbelief how the so-called "liberal media", or mainstream media is more concerned with sensationalism rather than investigative reporting. And I mean little things when it comes to investigating.

I just watched Jake Tapper talk about "empirical evidence" because Hillary said Comey didn't describe the email thing as "sloppiness". OK, he did in his testimony to the Witch Hunt committee. I watched it on C-SPAN as I have a little more free time on my hands these days than she does. I remeber him saying it when asked to describe what he meant by "extreme carelessness" Maybe she didn't realize it. That doesn't make her a liar. If it does then so is Jake Tapper.

That is because in that same testimony, a few minutes later, near the end, Cummings followed up about the emails and Comey testified only 3 emails out of over 30k were classified at the time, which the State Department then checked and said that any classification was in error and released the contents of those emails. So that means 0 out of 30k emails, right? Therefore the "extreme carelessness" judgment would be null and void, right?

And they found no evidence her server had been accessed even though there IS evidence that the State Department, White House, CIA and FBI WERE hacked??? So security goes like this: Google email, Clinton server, several official US government networks and their servers, right?

What about THAT empirical evidence??? Chronologically when was this 2k emails reduced to 110 in 52 chains mentioned? It was before the Comey testimony to Cummings. Not even sure how that was mentioned, but I did go to C-SPAN and check the transcript near the very end of that testimony and sure enough no emails were classified, and there was no evidence that the server was hacked, according to the Comey-Cummings discussion, just as Clinton has maintained. Cummings specifically said that he hoped the news media was paying attention to this as they were discussing it

So, why is the media failing to report this and instead report invalidated information instead?