Tag Archives: CNN

The CNN Town Hall Only Demonized The NRA Whilst Ignoring The Systemic Failure That Could Have Prevented The Parkland Shooting, by Duane Norman

How much longer will CNN survive if it keeps putting up this kind of horseshit? SLL says the over/under is 3 years. Gambling laws prevent SLL from taking your bets. From Duane Norman at fmshooter.com:

Last week, CNN hosted a town hall with the survivors of the Parkland, Florida school shooting.

Sheriff Israel and Dana Loesch.

Among the attendees of the town hall were Senators Marco Rubio and Bill Nelson, Rep. Ted Deutch, Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel, and NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch.

In particular, we’ll focus on the segment featuring both Israel and Loesch fielding questions from the audience.

After Emma Gonzalez, a senior at Stoneman Douglas High, asked whether or not Loesch believes “that it should be harder to obtain the semi-automatic weapons and the modifications for these weapons to make them fully automatic“, Loesch confirmed she agrees with common sense:

I don’t believe that this insane monster should have ever been able to obtain a firearm, ever. I do not think that he should have gotten his hands on any kind of weapon…

However, after exposing an uncomfortable truth found within our system, the audience shouted her down:

It is not federal law for states to report convictions to the NICS system. It’s not federally mandated. That’s the big question and I wish that this network had also covered this more, as other media networks would have covered it.

Throughout the night, Loesch pointed out the numerous inconsistencies with our system:

How was he [the Parkland shooter] able to pass a background check?He was able to pass a background check because we have a system that’s flawed. The Southerland Springs murderer was able to pass a background check because the Air Force did not report that record.

No matter how hard Loesch hammered the point, she was ignored and instead forced to constantly be on the defensive.

…We have to develop better protocol to follow up on red flags. This monster carrying bullets to school, carrying knifes to school, assaulting students, assaulting his parents, 39 visits in the past year.

Instead of discussing any of Loesch’s suggestions, the audience instead saw it better to shout her down when she made valid points. The questions directed toward Loesch only demanded her stances on nothing-issues for reactionary politics… not for any actual progress.

Loesch, offering solutions, was instead only lambasted and unfairly accosted.

LOESCH: I want to make a couple — one point. This is the eighth tragedy, the eighth tragedy where we have seen numerous tips that have been reported and red flagged — I mean — are we talking about prevention or not? I mean I think it’s incredibly important —

(BOOING)

To continue reading: The CNN Town Hall Only Demonized The NRA Whilst Ignoring The Systemic Failure That Could Have Prevented The Parkland Shooting

What Would We Do Without CNN? from The Burning Platform

Via Knuckledraggin

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2018/02/18/what-would-we-do-without-cnn/

CNN Praises Kim Jong Un’s Sister At The Winter Olympics And Ignores Both True Heroes and Reality In The Process, by Jon Hall

The US mainstream’s media long love affair with totalitarian dictators (it stretches back to at least Stalin) and dictatorships continues. From Jon Hall at fmshooter.com:

Over the weekend, CNN turned heads in their direction yet again – this time after praising none other than Kim Jong Un’s sister.

Somehow, this isn’t a parody.

CNN’s article opens with a cringe-inducing reference to “diplomacy” – which would be funny if it weren’t so sad…

If “diplomatic dance” were an event at the Winter Olympics, Kim Jong Un’s younger sister [Kim Yo Jong] would be favored to win gold…

Nothing about North Korea is diplomatic, lest they forgot the fact that it’s run by a dictator. The only off-hand mention they make to Kim Jong Un’s totalitarian regime is near the beginning of the piece:

But as North Korea’s brutal dictator, Kim’s brother has ruled with an iron fist since coming to power, operating Nazi-style prison camps, repressing political opposition and even executing senior officers and his own family members in an effort to consolidate power.

Otherwise, CNN’s article is a literal puff piece for North Korea’s regime. It chronicles Kim Yo Jong’s rise to power in the North Korean government as if it’s something to be proud of and even compares her to Ivanka Trump. 

Yep, because that’s a totally apt comparison!

If CNN is so hungry for comparisons, let’s dive right in…

For instance, let’s recollect the time they nearly doxxed someone’s anonymous identity for daring to post a humorous gif online… As I reported in July of 2017:

Purportedly – according to Fraud News Network (or CNN) – Reddit user, “HanAssholeSolo” posted the WWE Trump/CNN gif to The_Donald subreddit. Therefore, because he spread this heinous and destestable gif; doxxing him is justifiable. Wait, he apologized and showed remorse for his actions. CNN won’t identify him but “reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.”

The definition of blackmail is as follows:

“The use of threats or the manipulation of someone’s feelings to force them to do something.”

The infamous gif in question.

To continue reading: CNN Praises Kim Jong Un’s Sister At The Winter Olympics And Ignores Both True Heroes and Reality In The Process

A CNN Smear, by John Stossel

In case there was any doubt, more proof that CNN is one scuzzball of a TV network. From John Stossel at theburningplatform.com:

Did you happen to catch CNN’s latest smear?

Anderson Cooper’s show recently featured a “two-part exclusive” that claims Donald Trump’s EPA director had conspired with the CEO of a mining company to “withdraw environmental restrictions” so the company could dig “the largest open pit mine in the world in an extremely sensitive watershed in wild Alaska.”

The report was enough to horrify any caring person. CNN showed beautiful pictures of colorful salmon swimming in Bristol Bay, and the reporter intoned dramatically, “EPA staffers were shocked to receive this email obtained exclusively by CNN which says ‘we have been directed by the administrator to withdraw restrictions’ … (P)rotection of that pristine area was being removed.”

No! A “pristine” area and gorgeous salmon were about to be obliterated by a mine!

I would have believed it, except I happened to report on that mine a couple of years ago.

I knew that the real scandal was not EPA director Scott Pruitt’s decision to “withdraw the restrictions”; it was what President Obama’s EPA did to the company’s mining proposal in the first place.

Zealots at the EPA had conspired with rich environmental activists to kill the mine before its environmental impact statement could even be submitted. This was unprecedented.

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform later concluded: “EPA employees had inappropriate contact with outside groups and failed to conduct an impartial, fact-based review.”

Now, appropriately, Pruitt undid that censorship of science.

But CNN, implying devious secrecy said, “according to multiple sources, he made that decision without a briefing from any of EPA’s scientists.”

Shocking!

But Pruitt didn’t require opinions from scientists. He didn’t approve the mine. He didn’t make a science decision. He simply followed the law and allowed a company to submit a proposal.

Also, despite CNN’s repeated depictions of salmon on Bristol Bay, it turns out that the proposed mine would not even be on the Bay. It would not even be 10 miles away, or 20 miles away, or even 50 miles. The proposed mine would be about 100 miles away.

Did CNN mention that? No. Never. We asked CNN why. And why not point out that the mining company is just being allowed to start the EPA’s long and arduous environmental review? They didn’t get back to us.

To continue reading: A CNN Smear

CNN Warns It May Expose an Anonymous Critic if He Ever Again Publishes Bad Content, by Glenn Greenwald

CNN careens from disaster to disaster. From Glenn Greenwald at theintercept.com:

A CONTROVERSY ERUPTED late Tuesday night after CNN published an article announcing that it had uncovered the identity of the anonymous Reddit user who created the video of President Donald Trump punching a CNN logo. CNN and other outlets had previously reported that this user, who uses a pseudonym, had also posted anti-Semitic and racist content on Reddit, including an image identifying all of the Jewish employees of CNN, designated with a Jewish star next to their photos.

Though CNN decided — for now — not to reveal his name, the network made clear that this discretion was predicated on the user’s lengthy public apology, his promise not to repeat the behavior, and his status as a private citizen. But in its article, the network explicitly threatened that it could change its mind about withholding the user’s real name if his behavior changes in the future:

CNN is not publishing “HanA**holeSolo’s” name because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again. In addition, he said his statement could serve as an example to others not to do the same.
CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.

Several of the objections made to CNN’s conduct here appear to be false. That includes the claim by the president’s son Donald Trump Jr. that the user threatened by CNN is 15 years old (the CNN reporter, Andrew Kaczynski, said the Reddit user is an adult). The claim that CNN “blackmailed” the user into apologizing — expressed by a Twitter hashtag, #CNNBlackmail, that still sits at the top of trending topics on the site — seems dubious at best, since there is no evidence the user spoke to CNN before posting his apology (though CNN itself says it contacted the user the day before he posted his apology, which presumably means he knew CNN had found out his name when he posted it).

But the invalidity of those particular accusations does not exonerate CNN. There is something self-evidently creepy, bullying, and heavy-handed about a large news organization publicly announcing that it will expose someone’s identity if he ever again publishes content on the internet that the network deems inappropriate or objectionable. Whether it was CNN’s intent or not, the article makes it appear as if CNN will be monitoring this citizen’s online writing, and will punish him with exposure if he writes something the network dislikes.

To continue reading: CNN Warns It May Expose an Anonymous Critic if He Ever Again Publishes Bad Content

“CNN Caught Cold” In Undercover Sting – Producer Admits Russia Fake News Story Pushed For Ratings, by Tyler Durden

How about that! The mainstream media makes up stories to increase their ratings. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

Update: President Trump has noted the series of CNN ‘Fake News’ stories once again…

Fake News CNN is looking at big management changes now that they got caught falsely pushing their phony Russian stories. Ratings way down!

So they caught Fake News CNN cold, but what about NBC, CBS & ABC? What about the failing @nytimes & @washingtonpost? They are all Fake News!

*  *  *

Content originally published at iBankCoin.com

The investigative journalists at Project Veritas have done it again! Known for their undercover sting operations, such as the one which exposed the DNC’s highly organized network of professional agitators sent to disrupt Trump rallies, voter fraud, or the undercover operation which led to the arrests of Antifa thugs planning to disrupt an the inauguration “deploraball” event.

This time, the organization led by James O’Keefe has infiltrated CNN…

A PV journalist covertly filmed a candid discussion with CNN [health] producer John Bonifield, where the “Very Fake News” network employee admitted that the whole Russia story against President Trump is nothing more than a ratings grab by CNN’s CEO Jeff Zucker – based on the fact that most of CNN’s liberal audience wants to see the President go down in flames.

Bonifield also admitted that he hasn’t seen any evidence of President Trump committing a crime.

 John Bonifield: Even if Russia was trying to swing an election, we try to swing their elections, our CIA is doing shit all the time, we’re out there trying to manipulate governments.
I haven’t seen any good enough evidence to show that the President committed a crime.
I know a lot of people don’t like him and they’d like to see him get kicked out of office…. but that’s a lot different than he actually did something that can get him kicked out of office.

Fake News About “Love” For Obamacare? by Eric Peters

Any SLL reader who thinks Obamacare has been good for medical care or the country, leave a comment explaining why. From Eric Peters on a guest post at theburningplatform.com:

I begin to think maybe Trump is on to something with his Fake News schtick. Which isn’t schtick at all in terms of the obvious, egregious bias of what is styled “mainstream” media outlets such as CNN (back in the ’90s, the letters were said to stand for Clinton News Network).

But what Trump means is “news” that is not stilted but upended. Manufactured to present the outright wrong as the absolutely certain. And not on account of incompetence, either.

The best example being Trump’s victory itself.

In lockstep, the “mainstream” media predicted a route. Presented ominous pie charts and graphs and polls of many kinds purporting double digit leads in key states for… Hillary.

This is more serious than the usual weather man 50 percent track record of accurately predicting whether it’s going to snow tomorrow. When it’s unanimous that Trump – whom the people delivering the pie charts and graphs and exit polls all obviously loathe – is “going to lose” and yet wins anyhow, which is more likely? That all these people simply got it wrong in exactly the same way? Or that they were purposely trying to suppress the real news and stilt the outcome along lines they desired?

Now comes the latest – also from CNN – that “love for Obamacare” is at an all-time high. See here.

It reeks of Fake News.

Do you like Obamacare? Know anyone who does? Everyone I know loathes it – for both practical as well as moral reasons.

On the practical level, it sucks. You do not get medical care (let alone free or even “affordable” care). You are forced by the government to buy an insurance policy. It is not the same thing as getting “care.” The insurance company is a crony capitalist cartel that will do all it can to avoid paying for “care” while making you pay for “coverage.” People have become hip to this – and they are not in love with it.

To continue reading: Fake News About “Love” For Obamacare?

How CNN Shapes Political Debate, by Ray McGovern

From Ray McGovern at consoriumnews.com:

Exclusive: CNN was happy to add a right-wing questioner for the Republican debate but won’t add a progressive for the Democratic debate, another sign of how the “mainstream media” shapes what’s acceptable in political discussion, a lesson that ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern has learned from personal experience.
By Ray McGovern

CNN, the sponsor of Tuesday’s debate among Democratic presidential candidates, has gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid being sullied with the stigma of “liberal bias.” The four CNN journalists handpicked to do the questioning have carefully protected themselves from such a charge.

As Jeff Cohen noted Friday in “CNN’s Double Standards on Debates,” CNN made a point of including a bona fide right-winger in the Republican debate but “is not planning to include a single progressive advocate among its panel of four questioners … CNN presents as neutral: CNN’s [Dana] Bash and three CNN anchors (Anderson Cooper, Don Lemon, and Juan Carlos Lopez of CNN en Espanol.)”

The significance is that while a person from the Right or Left might break out of the usual frame of these debates, “mainstream” panelists can be counted on to ask predictable queries with maybe a “gotcha” question or two tossed in to show how “tough” the reporter can be. CNN’s line-up fits that description to a tee.

Dana Bash, who was also a panelist at last month’s debate among Republican candidates, has been a godsend to me as I hunted for examples to illustrate what has become of the so-called “mainstream media.” Speaking to college and other audiences, I often show this short but revealing video clip of Bash plying her “neutral” trade.

Perhaps you will agree that, although less than a minute long, this clip is worth far more than a thousand words in making clear how CNN crackerjack reporters like Dana Bash and CNN senior statesman Wolf Blitzer apply their peculiar brand of “fair and balanced.”

What leaps out is how they, and their acutely attentive technical support, were prepared at a second’s notice to nip in the bud any favorable (or merely “neutral”) allusion to Iran, on the one hand, and any possibly negative reference to Israel, on the other.

In Iowa, reporting on the Republican caucus 3 1/2 years ago, Bash singled out Army Cpl. Jesse Thorsen for an interview. The young soldier sported on his neck a large tattoo of the Twin Towers with the words “9/11 Remember” – making Thorsen seem an ideal candidate for the kind of “neutral” – super-patriotic – interview that Bash had in mind.

Although he supported libertarian Ron Paul, this young corporal on his way to his third deployment to Afghanistan looked like an easy mark for a fast-talking reporter whose “neutrality” was infused with Official Washington’s disdain for Paul’s anti-interventionist stance on foreign policy.

Pointing to the tattoo, Bash closed in for the kill, suggesting Ron Paul would endanger U.S. security if he pulled troops out of conflict areas like Afghanistan. Alas, Thorsen had not been briefed on the intended script, and the encounter did not work out the way Bash expected. The young soldier went off message into dangerous territory, mentioning – or, rather, trying to mention – Iran and Israel in ways that didn’t mesh with what all the Important People know to be true: Iran always bad, Israel always good.

Just in the nick of time, there was fortunate glitch cutting off the discordant message. Or as Blitzer explained, “we just lost our technical connection, unfortunately.”

To continue reading: How CNN Shapes Political Debate