May 16, 20178 yr 2 hours ago, PinkCouture said: In September 2016, Trump's personal doctor -- Harold N. Bornstein -- released a letter that noted Trump's parents lived into their "late 80s and 90s" and pronounced him to be in "excellent physical health." Back in December 2015, Bornstein had written a similarly hyperbolic letter proclaiming: "If elected, Mr. Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency." Just the perfect Trump surrogate
May 17, 20178 yr 12 hours ago, ILUVAdrianaLima said:   Just for balance and comparison sake, here was how the situation was reported on another show on the same network:  Â
May 18, 20178 yr  Quote  Robert Mueller, Former F.B.I. Director, Is Named Special Counsel for Russia Investigation STORY: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/us/politics/robert-mueller-special-counsel-russia-investigation.html  Â
May 22, 20177 yr ^ Wow, Melania I do think that she might not have wanted to be the First Lady. That’s not what she signed up for when she married a rich businessman. She would probably rather just raise her son, design her jewellery line, play tennis in Malibu etc. instead of representing at all kinds of official events that she is required to attend.
May 23, 20177 yr 13 hours ago, Sanni said: ^ Wow, Melania I do think that she might not have wanted to be the First Lady. That’s not what she signed up for when she married a rich businessman. She would probably rather just raise her son, design her jewellery line, play tennis in Malibu etc. instead of representing at all kinds of official events that she is required to attend.  There were unconfirmed online reports about how Donald Trump and Melania Trump were in the latter stages of finalizing their divorce when Donald unexpectedly was on his way to the GOP nomination so they cancelled those plans. Interestingly, that would explain some of Melania's choices since then (choosing to live in NYC with Barron) as well as some of her stand-offish public behavior since Donald Trump's election victory.
May 23, 20177 yr WHy do Dems and media pundits keep saying Russia 'hacked' the election? Surely they refer to Clinton +DNC email leaks, NOT that the voting system was compromised in any way?
May 23, 20177 yr ^ I think the "hack," or whatever you want to call it, did somewhat influence the number of votes but not significantly. It helped Trump gain a few more votes but nothing that would have changed the outcome even if the system was based solely on popular vote. The outcome would be the same. Hilary would have still won the popular vote and he would have still gotten the electoral vote. His win was inevitable.
May 23, 20177 yr Yes I know but again, leaking information thats designed to influence voters is not same as hacking or interfering in an election. Yet we still keep hearing the terms 'hack' 'interference' on CNN in this ostensibly misleading way. Secondly, it amuses me that none of these media outlets have shown any interest in examining how Certain elements within the FBI went to great lengths in order to leak information designed to hurt Clinton Pardon me, but it seems to me as if Trump has placed a curse on these media outlets; they ARE slowly turning into this 'fake news/propaganda machine' that he alleges they are  Besides, if theres anything the DNC leaks unmasked, it was the corruption involved in Democrat Primaries, something the Dems are conspicuously mum about  Â
May 23, 20177 yr Author ^ Harvard study  I'm sick of Trump dominating the news media to a idiotic level  https://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-donald-trumps-first-100-days/  Findings include: President Trump dominated media coverage in the outlets and programs analyzed, with Trump being the topic of 41 percent of all news stories—three times the amount of coverage received by previous presidents. He was also the featured speaker in nearly two-thirds of his coverage. Republican voices accounted for 80 percent of what newsmakers said about the Trump presidency, compared to only 6 percent for Democrats and 3 percent for those involved in anti-Trump protests. European reporters were more likely than American journalists to directly question Trump’s fitness for office. 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.
May 23, 20177 yr 52 minutes ago, elfstone said: Yes I know but again, leaking information thats designed to influence voters is not same as hacking or interfering in an election. Yet we still keep hearing the terms 'hack' 'interference' on CNN in this ostensibly misleading way. Secondly, it amuses me that none of these media outlets have shown any interest in examining how Certain elements within the FBI went to great lengths in order to leak information designed to hurt Clinton Pardon me, but it seems to me as if Trump has placed a curse on these media outlets; they ARE slowly turning into this 'fake news/propaganda machine' that he alleges they are  Besides, if theres anything the DNC leaks unmasked, it was the corruption involved in Democrat Primaries, something the Dems are conspicuously mum about    I think they refer to it as a hack bc it's assumed the emails were obtain through that method and then they were leaked. There are many layers and parts to this whole ordeal that got clumped together. No one's hands are totally clean.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.