by Ron Chapman
At one time the media reported stories as they developed and made every effort to get it right. This required extensive interviews with several sources and double checking both the evidence provided and the sources of that evidence to verify the truth.
It was a matter of journalistic ethics to “get it right.” There was pride in being a journalist then and editors made certain that their media organs maintained a rigid 4elevel of unbiased accuracy that garnered public respect.
The President’s first post mid-term election was a wild scene at the White House. It was an 87-minute marathon with almost universally hostile
The liberal mainstream news media has a narrative about Donald Trump and they do not deviate. The constant refrain is that the President is unhinged, idiotic, tyrannical and especially racist. Recently, the President was labeled a racist when he criticized CNN’s Don Lemon and NBA star LeBron James. Their latest obsession is the new book written by fired White House staffer Omarosa Manigault Newman.
In the age of President Donald Trump, American journalism has died and it has been replaced by Democratic Party advocacy. No longer are there standards for “objective” reporting in news departments at broadcast networks, cable networks like CNN or MSNBC or mainstream news organizations. Liberal commentators are masquerading as “journalists” and it is being displayed on a regular basis. In the aftermath of the President’s news conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin, anchors on CNN and MSNBC announced their outright disgust with Trump’s performance, discarding even the pretense of objectivity.
If there’s “fruit of the poisonous tree” tainting the Mueller probe, it comes from a tree planted by president Donald Trump. The phrase is catchy, however, even if it’s completely inapplicable during the course of an investigation. Once a trial, or proceeding, has commenced, and evidence introduced, a defendant, then, may object that any proffered evidence was illegally, or improperly, obtained. Until evidence is introduced admissibility isn’t an issue. It’s no surprise, though, that Trump will say, or do, anything to impede the investigation into Russia that may touch him, personally.
To the envy of people throughout the world, Americans enjoy precious freedoms which are enshrined in our Bill of Rights. Fortunately, this includes freedom of the press to conduct their journalistic responsibilities without undue government interference.
According to the Media Research Center, broadcast television news coverage of President Trump was 90% negative in the first quarter of 2018. This is not an aberration for it has been happening non-stop since Donald Trump announced his presidential campaign on June 16, 2015.
The media presents a sustained flow of Trump hating garbage masquerading as news reporting. It not only a hallmark of the broadcast news programs, but it also the type of biased “Trump coverage” presented by major newspapers and cable news outlets. The only exceptions are Fox News, some Internet sites and talk radio.
The Trump hating media has found a new obsession and her name is Stormy Daniels. The porn star is alleging a 2006 one-night stand with President Trump and the media cannot get enough of this story. In recent weeks, Daniels has been the focus of countless CNN and MSNBC segments. Her interview with Anderson Cooper on 60 Minutes was hyped for weeks, leading to a massive audience of 22 million viewers for the show. This was biggest audience for 60 Minutes in the last ten years.
Ever since Donald Trump officially entered the presidential race on June 16, 2015, the national news media has treated him with total disdain. It has been even worse since Donald Trump was elected President as networks such as CNN and MSNBC have devoted almost their entire broadcast schedule to attacking his personality, temperament and agenda.
by Ron Chapman
Am I living in a parallel universe? Has the world turned upside down?
Back in the 1970’s the Washington Post released the “Pentagon Papers” secreted out of that agency by one Daniel Ellsberg. No one had ever dared up to that time to take classified information and release it to the public in the name of patriotism. He took substantial risk-informing the American people about a major event impacting their lives and the nature of our government.