Russia this, Russia that, CNN laughing all the way to the bank.

[barbos]

Yes, I know who O’Keefe is, so spare your lecture. But video speaks for itself.

 

[blastula]

Yes, I know who O’Keefe is, so spare your lecture. But video speaks for itself.

If you knew him, then you wouldn't say that. His shtick is deceptively editing video.

 

[barbos]

Yes, I know who O’Keefe is, so spare your lecture. But video speaks for itself.

If you knew him, then you wouldn't say that. His shtick is deceptively editing video.

I know that. Do you have evidence of editing in this case?

 

[Will Wiley]

Three CNN Journalists Resign In Wake Of Retracted Russian Investment Fund Report

Three CNN journalists have resigned after the cable news operation had to retract a published report of a “Russia-related” article, CNN said this evening.

The yanked article reported that Congress was investigating a “Russian investment fund with ties to Trump officials”; it cited a single anonymous source.

Out are Thomas Frank, who wrote the report; Eric Lichtblau, an editor in CNN’s new investigative unit under which it was reported; and Lex Haris, who oversaw the unit.

The article was published on CNN’s website; it also was shared on CNN’s social media platforms. It did not air on CNN.

“In the aftermath of the retraction of a story published on CNN.com, CNN has accepted the resignations of the employees involved in the story’s publication,” a network spokesman said. The network has said management investigated and found standard editorial processes were not followed in publishing the article.

 

[blastula]

If you knew him, then you wouldn't say that. His shtick is deceptively editing video.

I know that.

Sorry, video doesn't speak for itself.

Do you have evidence of editing in this case?

Haven't clicked it, the caption showing there is very stupid. You should just say what's in there worth hearing.

 

[barbos]

I know that.

Sorry, video doesn't speak for itself.

How do you know that? You have not watched it yet.

Do you have evidence of editing in this case?

Haven't clicked it, the caption showing there is very stupid. You should just say what's in there worth hearing.

Pull you head out of your ass and listen to it.

 

[blastula]

Three CNN Journalists Resign In Wake Of Retracted Russian Investment Fund Report

Three CNN journalists have resigned after the cable news operation had to retract a published report of a “Russia-related” article, CNN said this evening.

The yanked article reported that Congress was investigating a “Russian investment fund with ties to Trump officials”; it cited a single anonymous source.

Out are Thomas Frank, who wrote the report; Eric Lichtblau, an editor in CNN’s new investigative unit under which it was reported; and Lex Haris, who oversaw the unit.

The article was published on CNN’s website; it also was shared on CNN’s social media platforms. It did not air on CNN.

“In the aftermath of the retraction of a story published on CNN.com, CNN has accepted the resignations of the employees involved in the story’s publication,” a network spokesman said. The network has said management investigated and found standard editorial processes were not followed in publishing the article.

And? Trump should follow suit, retract and resign.

- - - Updated - - -

Sorry, video doesn't speak for itself.

How do you know that? You have not watched it yet.

Do you have evidence of editing in this case?

Haven't clicked it, the caption showing there is very stupid. You should just say what's in there worth hearing.

Pull you head out of your ass and listen to it.

Hm, nope, still not sold. Your sales pitch needs some work.

 

[repoman]

I am 99% sure from past tapes from O'Keefe that this is also a deceptively edited hack job. The world would be much better if he were dead.

CNN is trash, but this is most likely even worse.

I would rather have a man advocate for rape, incest and murder than be allowed to do the shit that O'keefe does. Fuck this piece of shit. This is a crime against truth.

Even a stolid Trump partisan should totally ignore fuckface O'Keefe. To be so intellectually lazy and craven to accept lies like this is disgusting. Good job taking the high ground, Barbos.

I don't care if the people being framed by deceptive editing are cannibal, pedophile puppy rapers. There is no excuse to do this. The narrative vs narrative battles now are the worst possible dystopia for news. This is a slow motion train wreck. People won't even look at facts about climate change (which ia sound in theory and fact) because of narrative battle camps. There are other types of things that leftists won't even look at conversely.

If you have been proven to deceptively edit once, you get massive scrutiny. Twice and you should be exiled past Ouroboros.

Give us the entire tape or step off, O'Keefe.


--------------------------------------

Does anyone remember from probably this past year there was a hidden camera sting run by PV or a similar group of them trying to get someone to break a law somehow? It was a woman doing the baiting. But then she found out that SHE was also being recorded...

Can't find it now...

 

[barbos]

This is ironically indicative of the problem of the CNN. People want to hear what they want to hear and don't want to hear what they don't want to hear. So CNN talks only about things which increase their ratings, even when they know what they say is not true.

 

[repoman]

This is true at times, more than it should be. Their credibility has taken a hit for it.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Yes, I know who O’Keefe is, so spare your lecture. But video speaks for itself.

The Media is about sales and essentially any necessary bottom-feeding to achieve this. CNN is one of many.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Yes, I know who O’Keefe is, so spare your lecture. But video speaks for itself.

If you knew him, then you wouldn't say that. His shtick is deceptively editing video.

Does that mean adding words rather than deleting these and using a voice-alike?

We hear no giant proof. At this moment in time no giant proof has been produced.

I'm sure other media is also benefiting from this including Trump Media.

 

[ZiprHead]

Already heard about this from a news media prospective. This producer works on medical related stories, not political. He has no insider knowledge of what is going on at CNN as far as the Trump/Russia narrative goes because he's not an insider. His opinion is no better than any man on the street or anonymous poster on a message board.

There are dozens and dozens of producers that work for CNN, the same with all other major news networks. News producers are the guys or gals sitting inside the news truck directing the shots to the cameraman and helping the reporter/interviewer maintain their thoughts on the subject. They are nothing special.

O'Keefe is again being dishonest by not explaining this guy has no personal knowledge about CNN/Trump/Russia. He thinks he found a "gotcha" for the gullible to hang onto and obviously caught a couple gullibles here.

 

[Horatio Parker]

I don't see what's so amazing. That Trump is good for ratings is old news. One commentator thinks Russiagate is a nothingburger. A junior employee makes some indiscreet comments about CNN guests and viewers. None of this is new or unexpected. A good portion of the tape is O'Keefe promoting himself.

Meanwhile, there's this:

The Time I Got Recruited to Collude with the Russians

https://www.lawfareblog.com/time-i-got-recruited-collude-russians

Although it wasn’t initially clear to me how independent Smith’s operation was from Flynn or the Trump campaign, it was immediately apparent that Smith was both well connected within the top echelons of the campaign and he seemed to know both Lt. Gen. Flynn and his son well. Smith routinely talked about the goings on at the top of the Trump team, offering deep insights into the bizarre world at the top of the Trump campaign. Smith told of Flynn’s deep dislike of DNI Clapper, whom Flynn blamed for his dismissal by President Obama. Smith told of Flynn’s moves to position himself to become CIA Director under Trump, but also that Flynn had been persuaded that the Senate confirmation process would be prohibitively difficult. He would instead therefore become National Security Advisor should Trump win the election, Smith said. He also told of a deep sense of angst even among Trump loyalists in the campaign, saying “Trump often just repeats whatever he’s heard from the last person who spoke to him,” and expressing the view that this was especially dangerous when Trump was away.

Over the course of a few phone calls, initially with Smith and later with Smith and one of his associates—a man named John Szobocsan—I was asked about my observations on technical details buried in the State Department’s release of Secretary Clinton’s emails (such as noting a hack attempt in 2011, or how Clinton’s emails might have been intercepted by Russia due to lack of encryption). I was also asked about aspects of the DNC hack, such as why I thought the “Guccifer 2” persona really was in all likelihood operated by the Russian government, and how it wasn’t necessary to rely on CrowdStrike’s attribution as blind faith; noting that I had come to the same conclusion independently based on entirely public evidence, having been initially doubtful of CrowdStrike’s conclusions.

Towards the end of one of our conversations, Smith made his pitch. He said that his team had been contacted by someone on the “dark web”; that this person had the emails from Hillary Clinton’s private email server (which she had subsequently deleted), and that Smith wanted to establish if the emails were genuine. If so, he wanted to ensure that they became public prior to the election. What he wanted from me was to determine if the emails were genuine or not.

It is no overstatement to say that my conversations with Smith shocked me. Given the amount of media attention given at the time to the likely involvement of the Russian government in the DNC hack, it seemed mind-boggling for the Trump campaign—or for this offshoot of it—to be actively seeking those emails. To me this felt really wrong.

In my conversations with Smith and his colleague, I tried to stress this point: if this dark web contact is a front for the Russian government, you really don’t want to play this game. But they were not discouraged. They appeared to be convinced of the need to obtain Clinton’s private emails and make them public, and they had a reckless lack of interest in whether the emails came from a Russian cut-out. Indeed, they made it quite clear to me that it made no difference to them who hacked the emails or why they did so, only that the emails be found and made public before the election.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Already heard about this from a news media prospective. This producer works on medical related stories, not political. He has no insider knowledge of what is going on at CNN as far as the Trump/Russia narrative goes because he's not an insider. His opinion is no better than any man on the street or anonymous poster on a message board.

There are dozens and dozens of producers that work for CNN, the same with all other major news networks. News producers are the guys or gals sitting inside the news truck directing the shots to the cameraman and helping the reporter/interviewer maintain their thoughts on the subject. They are nothing special.

O'Keefe is again being dishonest by not explaining this guy has no personal knowledge about CNN/Trump/Russia. He thinks he found a "gotcha" for the gullible to hang onto and obviously caught a couple gullibles here.

No inside knowledge of CNN or on the other side Fox News is required. Both are biased. I don't think the media itself has much knowledge of Russia, Trump or Russia either.

 

[Keith&Co.]

This is ironically indicative of the problem of the CNN. People want to hear what they want to hear and don't want to hear what they don't want to hear. So CNN talks only about things which increase their ratings, even when they know what they say is not true.

OR they talk about things that ARE true, but they only talk about those true things that boost their ratings.

It just seems counterproductive to refer to a known professional liar to say you've caught CNN constantly lying.

Has anyone else taken Okeefe's breaking news and run with it? Anyone else said, 'hey, there's actually a story here,' who isn't already invested in the narrative?

 

[ZiprHead]

Already heard about this from a news media prospective. This producer works on medical related stories, not political. He has no insider knowledge of what is going on at CNN as far as the Trump/Russia narrative goes because he's not an insider. His opinion is no better than any man on the street or anonymous poster on a message board.

There are dozens and dozens of producers that work for CNN, the same with all other major news networks. News producers are the guys or gals sitting inside the news truck directing the shots to the cameraman and helping the reporter/interviewer maintain their thoughts on the subject. They are nothing special.

O'Keefe is again being dishonest by not explaining this guy has no personal knowledge about CNN/Trump/Russia. He thinks he found a "gotcha" for the gullible to hang onto and obviously caught a couple gullibles here.

No inside knowledge of CNN or on the other side Fox News is required. Both are biased. I don't think the media itself has much knowledge of Russia, Trump or Russia either.

Nobody gives a fuck what you think.

 

[barbos]

Yes, it would have been bigger story if it was Anderson Cooper instead of health issues producer. But the guy does have an access to inside info and can base his opinion on that.

Bonifield explains how far CNN pushed the Russia line, describing a meeting in which reporters were told by the CEO to stop covering climate accords, urging instead “Let’s get back to Russia.”

You don't have a problem with journalists being financially interested in certain narrative even though they know it's false? This health issue producer at CNN thinks it's false and certainly not based on proven facts.

I don't watch russian news/TV much but from time to time I catch what other people like to watch. And guess what get good ratings in Russia? Trashing US and Ukraine, they go on and on about it. They even have american guy there, I don't know how much they pay him, I guess a lot becasue they "beat" him senselessly but he does not mind. It's pretty annoying propaganda by people who don't know much about US. But it has good ratings I guess.
Do you know what else had good ratings in 1930s in Poland and Germany? German and Polish radio stations near their border trashing each other. And poles were not that innocent propaganda wise.

 

[braces_for_impact]

Already heard about this from a news media prospective. This producer works on medical related stories, not political. He has no insider knowledge of what is going on at CNN as far as the Trump/Russia narrative goes because he's not an insider. His opinion is no better than any man on the street or anonymous poster on a message board.

There are dozens and dozens of producers that work for CNN, the same with all other major news networks. News producers are the guys or gals sitting inside the news truck directing the shots to the cameraman and helping the reporter/interviewer maintain their thoughts on the subject. They are nothing special.

O'Keefe is again being dishonest by not explaining this guy has no personal knowledge about CNN/Trump/Russia. He thinks he found a "gotcha" for the gullible to hang onto and obviously caught a couple gullibles here.

This. In this situation, it's like asking a customer service manager if it's his company's business to actively defraud customers. He may actually think so, but that doesn't mean he understands what the board of directors is doing. O'Keefe is famous for his selective and dishonest editing of video in every case he's ever been involved in, and he has a criminal history of trespass and using false pretenses to gain access. Not in the interests of uncovering the truth, but in the interests in giving his side of the argument ammunition - ammunition that turns out to be blanks except to those that continuously take what he does for fact without question due to their own confirmation bias. Now you may count yourselves among them. Every single time this guy does this it turns out to be bullshit. I feel pretty confident calling this bullshit as well unless I'm provided with much more solid counter-evidence to the contrary. I'm not required to examine each and every argument Kent Hovind pulls out of his ass to prove evolution wrong after twenty years of his arguments turning out to be blullshit. Maybe Kent Hovind will one day get lucky and happen upon an argument that utterly destroys evolution and win that Nobel Science Prize. Until then, I'm pretty safe in saying that Kent Hovind is a huckster that fleeces the gullible that wish to hear what they want to hear. So is O'Keefe.

He used to do this with anti-abortion videos. Funny I have never seen the current supporters in this thread using O'Keefe's arguments in defense of "Life" before, but suddenly they wish to heed his words with regards to Trump. Perhaps they should all go reevaluate their opinions on abortion and voting fraud also.

So what are we left with? A CNN employee that thinks there's nothing good coming out of the Trump bullshit (he's not exactly precise in what that means) and thinks Trump and voters are incredibly stupid. I call that truth in advertising, about a person who's opinion no one really cares about, and carries no weight.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Yes, it would have been bigger story if it was Anderson Cooper instead of health issues producer. But the guy does have an access to inside info and can base his opinion on that.

IF he had access to inside information, wouldn't it be better to base the story on inside information, rather than his opinion allegedly based on inside information? Seems like a one-off.