What has the media gotten wrong about Trump/Russia collusion?

[PyramidHead]

I keep hearing from certain posters how the media is blowing everything out of proportion and has been since Trump was elected. Well, if that were true, there should be some things they said in the past 6 months that were later proven false. It's trivial to find examples of Breitbart or Fox getting their facts wrong in defense of Trump. But I can't seem to find any stories that were later conclusively shown to be false or misleading on the part of the usual mainstream outlets... Washington Post, CNN, Independent, etc. Am I missing something? If so, can we start a list of the claims that were made (not just suggested or speculated, but stated as facts) and later refuted?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Hillary and Obama set up Donald Jr.

Oh wait you meant mainstream media.

 

[Horatio Parker]

That it's ok for conservatives to break the law, since they're only following the courage of their convictions.

Dems OTOH aspire to be social justice warriors which means that their every move must be examined under a microscope, and the impure condemned.

 

[Elixir]

Seriously PH asks a good question. But we all know the answer: MSM is the least fake of all "news" segments. Almost all the Fake News is coming from conservofascist sources like Breitbart. And Russia - don't forget Russia.

 

[PyramidHead]

I was looking to hear from the usual suspects on this one. You'd think that if WP and company were right about this being a media witch hunt or a bunch of sore losers making up tall tales, they'd be able to point out something in the past half a year that CNN et al said about the situation that we now know is bullshit. Are there any examples? Or does each new revelation seem to corroborate and strengthen those that preceded it, almost as if...

 

[blastula]

There is one thing I know of, where Comey said the NYT got a story wrong.

‘In the main, it was not true’: Comey denounces New York Times story - The Washington Post

However, it's hard to tell what he meant was wrong in the story. All he said, was, “In the main, it was not true" and did not elaborate.

 

[Elixir]

There is one thing I know of, where Comey said the NYT got a story wrong.

‘In the main, it was not true’: Comey denounces New York Times story - The Washington Post

However, it's hard to tell what he meant was wrong in the story. All he said, was, “In the main, it was not true" and did not elaborate.

So who ya gonna believe? The NYT or "that nutjob"?

 

[Horatio Parker]

I was looking to hear from the usual suspects on this one. You'd think that if WP and company were right about this being a media witch hunt or a bunch of sore losers making up tall tales, they'd be able to point out something in the past half a year that CNN et al said about the situation that we now know is bullshit. Are there any examples? Or does each new revelation seem to corroborate and strengthen those that preceded it, almost as if...

Things are progressing too fast for the messaging machine to keep up.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I was looking to hear from the usual suspects on this one. You'd think that if WP and company were right about this being a media witch hunt or a bunch of sore losers making up tall tales, they'd be able to point out something in the past half a year that CNN et al said about the situation that we now know is bullshit. Are there any examples? Or does each new revelation seem to corroborate and strengthen those that preceded it, almost as if...

Things are progressing too fast for the messaging machine to keep up.

That's somewhat of an unfair assessment. After all, most of the funding for the messaging machine was diverted to buy a new beach house for Putin's daughter, so they've been having to do their job with limited resources.

They're trying their best with what they have and we should give them credit for that.

 

[Opoponax]

There was a story that didn't get it all right. CNN ran a story and three journalists resigned over it.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/26/media/cnn-announcement-retracted-article/index.html

The short of it is that editorial processes weren't followed and there was some kind of inaccuracy in the report.

The story, which reported that Congress was investigating a "Russian investment fund with ties to Trump officials," cited a single anonymous source.

So there's the "MSM" bombshell that didn't get everything right the first time.

Meanwhile, today, Fox is running with the Hillary-uranium tale again. It's water for the Trumptards who are wandering through the desert randomly shouting out "Hillary ... Obama ... Whatabout ... MAGA!"