Lone Star wrote:Professor Stephen Cohen (from the previously posted video), not affiliated with either campaign, points out the media's hit job on Trump for bringing up the question of US relations with Russia and his questioning of the purpose of NATO. Cohen accurately articulates that "the real danger is what is being done to our own political process" by the media. Cohen says that instead of what the media is dishing out, that Americans deserve more in the political reporting.
Professor Cohen also points out that there's no evidence of Putin wanting to disrupt the Baltic States, which is what the host claims.
Regarding NATO and Trump's question about their mission, Cohen says that many policy experts ask the same question. What is NATO doing today since the Cold War ended? It's not outlandish to question NATO's purpose and ask why they aren't involved in fighting international terrorism. All of a sudden, a candidate cannot be trusted because they ask questions? After all, NATO has only gone into full swing as an alliance only ONCE in their entire history.
Cohen lays it out correctly without all the media hype and innuendo. He says, "I don't defend Trump. Trump raises questions, and instead of giving an answer to the substance of the question, we denounce him as some kind of Kremlin agent. That's bad for our politics, but still worse, given the danger (of a new Cold War with Russia), we're not addressing it."
Mr. Parrot you made a statement earlier that I surmised was about Trump the businessman:
"Maybe if the involved party was known to take advice from influential advisors.....but in this case, that's not the case."
I'm curious to know which statements or policies that Trump has outlined are against the advice of his advisors. What did they suggest that Trump rejected? I'd like to read what you have seen. Thanks.
Yes I saw that last night and I must say that its about time, that someone questioned the Media's objectiveness and or motives. I watch most of the American new channels each night and I would have to say that CNN is one of the most bias/anti Trump channels, that one can view. You can read it in, who they invite on the show to speak and their leading questions, as though all the answers/attacks on Trump are scripted, with never a bad word to say about Hillary.
MSNBC used to be 60/40, i.e. 60 for Democrats and 40 for Republicans, but recently they have swung more in favor of the Democrats, notably over the past two weeks, with the way they Report. Now I see Bloomberg weighing in on the side of the Democrats (not entirely unexpected) - obviously Michael is a bit upset with what Trump said about him.
Then their is Fox New. You can see Hannity is completely pro Trump and most of Fox Blonds are also Trump supporters. Megyn K being the odd exception.
I score it 3 for Hillary and 1 for Donald, so he has an up hill battle, as the next 3 month are going to be pretty rough on him from a Media/Reporting perspective
I am not American, so I don't have a real preference one way or the other, but what the US Media is doing is disgraceful unbiased reporting.
What will be interesting, is, if Trump manages to pull a rabbit out of his arse and win, will be how small the Media group is, in the White House Briefing Room, over the next four years.
Can almost guarantee that CNN and possibly Bloomberg will need to send their Presidential Reports from outside the White House fence, on the footpath pavement. Trump will not forgive if them is he wins.
pipoz4444
