The moment media matters and the WaPo try to make Seth Rich into a Russian agent is the moment John Podesta needs to be arrested.

(05-24-2017 11:03 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  The moment media matters and the WaPo try to make Seth Rich into a Russian agent is the moment John Podesta needs to be arrested.

Brad Bauman represents Seth Rich's family. He's a died in the wool entrenched DC insider Democrat.

http://heavy.com/news/2017/05/brad-bauma...wikileaks/

The Bauman Foundation... guess who is on the board. David Brock, John Podesta's boy....

http://www.baumanfoundation.org/about-us/board

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

(05-24-2017 08:11 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 07:55 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 07:50 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Those evil mega-corporations acting like corporate persons with speech rights!

That just ain't right! Wielding their evil money-politics to influence!

Lol

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

I think you whiffed on the point. It isn't the corporations selecting where to spend their advertising dollars that is the issue. Its groups like Media Matters putting pressure on advertisers. Its a 3rd party boycott that is illegal in some somewhat parallel situations (union boycotting a 3rd party when their dispute is with the employer in order to get 3rd party to pressure employer).

I see the overall point, but am more amused at the hypocrisy of getting the evil corporations goose-stepping to exert corporate influence over the press. A press which is supposed to be holy, sacrosanct, and immunized from any sort of corporate or political pressure (or being called fake and whatnot).

WTF?

Hannity's never been "press", any more than Buckley was press back when. He's a personality driven chat show, more akin to the view than "news". He's there to drive ratings, invite debate, find differing opinions, not report.

The "press" is what they (Fox) do from about 4-7, that's about it unless something "real" happens., Same as the other cable shows.

(05-24-2017 10:13 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 09:16 PM)Kronke Wrote:  Cernovich is posting each company that has pulled their advertising. USAA, Peleton, and Ring so far that I've seen. Liberal fascism.

USAA? ****. That's who we bank with.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

Yea, that's not good. Got some serious dime with them.

(05-24-2017 10:56 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 10:51 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  /POL has been digging up all kinds of stuff. They've been trying to get confirmation of which hospital and which surgeon operated on Seth Rich.

The reason?

Because the lead director of the Gold Surgery team at MedStar Washington Hospital Center is Jack Sava, MD. And this is the most likely hospital he was taken to, as it is the closest one with a trauma unit.

Which is important why?

Because Jack Sava happens to be mentioned in one of the leaked Podesta emails. He is associated with the Podesta brothers.

Coincidence? Maybe.

Also, coincidentally, Jack Sava is in a relationship with Lisa Kountoupes. Whats interesting about her? Does the fact that she's visited the Obama White House 29 times matter? Her last visit was May 31st, 2016. How about that she's tied to uranium one, and was a Clinton lobbyist?

There's more than that. Could all be coincidence. Then again, the Obama administration swore to us that they legally unmasked names, and today we found out that the FISA court said it wasnt legal. One out of 20 times they unmasked wasnt legal.

But yea, it was just a robbery where none of his items were taken. And it was a homicide where the victim was alert and conscious when medics arrived, but died an hour and a half later, possibly at the hands of a Podesta associate.

Tonite we learned that the DC police have never interviewed the employees of a bar Rich visited that night. It simply sounds like they are not performing an investigation.

It's really disturbing how anyone on either side of the aisle could just write this off as a wild conspiracy theory. Maybe that's all it turns out to be but there's enough irregularities to make you wonder what really happened.

The fact that Hannity stuck his neck out there for this shows balls IMHO. And why is Media Matters so concerned about this story?

Oh yeah... David Brock, Podestas boy. Brad Bauman is representing Seth Rich's family.

http://archive.is/np7nI

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

Better question is why is someone as corrupted and whorish as a david brock even listened to? He'd bend over for david duke next if the check was right.

he/she's about as credible as OJ. Yea. No.

(05-25-2017 12:22 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 08:11 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 07:55 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 07:50 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Those evil mega-corporations acting like corporate persons with speech rights!

That just ain't right! Wielding their evil money-politics to influence!

Lol

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

I think you whiffed on the point. It isn't the corporations selecting where to spend their advertising dollars that is the issue. Its groups like Media Matters putting pressure on advertisers. Its a 3rd party boycott that is illegal in some somewhat parallel situations (union boycotting a 3rd party when their dispute is with the employer in order to get 3rd party to pressure employer).

I see the overall point, but am more amused at the hypocrisy of getting the evil corporations goose-stepping to exert corporate influence over the press. A press which is supposed to be holy, sacrosanct, and immunized from any sort of corporate or political pressure (or being called fake and whatnot).

WTF?

Hannity's never been "press", any more than Buckley was press back when. He's a personality driven chat show, more akin to the view than "news". He's there to drive ratings, invite debate, find differing opinions, not report.

The "press" is what they (Fox) do from about 4-7, that's about it unless something "real" happens., Same as the other cable shows.

Hate to break it to you, but from top to bottom they're just as biased as Hannity is. They all have a thin crust of journalistic coating to make them holy.

Democracy Dies in Darkness...recently...and for at least 3.5 years.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

(05-25-2017 01:02 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 12:22 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 08:11 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 07:55 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 07:50 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  Those evil mega-corporations acting like corporate persons with speech rights!

That just ain't right! Wielding their evil money-politics to influence!

Lol

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

I think you whiffed on the point. It isn't the corporations selecting where to spend their advertising dollars that is the issue. Its groups like Media Matters putting pressure on advertisers. Its a 3rd party boycott that is illegal in some somewhat parallel situations (union boycotting a 3rd party when their dispute is with the employer in order to get 3rd party to pressure employer).

I see the overall point, but am more amused at the hypocrisy of getting the evil corporations goose-stepping to exert corporate influence over the press. A press which is supposed to be holy, sacrosanct, and immunized from any sort of corporate or political pressure (or being called fake and whatnot).

WTF?

Hannity's never been "press", any more than Buckley was press back when. He's a personality driven chat show, more akin to the view than "news". He's there to drive ratings, invite debate, find differing opinions, not report.

The "press" is what they (Fox) do from about 4-7, that's about it unless something "real" happens., Same as the other cable shows.

Hate to break it to you, but from top to bottom they're just as biased as Hannity is. They all have a thin crust of journalistic coating to make them holy.

Democracy Dies in Darkness...recently...and for at least 3.5 years.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

Makes me wonder if you've ever watched either one if you think Hannity is the same as the Brit Humes, etc. Its not even close. Hannity is a cheerleader for his opinions, whatever those happen to be that day. One day he's the biggest Cruz supporter on the planet and doesn't like Trump. Next day he's a Trump supporter.

He's turned into a joke. Half his show is laughing at the left and their conspiracies, the other half, pushing conspiracies.

(05-25-2017 07:25 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 01:02 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 12:22 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 08:11 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 07:55 PM)bullet Wrote:  I think you whiffed on the point. It isn't the corporations selecting where to spend their advertising dollars that is the issue. Its groups like Media Matters putting pressure on advertisers. Its a 3rd party boycott that is illegal in some somewhat parallel situations (union boycotting a 3rd party when their dispute is with the employer in order to get 3rd party to pressure employer).

I see the overall point, but am more amused at the hypocrisy of getting the evil corporations goose-stepping to exert corporate influence over the press. A press which is supposed to be holy, sacrosanct, and immunized from any sort of corporate or political pressure (or being called fake and whatnot).

WTF?

Hannity's never been "press", any more than Buckley was press back when. He's a personality driven chat show, more akin to the view than "news". He's there to drive ratings, invite debate, find differing opinions, not report.

The "press" is what they (Fox) do from about 4-7, that's about it unless something "real" happens., Same as the other cable shows.

Hate to break it to you, but from top to bottom they're just as biased as Hannity is. They all have a thin crust of journalistic coating to make them holy.

Democracy Dies in Darkness...recently...and for at least 3.5 years.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

Makes me wonder if you've ever watched either one if you think Hannity is the same as the Brit Humes, etc. Its not even close. Hannity is a cheerleader for his opinions, whatever those happen to be that day. One day he's the biggest Cruz supporter on the planet and doesn't like Trump. Next day he's a Trump supporter.

99% of the Press Corps are cheerleaders for their own opinion. Hannity just doesn't pretend.

I don't like Hannity, never have. But I don't buy the "holy objective journalist" mantra. They are unpopular for a reason. Most of them can't spell your name right, get basic facts wrong, use anonymous sources that share an agenda, and do nothing but play gotcha games hoping to be the next Woodward

The overall bias of the news media is well known. Its not a conspiracy theory or something.

Its amusing to me to see the liberals cheering the evil corporate money influence on the media. That's really what my post is about and its damn funny.

(05-25-2017 12:37 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Better question is why is someone as corrupted and whorish as a david brock even listened to? He'd bend over for david duke next if the check was right.

he/she's about as credible as OJ. Yea. No.

David Duke would be advised never to bend over in front of Brock.

If Hannity gets destroyed, it will be by Hannity. But he can always start a web site.

Words have consequences sometimes

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using CSNbbs mobile app

Hannity killed himself going on and on about the conspiracy about the dead Democrat.

Hannity's numbers are about to go up... mark it down!

Dealers are now dropping Cars.com. Thats going to sting, because Cars.com relies upon dealer networks to even be able to function.

(05-24-2017 07:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/adverti...spartanntp

I'm not particularly a fan of Hannity. I guess I will have to start watching him as a sign of support.

"...The two advertisers made their decision one day after Media Matters for America published an article calling Hannity "a bigot, a sexist, and a conspiracy theorist." The article didn't explicitly call for a boycott, though it listed more 100 companies that advertise on Hannity...."

I've never seen him say or do anything that would label him a bigot or sexist.

He is a conspiracy theorist however.

Hannity is over the top for my taste most of the time, but this "boycott" from Media Matters is completely ridiculous. Is Hannity not entitled to his own opinions on his show? Is everything he said regarding Rich not at least as verifiable as the Russia/Trump collusion stories that have been run non-stop across media outlets that Media Matters 'approves' of? It would be one thing if Hannity had a history of promoting provably false information, but as someone that has listened to him quite a bit, Hannity doesn't even come close to walking the line of "fake news" that half the left-wing outlets do.

(05-25-2017 09:31 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Hannity is over the top for my taste most of the time, but this "boycott" from Media Matters is completely ridiculous. Is Hannity not entitled to his own opinions on his show? Is everything he said regarding Rich not at least as verifiable as the Russia/Trump collusion stories that have been run non-stop across media outlets that Media Matters 'approves' of? It would be one thing if Hannity had a history of promoting provably false information, but as someone that has listened to him quite a bit, Hannity doesn't even come close to walking the line of "fake news" that half the left-wing outlets do.

Russian interference into our Presidential election isn't fake news.

Hillary's so called murder of Rich IS fake news.

(05-25-2017 09:33 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 09:31 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Hannity is over the top for my taste most of the time, but this "boycott" from Media Matters is completely ridiculous. Is Hannity not entitled to his own opinions on his show? Is everything he said regarding Rich not at least as verifiable as the Russia/Trump collusion stories that have been run non-stop across media outlets that Media Matters 'approves' of? It would be one thing if Hannity had a history of promoting provably false information, but as someone that has listened to him quite a bit, Hannity doesn't even come close to walking the line of "fake news" that half the left-wing outlets do.

Russian interference into our Presidential election isn't fake news.

Hillary's so called murder of Rich IS fake news.

Hannity hasn't said that Hillary or the DNC definitely murdered Rich. He just wants the truth to come out.

Seth was murdered.
Emails were leaked or stolen via a phishing scam.

They why and how for both stories haven't been 100% settled.

(05-25-2017 09:53 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 09:33 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-25-2017 09:31 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Hannity is over the top for my taste most of the time, but this "boycott" from Media Matters is completely ridiculous. Is Hannity not entitled to his own opinions on his show? Is everything he said regarding Rich not at least as verifiable as the Russia/Trump collusion stories that have been run non-stop across media outlets that Media Matters 'approves' of? It would be one thing if Hannity had a history of promoting provably false information, but as someone that has listened to him quite a bit, Hannity doesn't even come close to walking the line of "fake news" that half the left-wing outlets do.

Russian interference into our Presidential election isn't fake news.

Hillary's so called murder of Rich IS fake news.

Hannity hasn't said that Hillary or the DNC definitely murdered Rich. He just wants the truth to come out.

Seth was murdered.
Emails were leaked or stolen via a phishing scam.

They why and how for both stories haven't been 100% settled.

Just like the Russian thing, I'm sure it was all just a big coincidence.