Bloomberg News Killed Investigation, Fired Reporter, Then Sought To Silence His Wife

[Pete7469]

ya ya ya, I get you hate and blame leftists for everything and rightists are absolute angels. Let's get real.

In the meantime, how about the topic? Anything to say on that? You, like several others seem to entirely miss the valid points. Not everything is partisan.

Well actually on the OP I totally agree with you.

That makes me very uncomfortable....

I'm not sure how to hold media accountable for what basically amounts to malpractice most of the time and at other times criminal incitement to panic or riot with malicious intent. All media is designed to manipulate public opinion and of course in my view, the global collectivist elite are the most nefarious and insidious. The small fraction of "rightist" media does their part to ignore things of course.

How can we regulate the media though? We would implode the court system if we started holding people with "journalism" credentials accountable.

.

 

[toobfreak]

Bloomberg News Killed Investigation, Fired Reporter, Then Sought To Silence His Wife

Typical Leftist tactics. Must have picked that one up from Barry Obumma who was an expert of killing investigations and harassing reporters and quashing news.

Dumb. Rightists do it as well. Typical retarded partisan response ignoring the larger issues.

What is dumb here is trying to run and hide from the facts. Obama wrote the book on killing investigations, harassing and silencing reporters. Typical of you to try to deny it.

The secret backstory of how Obama let Hezbollah off the hook

An ambitious U.S. task force targeting Hezbollah's billion-dollar criminal enterprise ran headlong into the White House's desire for a nuclear deal with Iran

www.politico.com

Philip Haney, DHS whistleblower during Obama era, found dead, police say

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) whistleblower and Fox News contributor Phil Haney was found dead in Amador County, Calif., on Friday, according to a press release from local authorities.

www.foxnews.com

The Top 5 Investigations Obstructed by the Obama Administration

Democrats tolerated unprecedented obstruction for eight years.

pjmedia.com

Report: Obama’s Spying On The Press Was Far More Extensive Than Previously Thought

President Trump might be openly hostile to the mainstream media, but it was the Obama administration that was engaged in a widespread effort to thwart the media. Which do you think is more harmful …

issuesinsights.com

Obama Prosecuted More Journalists THAN ALL PRESIDENTS COMBINED

Barack Obama was a media wrecking ball, as he had the media paralyzed with fear. Remember when Obama declared his administration "scandal free?"

theblacksphere.net

Obama War on Journalism: Feds Raid Reporter, Seize Notes - The New American

Obama’s "war on journalism" has escalated recently with a federal SWAT raid on a reporter's home and the potential unmasking of whistleblowers in government. by Alex Newman

www.thenewamerican.com

Obama administration spied on Fox News reporter James Rosen: Report

The Justice Department spied extensively on Fox News reporter James Rosen in 2010, collecting his telephone records, tracking his movements in and out of the State Department and seizing two days of Rosen’s personal emails, the Washington Post reported on Monday. In a chilling move sure to rile...

www.yahoo.com

ya ya ya, your ODS is pretty obvious. How about the actual topic?

It's not ODS when it is all TRUE and the topic is Bloomberg, which is a mere shadow as bad as Obama! But your tongue would fall out of your mouth if you ever sad a single bad word about your master. How can you even complain about Bloomberg who is a democrat and a drizzle when you have Obama who is a democrat and like a typhoon?

Topic isn't Obama. Stop trying to derail the thread.

Sorry you can't read, Varmint, I mentioned Bloomberg TWICE in my previous post. And I'll ask you again, what good does it do to rant about a little drizzle when you celebrate the storm?

 

[Indeependent]

Enough with the Bloomberg is anything but a Bloombergist.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Michael Bloomberg will have to answer for this because worrying about upsetting the Communist Regime in China over showing how their political elites live and killing the story is wrong on his part or anyone that is or was working for him.

China Regime is corrupt just like Stalin Regime and they live off the slave state they have built off the suffering of their population.

China Regime has since the start of time been nothing but a brutal system one after the other and the leadership may change but one thing remains and the few enjoy prosperity off the slavery of the many...

Michael Bloomberg must answer for this news story killing and bullying...

Yup.

But it's not just Bloomberg - he's a symptom of a larger problem. Remember what happened with the NBA, when one of the players tweeted support of Hong Kong's protesters?

We are just beginning to see them flex their economic power.

Actually it was the Houston Rockets Head Coach and how I know this is because I live outside Houston.

Look, you can review my history for my opinion of China and their brutal regime and I have stated since being in here and on other sites China is a rising threat...

Well no longer rising but a threat.

When our medication and National Security relies on our enemy that enslaves it population then we have a true issue.

Also you can review again my comments of the past where I have pointed out China influence in Mexico funding the Cartels to supporting Venezuela regime to using North Korea to shoot off a rocket or two when Obama was fussing with China over the islands and water way in the South China Sea.

So yes you are correct this is the tip and now America and the World are held over a barrel by a regime that mimic Stalin and nothing what Trotsky taught...

 

[MeBelle]

And Democrats wanted the old white, rich, guy, Bloomberg for President.

umh....no...apparently they didn’t.

Ummm, yes, they did.

Don't you recall Bloomberg showing up in debates at the last minute?

Maybe you should use google.

Yes. I did. I noticed how well he did in the primaries winning uh...hmmm....zero states and dropping out. Ya, they sure wanted him alright.

Maybe you need to be more honest?

Primaries? What primaries? Bloomberg didn't run in the primaries.
Do you mean caucuses?

He did win the American Samoa caucus.

Hmmm, yaa, the DNC allowed Bloomberg in because they needed an infusion of cash - the DNC is broke, ya know. The DNC, once again, changed their rules, which is their prerogative - the same way they changed rules in 2016 that allowed Hillary the nomination and shoved Bernie aside.

If you want to insult me and call out my integrity you need to do it using facts - not, uhs and hmmms

 

[MeBelle]

And Democrats wanted the old white, rich, guy, Bloomberg for President.

umh....no...apparently they didn’t.

Ummm, yes, they did.

Don't you recall Bloomberg showing up in debates at the last minute?

Maybe you should use google.

Yes. I did. I noticed how well he did in the primaries winning uh...hmmm....zero states and dropping out. Ya, they sure wanted him alright.

Maybe you need to be more honest?

And PLEASE!

Don't question my honesty.

Unless, of course, you look in your cracked mirror first.

 

[MeBelle]

Topic isn't Obama. Stop trying to derail the thread.

Is this an official mod warning?

 

[Coyote]

Topic isn't Obama. Stop trying to derail the thread.

Is this an official mod warning?

Is it in red? Then it is.

If you have issues, take it up via pm.

 

[Coyote]

Enough with the Bloomberg is anything but a Bloombergist.

Bloomberg is about Bloomberg. I'm not a fan of him.

 

[Coyote]

ya ya ya, I get you hate and blame leftists for everything and rightists are absolute angels. Let's get real.

In the meantime, how about the topic? Anything to say on that? You, like several others seem to entirely miss the valid points. Not everything is partisan.

View attachment 323425

Well actually on the OP I totally agree with you.

That makes me very uncomfortable....

I'm not sure how to hold media accountable for what basically amounts to malpractice most of the time and at other times criminal incitement to panic or riot with malicious intent. All media is designed to manipulate public opinion and of course in my view, the global collectivist elite are the most nefarious and insidious. The small fraction of "rightist" media does their part to ignore things of course.

How can we regulate the media though? We would implode the court system if we started holding people with "journalism" credentials accountable.

.

Thank you.

Do we NEED to regulate media beyond libel/slander laws?

Media in the social media age has entered an entirely new era, so maybe there needs to be some changes to enforce greater accountability - but, I am not comfortable at all with governments attempting to regulate freedom of the media and I don't see a way that it can be done without comprising it's ability to do it's job especially when it comes to investigating and reporting on governments.

If we talk only about people with "journalism credentials" - then slander/libel laws ought to be enough. Responsible media sources will print retractions and corrections and if readers don't like "bias" they have a lot of alternatives to choose from.

Enroaching on media rights is pretty much the same as free speech...

 

[Sun Devil 92]

ya ya ya, I get you hate and blame leftists for everything and rightists are absolute angels. Let's get real.

In the meantime, how about the topic? Anything to say on that? You, like several others seem to entirely miss the valid points. Not everything is partisan.

View attachment 323425

Well actually on the OP I totally agree with you.

That makes me very uncomfortable....

I'm not sure how to hold media accountable for what basically amounts to malpractice most of the time and at other times criminal incitement to panic or riot with malicious intent. All media is designed to manipulate public opinion and of course in my view, the global collectivist elite are the most nefarious and insidious. The small fraction of "rightist" media does their part to ignore things of course.

How can we regulate the media though? We would implode the court system if we started holding people with "journalism" credentials accountable.

.

Thank you.

Do we NEED to regulate media beyond libel/slander laws?

Media in the social media age has entered an entirely new era, so maybe there needs to be some changes to enforce greater accountability - but, I am not comfortable at all with governments attempting to regulate freedom of the media and I don't see a way that it can be done without comprising it's ability to do it's job especially when it comes to investigating and reporting on governments.

If we talk only about people with "journalism credentials" - then slander/libel laws ought to be enough. Responsible media sources will print retractions and corrections and if readers don't like "bias" they have a lot of alternatives to choose from.

Enroaching on media rights is pretty much the same as free speech...

Except you have some little shitassed group trying to sue Fox news over false information.

Now, I don't really care. If they can show Fox openly lied and people were hurt.....they should do that.

Media is not what media used to be. Especially with the internet and it's time both sides wised up.

Bloomberg's Bullshit (as it should be called) is just another example.

 

[justinacolmena]

killed

They're not fools when they use that word, and we're not fools either. That means that many people who were alive in connection with that mainstream media news investigation are now no longer alive.

 

[MeBelle]

Topic isn't Obama. Stop trying to derail the thread.

Is this an official mod warning?

Is it in red? Then it is.

If you have issues, take it up via pm.

I didn't post about Obama.

Are you moderating your own thread?

 

[Pete7469]

Thank you.

Do we NEED to regulate media beyond libel/slander laws?

Media in the social media age has entered an entirely new era, so maybe there needs to be some changes to enforce greater accountability - but, I am not comfortable at all with governments attempting to regulate freedom of the media and I don't see a way that it can be done without comprising it's ability to do it's job especially when it comes to investigating and reporting on governments.

If we talk only about people with "journalism credentials" - then slander/libel laws ought to be enough. Responsible media sources will print retractions and corrections and if readers don't like "bias" they have a lot of alternatives to choose from.

Enroaching on media rights is pretty much the same as free speech...

I don't think it's possible to regulate media even on slander issues. That by itself would implode the courts.

To regulate it on TRUTH? Who gets to be in charge of THAT? God Himself would have to descend from Heaven and yank a knot in our asses. The concept of GOVERNMENT doing so should terrify anyone, and I'm glad you agree that it's a no-go.

Unfortunately I think what we have is the best we can do, as long as the internet remains a place where people can freely speak their minds, at least in this country, post video evidence in spite of YouTube, and even act a damn fool the alternatives are worse. I'd rather have Alex Jones and his bullshit along with media matters and their bullshit playing a tug of war while the rest of us have to be mushrooms. Some of us will grow into the light, some will just stay down in that dark shitty muck.

.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

And Democrats wanted the old white, rich, guy, Bloomberg for President.

umh....no...apparently they didn’t.

Ummm, yes, they did.

Don't you recall Bloomberg showing up in debates at the last minute?

Maybe you should use google.

Yes. I did. I noticed how well he did in the primaries winning uh...hmmm....zero states and dropping out. Ya, they sure wanted him alright.

Maybe you need to be more honest?

Primaries? What primaries? Bloomberg didn't run in the primaries.
Do you mean caucuses?

He did win the American Samoa caucus.

Hmmm, yaa, the DNC allowed Bloomberg in because they needed an infusion of cash - the DNC is broke, ya know. The DNC, once again, changed their rules, which is their prerogative - the same way they changed rules in 2016 that allowed Hillary the nomination and shoved Bernie aside.

If you want to insult me and call out my integrity you need to do it using facts - not, uhs and hmmms

Bloomberg ran on Super Tuesday with the hope he could win Texas and maybe a few other States.

He finished third in the Texas Primary.

 

[August West]

And Democrats wanted the old white, rich, guy, Bloomberg for President.

Not me! I like a candidate who gets caught and fined for robbing his own Foundation.

 

[Coyote]

ya ya ya, I get you hate and blame leftists for everything and rightists are absolute angels. Let's get real.

In the meantime, how about the topic? Anything to say on that? You, like several others seem to entirely miss the valid points. Not everything is partisan.

View attachment 323425

Well actually on the OP I totally agree with you.

That makes me very uncomfortable....

I'm not sure how to hold media accountable for what basically amounts to malpractice most of the time and at other times criminal incitement to panic or riot with malicious intent. All media is designed to manipulate public opinion and of course in my view, the global collectivist elite are the most nefarious and insidious. The small fraction of "rightist" media does their part to ignore things of course.

How can we regulate the media though? We would implode the court system if we started holding people with "journalism" credentials accountable.

.

Thank you.

Do we NEED to regulate media beyond libel/slander laws?

Media in the social media age has entered an entirely new era, so maybe there needs to be some changes to enforce greater accountability - but, I am not comfortable at all with governments attempting to regulate freedom of the media and I don't see a way that it can be done without comprising it's ability to do it's job especially when it comes to investigating and reporting on governments.

If we talk only about people with "journalism credentials" - then slander/libel laws ought to be enough. Responsible media sources will print retractions and corrections and if readers don't like "bias" they have a lot of alternatives to choose from.

Enroaching on media rights is pretty much the same as free speech...

Except you have some little shitassed group trying to sue Fox news over false information.

Now, I don't really care. If they can show Fox openly lied and people were hurt.....they should do that.

Media is not what media used to be. Especially with the internet and it's time both sides wised up.

Bloomberg's Bullshit (as it should be called) is just another example.

People are always trying to sue the media. But the bar is pretty high and for good reason. I agree - the internet (and the 24 hour news cycle) has really changed things.

 

[Coyote]

And Democrats wanted the old white, rich, guy, Bloomberg for President.

umh....no...apparently they didn’t.

Ummm, yes, they did.

Don't you recall Bloomberg showing up in debates at the last minute?

Maybe you should use google.

Yes. I did. I noticed how well he did in the primaries winning uh...hmmm....zero states and dropping out. Ya, they sure wanted him alright.

Maybe you need to be more honest?

Primaries? What primaries? Bloomberg didn't run in the primaries.
Do you mean caucuses?

He did win the American Samoa caucus.

Hmmm, yaa, the DNC allowed Bloomberg in because they needed an infusion of cash - the DNC is broke, ya know. The DNC, once again, changed their rules, which is their prerogative - the same way they changed rules in 2016 that allowed Hillary the nomination and shoved Bernie aside.

If you want to insult me and call out my integrity you need to do it using facts - not, uhs and hmmms

Bloomberg ran on Super Tuesday with the hope he could win Texas and maybe a few other States.

He finished third in the Texas Primary.

Ya. He was pretty damn arrogant thinking all his money would create a win. It's pretty obvious the Dems didn't support him.

 

[Coyote]

Thank you.

Do we NEED to regulate media beyond libel/slander laws?

Media in the social media age has entered an entirely new era, so maybe there needs to be some changes to enforce greater accountability - but, I am not comfortable at all with governments attempting to regulate freedom of the media and I don't see a way that it can be done without comprising it's ability to do it's job especially when it comes to investigating and reporting on governments.

If we talk only about people with "journalism credentials" - then slander/libel laws ought to be enough. Responsible media sources will print retractions and corrections and if readers don't like "bias" they have a lot of alternatives to choose from.

Enroaching on media rights is pretty much the same as free speech...

I don't think it's possible to regulate media even on slander issues. That by itself would implode the courts.

To regulate it on TRUTH? Who gets to be in charge of THAT? God Himself would have to descend from Heaven and yank a knot in our asses. The concept of GOVERNMENT doing so should terrify anyone, and I'm glad you agree that it's a no-go.

Unfortunately I think what we have is the best we can do, as long as the internet remains a place where people can freely speak their minds, at least in this country, post video evidence in spite of YouTube, and even act a damn fool the alternatives are worse. I'd rather have Alex Jones and his bullshit along with media matters and their bullshit playing a tug of war while the rest of us have to be mushrooms. Some of us will grow into the light, some will just stay down in that dark shitty muck.

.

I actually agree with you on that. WHO decides what the "truth" is? Scary thought! Slander/Libel laws work ok for creating some measure of accountability and I think that is good.

What I do worry about is deliberate misinformation - not through journalistic sources (because you can always look to multiple sources to figure things out) but through social media type outlets. I think we have entered an information warfare era and we lack, as a nation, the cognitive tools to deal with it.

 

[Indeependent]

And Democrats wanted the old white, rich, guy, Bloomberg for President.

Not me! I like a candidate who gets caught and fined for robbing his own Foundation.

Why bring up the Clintons?