A free e-book. 50 pages or so.
Trumps the outsider. Heās avant garde. Jesus was always for the outsider. Jesus was and is the ultimate outsider. Iām for Trump after seeing his speech on this:
Relish the opportunity to be an outsider. Itās the outsiders that change the world - Donald Trump
Andrew Yang occasionally says something spot-on:
"On Sundayās broadcast of ABCās āThis Week,ā 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang argued Democrats should not be treating President Donald Trump as the cause of all problems.
Yang said, āTo me, itās clear the reason Donald Trump is our president today is that we automated away 4 million manufacturing jobs that were primarily based in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Missouri, and Iowa, the swing states he needed to win.ā
He added, āDemocrats still have not asked themselves the hard questions as to how Donald Trump won in 2016,ā Yang responded. āWhere if you look around the country, you see 30 percent of stores and malls closing. You see record-high levels of stress, financial insecurity, student loan debt, even suicides, and drug overdoses. These are the problems that voters talk to me about when Iām out there every single day. The Democratic Party, unfortunately, is acting like Donald Trump is the cause of all of our problems. Heās a symptom, and we need to cure the underlying disease.ā
1 Like
Another video from the political front, 
3.9 Billion for mental health programs. He has my vote
1 Like
Hi Dave J
Good to hear from you too me old mucker (AS Johnny P. calls me for some reason :-D)
You ask āWhat ABOUT the list above?ā Ach thatās not a simple answer ā¦
Preliminary Observations
It seems to me that when Americans ā or at least āconservativeā Americans - talk about the āMediaā they mean something slightly different than I do as a Brit. In the UK we seem to acknowledge that some of our media outlets are left wing, some are right wing, and some at least claim a certain neutrality. 75% of the British National Newspapers are varying shades of right wing, and would not shy away from that label. The other 25% is made up of papers that are liberal and social democrat. Our TV channels, are āliberalā but try ā and sometimes fail, of course ā to give air time to all political points of view apart from the most extreme and also the top TV interviewers come from a variety of political backgrounds.
When Americans talk about the āMediaā they are not likely to make distinction between politically right wing and politically left wing media. āMediaā has simply become a word for news providers that are not trustworthy. Obviously Fox News, Breitbart, the Rush Limbaugh radio show etc. are right-wing. On the other hand CNN, NBC, The New York Times, Huffington Post etc. are Liberal. Indeed a lot of the traditional newspapers are āliberalā in American terms, although this is offset by the sheer number of people who get their news only from Fox (thatās a quarter of Americans in the figures Iāve seen).
You use the term āMainstream Mediaā ā which is more precise than simply āThe Mediaā - and āThe Mediaā is āliberal/left-wingā. It seems to me that labelling of part of the media as āThe Mediaā is symptomatic of a more radically polarized society than we have in the UK. It is symptomatic of a society divided by āculture warsā in which differences of opinion are interpreted as differences in the sort of person you are ā in terms of integrity or lack of it ā and honourable differences are less easily tolerated because nuances disappear. Of course I am a bit of a dinosaur here. There once was a more unified culture in the UK where differences and nuances between differences were honoured as part of the national conversation. Of course with the internet and the use of social media we too are now entering the era of culture wars which negotiates the problems of our age in black and white terms (but I guess you donāt have to like it just because history has moved on past you).
To the point -
Sharyl Attkisson list of media mistakes seems sound for the most part. However, Iād make the following observations about some of the points from the list you have given ā especially since you are providing these examples as evidence of the untruthful nature of the Left wing press in the age of Trump.
62. Dec. 24, 2018
Itās discovered that nearly everything written by a Der Spiegel reporter, who had been honored by CNN, about a supposedly racist Trump stronghold town was fabricated ālike much of his other work.
Claus Relotius worked for the German magazine Der Speigel ā which is centrist in its politics in German terms. He had won prestigious awards in Germany and elsewhere for his journalism ā and was honoured by CNN in 2014. The revelation that 14 out of his 60 published articles over the year ā only one about Trump supporters ā were actually largely made up after a colleague blew the whistle on him shocked the journalistic world in which he was esteemed by many of all political persuasions. His article on Trump supporters fed into existing prejudices that liberal Americans have about Trump supporters. However, CNN did not act in bad faith here. Relotious was obviously an extremely clever and cunning psychopath who knew how to play people. It was not only CNN that was fooled. See here
66. Jan. 11, 2019
Fox TV affiliate in Seattle, Washington airs fake, doctored video 2 of President Trump that altered his face and made it appear as though he had stuck his tongue in and out while giving an Oval Office address.
This is not good evidence for bias, lying of laziness in the liberal/left wing media in the USA because it was a Fox TV affiliate who aired the doctored video. Obviously the network didnāt mean to air it. It was a prankster āwot done itā. And anyway Trump doesnāt look half as bad as the two New York Times reporters whose pictures were aired on Fox in 2008 photo-shopped into grotesqueness. Even that is no big deal in my book: in the UK its long been the practise for papers (especially those owned by Murdoch) to choose the least flattering photos of politicians from āthe other sideā ā and if you take enough photos of someone youāll be sure to find one of them picking their nose or looking like a clodpoll or a mooncalf. Thatās not quite the same as altering an image ā but Trump is so very orange in that film it is obvious itās not him. This was a harmless joke I think.
69. Jan. 26, 2019
The UK Telegraph apologizes for all the facts it got wrong in a Jan. 19 article criticizing the First Lady.
This is from a right wing UK newspaper ā and a newspaper that is āmiddlingā rather than centre right - and not from an American mainstream liberal/left news outlet. So it is not legitimate evidence for the point the list is trying to prove
71. Various dates: Other faked attacks reported by the news as if confirmed
The day after Trump was elected, an incident at Elon University in North Carolina made national news. Hispanic students found a āhateful noteā written on a classroom whiteboard reading, āBye Bye Latinos.ā After the story made news, it was learned that the message was written by āa Latino student who was upset about the results of the election.ā
This is a story that was generated by a photo posted on twitter that went viral ā it seems it wasnāt the Latino student who did the graffiti when affronted by the result but another student who posted this ā one who didnāt know the origin. Thatās the trouble with social media - these stories are generated and passed on within the self-referencing echo chamber of your own tribe.
There are a number example of Muslims and black people who fabricated stories of violence directed towards them in Sharyl Attkissonās list.
There are enough Muslims, black people, Latinos etcā¦, in the USA to include a percentage of fantasist and attention seekers. The same is true of women who accuse men of raping them ā there will always be a few fantasists but most cases will be genuine. My sense is from what I know in the UK that there does appear to have been a big increase of racially/culturally/religiously motivated crimes that correlates with a culture of divisive and explosive rhetoric from politicians. This correlation appears to be significant even if causation cannot be proved as easily as in the case of an Islamist extremist mullah giving his followers the command to ākill the kafirā (for example).
77. July 4, 2019
Several news outlets seemed to be victimized by a bad case of wishful thinking when they reported that President Trumpās Fourth of July celebration did not draw crowds. One analysis 1 incorrectly claimed there were āsmall crowds.ā However, by any factual assessment, the crowds were, in fact, huge. Thatās in spite of the bad weather.
According to Snopes ā the fact checker ā there might be some mitigating circumstances here. Reporters may have based their estimate on early photographs which showed a thin crowd of people with numbers seemingly smaller than expected because of rain. And perhaps they were unconsciously motivated by memories of the āalternativeā unproven āfacts surrounding the crowd at Trumpās inauguration ā which was billed as the largest in history and which Trump claimed had been graced by the sun coming thought the clouds on an overcast day. There was a fake new story about the photo of the event having been faked (on top of everything else). Reporters of all political persuasions need to check their facts better ā but I can see that this one might have been a bit confusing for those reporting at a distance.
Agence France Press publishes a sensational story saying that more than 100,000 children are being held in migration-related detention in the U.S. under President Trump. It turns out that was the number in 2015 under President Obama.
Again this is not the liberal/left wing media in America making a mistake or lying. It is the oldest and highly respected news agency in the world making the mistake. Since their reputation for accuracy is of huge importance to them this was obviously a mistake.
Closing Observations
OK ā so Iām done with the annotations. A final point Iād make is: Iāve obviously heard about various conspiracy theories generated and spread by the right wing media in America ā that Obama is Muslim born in Kenya (a myth which Trump played a huge role in propagating apparently); the PIzzagate conspiracy (which Breitbart propagated along with other outlets apparently) ā¦ etc. Indeed, Trumpās tweeting as a form of ānew/informationā still has an awful lot of people alarmed over here in the UK because of the indecent insults he employs and the recycling of conspiracy theories. Trumps own ability to be āeconomical with the truthā is something of a legend ā sometimes what Iāve read seems trivial ā Iād give him the benefit of the doubt; but other times it seems far more serious - at least as serious as the list of journalistic mistakes made about Trump that youāve provided.
Here are two ālistsā ā one of conspiracy theories propagated by the American right, the other of dubious statements made by Trump. I think to I need to place evidence like this alongside Sharyl Attkissonās list to evaluate this issue properly.
In the end it seems simply to boil down to whose side you are on ā and thatās worrying. But anyway Iāve answered you the best I can Dave out of respect J
A very Happy New Year to you Old China J
1 Like
Thanks as always Dick.
There IS a difference looking at things from āover thereā and Iām not sure that it makes your vision clearer or blurrier. Maybe a bit of both.
It is disheartening that of the readers on this side, no one takes up the challenge of actually commenting on the list; part of that is because we here have lived with the 3 year onslaught of - Iām sorry to report it - constant lies, overstatements, conspiracies, runs-around-the-constitution etc. Iām not aware of your news āfeedsā over yonder; but watching ours = MSM and others - for 3 years, I can report that a daily diet of sneering, gloating, mean-spirited and hate-filled - again, Iām not exaggerating - āreportersā who have done nothing for those years but make up lies and exaggerations - has been a chilling experience. Journalism is well and truly dead - all because Trump upset the apple cart.
You may or may not know that until 2009 or so I was non-political; and even now I donāt choose sides, but have been very open that I judge Trump by what he does - and he has done magnificently with ZERO help from the opposition, and as far as I can tell, ZERO acknowledgement by any MSM of the good he has done - and that is reprehensible. They are tearing this country apart. Conservatives are not. It really is black and white, Dick, from this side at least.
Thanks for acknowledging that most of that list was in fact āright onā - and there was much more to the list than that.
Two things: a list of Trumpās accomplishments does not garner ANY response here - and none from overseas either as far as I can tell, except perhaps, and oddly, from some Australian sources. Second, a list of very obvious MSM lies and distortions, continual for years, does not garner ANY response here, to speak of.
Thus: if Trump does well, no response; if the MSM gets caught continually lying, no response.
Trump sneezes off-key - OMG the MSM lights up.
If Trump is innocent as Mueller stated, no response. On to the next scandal.
So Iāll say it: the entire Left is acting in a bad-faith power grab, and our constitution be damned. I think that is obvious to any impartial assessment of the evidence.
From talking with other friends abroad, I know full well that the problem, in my mind it is a problem, is just as real there - friends in Holland, smart people, are shocked to hear of any good thing Trump has done - they are not exposed to it, and that is true for others abroad as well.
So, I am not a Trumpist; neither am I anti-Trump. Iām not dem, Iām not republican. I follow no Party line. I do try to find the truth wherever it is. And as it stands now, of the political leaders in this country, Trump is the only one I trust to do what he has promised, as best he can, and he has been doing a helluva job. I sincerely hope he gets a few more years.
We could talk about this for a long time; there are many facets to this āwhere is America goingā thing.
Well thanks again, Dick. Iām off looking for other outrages. 
Just for kicks, I entered the following search term into a browser:
ācompare air time for negative coverage and positive coverage of Trump 2019ā
The first entire page were reports of studies and polls etc from liberal and conservative groups - and the airtime ranged from 91-97% negative coverage for ABC, BBC (which was in the high 80ās, actually) CBS, CNN.
No bias? Or are the opinions in this thread basically a commentary on the effectiveness not of critical thinking, but a simple unthinking reflection of MadCow, Steltzer, Blitzer etc etc?
1 Like
Dick, I think you have nailed what is obvious in the U.S. right now (and the reason I stopped engaging such self-serving lists). The extremes, left and right, choose to trust media that supply whichever list is the one that suits their political preference. Then they complain that others donāt engage the list that their own preferred media supply them.
When I ask why they trust either their constantly cited left wing or right wing media sources, all they tend to say is that they perceive them as trustworthy and having good opinions. My own perception is that this assurance really comes down to the reality that that their preferred wing of media presents āopinions,ā lists, and argumenta that fit the brand of politics that a person on a given side already is inclined to prefer and embrace.
Indeed, those at each extreme, and many holding political power, work hard to get their followers (and anyone else they can) to distrust media that does not present their own side, believing that holding onto power is most effectively done by polarizing their base to reject any sources that challenge their partisan causes. This entrenches a polarized discourse, wherein the other sideās sources can be easily dismissed, and lacking any real dialogue, each base feels confirmed in the righteousness of its own narrative.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2017/09/12/study-91-percent-of-recent-network-trump-coverage-has-been-negative/
1 Like
"Stretching ahead, without Trump, is the progressivesā dream: continued indoctrination of the young, crippling climate action, transgender troops in a shrinking army, ever-more intrusive government, an ever-widening compass of disallowed āhateā speech, oppression of Christianity, destruction of national pride and its replacement with self-hatred and globalism, marginalisation of the traditional family, rampant abortion with population gaps more than filled by manipulable and compliant Third World refugees and, make no mistake, the likely fall of Israel.
Of course, as progressivism wreaks its havoc, Islam or China or both are waiting in the wings. But progressives being deficient in the cognitive ability of weighing consequences canāt see that far."
from Peter Smith, https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/peter-smith/2019/10/trumperman-and-the-joker-legions/
Remedying the most cognitively deficient is bound to be daunting.
I was pleased to have made a stab at evaluating some of the list of mistakes you had given. Iām uncertain how many are actual examples of āfake newsā ā news stories made up by journalists deliberately to mislead people; but the list does give examples of mistakes made in reporting on Trump and on racist attacks allegedly carried out as a result of Trumpās rhetoric.
It doesnāt surprise me that journalists make mistakes when reporting on the big stories of their times ā and Trump is a very big story. All of my adult life I have read a UK monthly magazine named āPrivate Eyeā which is part satire and part an exposure of mistakes made by UK journalists across the spectrum, and of the way columnists loop the loop to cover up how they swiftly change their opinions in accordance with changes in the political climate, and how journalists who adopt the highest moral tone are often hypocrites etcā¦ So Iāve always thought that a proneness to error is part of the territory of journalism. However, āPrivate Eyeā, while pointing out journalistic errors and hypocrisy also confirms the merits of good investigative reporting wherever it is found across the political spectrum. So the only thing Iām surprised by in your list of mistakes (in terms of my own experience) is that it is being given as evidence of how one section of the media is particularly untruthful. Iām sure it would be possible to get together a long list of mistakes and errors made in pro-Trump articles and reports.
You say above āāIf Trump is innocent as Mueller stated, no response.āā And thatās a case in point. Mueller didnāt say that Trump was āinnocentā. His findings did not provide grounds for prosecuting Trump, but he clearly stated ā in contradiction of the President ā that neither did they exonerate Turmp. I remember that clearly enough. I found a very good Fact Checking article on this one that shows clearly how both sides misrepresented what Mueller had actually said:
Regarding the negative treatment of Trump by the media ā Iāve seen some academic research on this (Bob has posted a link to an article about this research). It seems that Trump had a far harder time from the press in his first hundred days ā for example ā than Clinton, or George W. Bush, or Obama. And yes 91% negative sounds like a realistic figure. The research analysis suggests that Trump isnāt simply a victim here. Heās a divisive figure who, unlike the other three before him, openly antagonises the media at press conferences. He thrives on any publicity ā and he gets it with a huge amount of air time even in negative stories. And he appears to court negative publicity with his tweets ā and these are very successful in keeping him up there as the number one story. I think that is a fair assessment of his methods as ādisrupter in chiefā. I think in some sense the MSN is his poddle that he takes for a walk.
I have actually seen some articles by MSM journalists that acknowledge Trumpās achievements ā as they see them. Whether or not any achievements he has made can justify his methods is another topic.
I donāt watch BBC News very much. I tend to read Centre Right and Centre Left newspapers and to watch Press Preview on Skye where a right wing journalist and a left wing journalist discuss the news stories of the day. But yes ā the left and he right wing media (bar Nigel Farage and Katie Hopkins) were united at first in a negative view of Trump, and a real concern about him. This consensus is changing now we are actually Brexiting the EU (but that, again, is another story).
Anyway thatās me done on this one Dave 
1 Like
I agree Bob - and the research cited by he Washington post article seems very good and the conclusions are thought provoking Thank you
1 Like
The US embassy in Iraq, canāt take their coffee breaks.
Donāt worry. Iāll get you up to speed, with the highlights.
1 Like
Itās hard not to anticipate that the past will become prologue
The book is about Jesus but fits Trump. Heās the Beautiful Outlaw
Beautiful Outlaw: Experiencing the Playful, Disruptive, Extravagant Personality of Jesus
That assumed equation fits the fervor of many here.
And the beat goes on.