Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Show your support for what this community means to you:


Choose a Donation Amount
Username (required for credit)



Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. If you dare criticize Jimmy Lake, you won't last long.

A look at certain press practices in Obama vs. Trump presidencies

13»

Comments

  • 2001400ex2001400ex Posts: 24,830
    Swaye's Wigwam 10000 Comments 250 Answers Fifth Anniversary

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    I would agree with that opinion. They also represent the leading print media in the country. Missing only the Chicago Tribune, Boston Globe, and maybe the Baltimore Sun. Reuter’s and AP covers the gaps. Telling, yes?
    And print media isn't the only media that is responsible for journalistic activities.
  • GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Posts: 34,909
    Swaye's Wigwam 25000 Comments 250 Answers Fucktard of the Week Award
    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    I would agree with that opinion. They also represent the leading print media in the country. Missing only the Chicago Tribune, Boston Globe, and maybe the Baltimore Sun. Reuter’s and AP covers the gaps. Telling, yes?
    And print media isn't the only media that is responsible for journalistic activities.
    Ah fuckitall hondo, you’re obtuse tribe wins.
    MikeDamoneRaceBannon
  • SFGbobSFGbob Posts: 8,620
    Standard Supporter 5000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes
    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.


    Yeah, Hondo's all about facts. That claim is pure bullshit, your specialty Hondo. Hillary's use of a private email server was uncovered during the Congressional investigation of the Bengahzi attack not by a FOIA request. You've heard about the Benghazi investigation haven't you Hondo? That's very same investigation that you Kunts claim found nothing.

  • SFGbobSFGbob Posts: 8,620
    Standard Supporter 5000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    Hillary emails came out of the Benghazi hearings

    That's why you don't have a source for your bullshit
    Sorry Race, didn't see your response to Hondo's bullshit before I posted my response.
    RaceBannon
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Posts: 24,830
    Swaye's Wigwam 10000 Comments 250 Answers Fifth Anniversary
    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.


    Yeah, Hondo's all about facts. That claim is pure bullshit, your specialty Hondo. Hillary's use of a private email server was uncovered during the Congressional investigation of the Bengahzi attack not by a FOIA request. You've heard about the Benghazi investigation haven't you Hondo? That's very same investigation that you Kunts claim found nothing.

    Are you stupid. I wasn't talking about her emails in regards to "I don't have a source..." Which is why you don't pull quotes out of context. Idiot.

    19]

    Initial awareness
    Edit
    As early as 2009, officials with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) expressed concerns over possible violations of normal federal government record-keeping procedures at the State Department under then-Secretary Clinton.[31]

    In December 2012, near the end of Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, a nonprofit group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, filed a FOIA request seeking records about her email. CREW received a response in May 2013: "no records responsive to your request were located."[32] Emails sent to Clinton's private clintonemail.com address were first discovered in March 2013, when a hacker named "Guccifer" widely distributed emails sent to Clinton from Sidney Blumenthal, which Guccifer obtained by illegally accessing Blumenthal's email account.[33][34][35] The emails dealt with the 2012 Benghazi attack and other issues in Libya and revealed the existence of her clintonemail.com address.[33][34][35]



    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Posts: 24,830
    Swaye's Wigwam 10000 Comments 250 Answers Fifth Anniversary
    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    Hillary emails came out of the Benghazi hearings

    That's why you don't have a source for your bullshit
    Sorry Race, didn't see your response to Hondo's bullshit before I posted my response.
    How cute. Bob and race together.

    photo DD737B8E-4D97-46D7-99BD-890F7226DE90_zpsv3pmx1xv.jpg


    And both wrong.
  • SFGbobSFGbob Posts: 8,620
    Standard Supporter 5000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes
    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.


    Yeah, Hondo's all about facts. That claim is pure bullshit, your specialty Hondo. Hillary's use of a private email server was uncovered during the Congressional investigation of the Bengahzi attack not by a FOIA request. You've heard about the Benghazi investigation haven't you Hondo? That's very same investigation that you Kunts claim found nothing.

    Are you stupid. I wasn't talking about her emails in regards to "I don't have a source..." Which is why you don't pull quotes out of context. Idiot.

    19]

    Initial awareness
    Edit
    As early as 2009, officials with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) expressed concerns over possible violations of normal federal government record-keeping procedures at the State Department under then-Secretary Clinton.[31]

    In December 2012, near the end of Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, a nonprofit group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, filed a FOIA request seeking records about her email. CREW received a response in May 2013: "no records responsive to your request were located."[32] Emails sent to Clinton's private clintonemail.com address were first discovered in March 2013, when a hacker named "Guccifer" widely distributed emails sent to Clinton from Sidney Blumenthal, which Guccifer obtained by illegally accessing Blumenthal's email account.[33][34][35] The emails dealt with the 2012 Benghazi attack and other issues in Libya and revealed the existence of her clintonemail.com address.[33][34][35]



    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy
    Don't blame me because you have the writing skills of a retard. And of course now you're lying. You claimed that most of the FOIA requests in Obama's second term went to Hillary and Bernie. December 2012 wasn't part of Obama's second term. So not only do you write the a retard you're a fucking liar.

    I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Posts: 24,830
    Swaye's Wigwam 10000 Comments 250 Answers Fifth Anniversary
    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.


    Yeah, Hondo's all about facts. That claim is pure bullshit, your specialty Hondo. Hillary's use of a private email server was uncovered during the Congressional investigation of the Bengahzi attack not by a FOIA request. You've heard about the Benghazi investigation haven't you Hondo? That's very same investigation that you Kunts claim found nothing.

    Are you stupid. I wasn't talking about her emails in regards to "I don't have a source..." Which is why you don't pull quotes out of context. Idiot.

    19]

    Initial awareness
    Edit
    As early as 2009, officials with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) expressed concerns over possible violations of normal federal government record-keeping procedures at the State Department under then-Secretary Clinton.[31]

    In December 2012, near the end of Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, a nonprofit group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, filed a FOIA request seeking records about her email. CREW received a response in May 2013: "no records responsive to your request were located."[32] Emails sent to Clinton's private clintonemail.com address were first discovered in March 2013, when a hacker named "Guccifer" widely distributed emails sent to Clinton from Sidney Blumenthal, which Guccifer obtained by illegally accessing Blumenthal's email account.[33][34][35] The emails dealt with the 2012 Benghazi attack and other issues in Libya and revealed the existence of her clintonemail.com address.[33][34][35]



    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy
    Don't blame me because you have the writing skills of a retard. And of course now you're lying. You claimed that most of the FOIA requests in Obama's second term went to Hillary and Bernie. December 2012 wasn't part of Obama's second term. So not only do you write the a retard you're a fucking liar.

    I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.
    You. Sir. Are seriously the dumbest motherfucker here. And that counts sledog.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_presidential_election

    Anything after the election, in November of 2012 is essentially his second term. Fuckstick. He has nothing else to run on after that time. Idiot.
  • USMChawkUSMChawk Posts: 806
    Standard Supporter 250 Answers 500 Up Votes 500 Awesomes
    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.


    Yeah, Hondo's all about facts. That claim is pure bullshit, your specialty Hondo. Hillary's use of a private email server was uncovered during the Congressional investigation of the Bengahzi attack not by a FOIA request. You've heard about the Benghazi investigation haven't you Hondo? That's very same investigation that you Kunts claim found nothing.

    Are you stupid. I wasn't talking about her emails in regards to "I don't have a source..." Which is why you don't pull quotes out of context. Idiot.

    19]

    Initial awareness
    Edit
    As early as 2009, officials with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) expressed concerns over possible violations of normal federal government record-keeping procedures at the State Department under then-Secretary Clinton.[31]

    In December 2012, near the end of Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, a nonprofit group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, filed a FOIA request seeking records about her email. CREW received a response in May 2013: "no records responsive to your request were located."[32] Emails sent to Clinton's private clintonemail.com address were first discovered in March 2013, when a hacker named "Guccifer" widely distributed emails sent to Clinton from Sidney Blumenthal, which Guccifer obtained by illegally accessing Blumenthal's email account.[33][34][35] The emails dealt with the 2012 Benghazi attack and other issues in Libya and revealed the existence of her clintonemail.com address.[33][34][35]



    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy
    Don't blame me because you have the writing skills of a retard. And of course now you're lying. You claimed that most of the FOIA requests in Obama's second term went to Hillary and Bernie. December 2012 wasn't part of Obama's second term. So not only do you write the a retard you're a fucking liar.

    I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.
    You. Sir. Are seriously the dumbest motherfucker here. And that counts sledog.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_presidential_election

    Anything after the election, in November of 2012 is essentially his second term. Fuckstick. He has nothing else to run on after that time. Idiot.
    So it’s technically (I.e. actually) part of his first term.
  • SFGbobSFGbob Posts: 8,620
    Standard Supporter 5000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes
    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.


    Yeah, Hondo's all about facts. That claim is pure bullshit, your specialty Hondo. Hillary's use of a private email server was uncovered during the Congressional investigation of the Bengahzi attack not by a FOIA request. You've heard about the Benghazi investigation haven't you Hondo? That's very same investigation that you Kunts claim found nothing.

    Are you stupid. I wasn't talking about her emails in regards to "I don't have a source..." Which is why you don't pull quotes out of context. Idiot.

    19]

    Initial awareness
    Edit
    As early as 2009, officials with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) expressed concerns over possible violations of normal federal government record-keeping procedures at the State Department under then-Secretary Clinton.[31]

    In December 2012, near the end of Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, a nonprofit group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, filed a FOIA request seeking records about her email. CREW received a response in May 2013: "no records responsive to your request were located."[32] Emails sent to Clinton's private clintonemail.com address were first discovered in March 2013, when a hacker named "Guccifer" widely distributed emails sent to Clinton from Sidney Blumenthal, which Guccifer obtained by illegally accessing Blumenthal's email account.[33][34][35] The emails dealt with the 2012 Benghazi attack and other issues in Libya and revealed the existence of her clintonemail.com address.[33][34][35]



    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy
    Don't blame me because you have the writing skills of a retard. And of course now you're lying. You claimed that most of the FOIA requests in Obama's second term went to Hillary and Bernie. December 2012 wasn't part of Obama's second term. So not only do you write the a retard you're a fucking liar.

    I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.
    You. Sir. Are seriously the dumbest motherfucker here. And that counts sledog.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_presidential_election

    Anything after the election, in November of 2012 is essentially his second term. Fuckstick. He has nothing else to run on after that time. Idiot.
    Essentially you're a lying dumbfuck. Obama second term didn't start until after his inauguration in January.

  • 2001400ex2001400ex Posts: 24,830
    Swaye's Wigwam 10000 Comments 250 Answers Fifth Anniversary
    USMChawk said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.


    Yeah, Hondo's all about facts. That claim is pure bullshit, your specialty Hondo. Hillary's use of a private email server was uncovered during the Congressional investigation of the Bengahzi attack not by a FOIA request. You've heard about the Benghazi investigation haven't you Hondo? That's very same investigation that you Kunts claim found nothing.

    Are you stupid. I wasn't talking about her emails in regards to "I don't have a source..." Which is why you don't pull quotes out of context. Idiot.

    19]

    Initial awareness
    Edit
    As early as 2009, officials with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) expressed concerns over possible violations of normal federal government record-keeping procedures at the State Department under then-Secretary Clinton.[31]

    In December 2012, near the end of Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, a nonprofit group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, filed a FOIA request seeking records about her email. CREW received a response in May 2013: "no records responsive to your request were located."[32] Emails sent to Clinton's private clintonemail.com address were first discovered in March 2013, when a hacker named "Guccifer" widely distributed emails sent to Clinton from Sidney Blumenthal, which Guccifer obtained by illegally accessing Blumenthal's email account.[33][34][35] The emails dealt with the 2012 Benghazi attack and other issues in Libya and revealed the existence of her clintonemail.com address.[33][34][35]



    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy
    Don't blame me because you have the writing skills of a retard. And of course now you're lying. You claimed that most of the FOIA requests in Obama's second term went to Hillary and Bernie. December 2012 wasn't part of Obama's second term. So not only do you write the a retard you're a fucking liar.

    I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.
    You. Sir. Are seriously the dumbest motherfucker here. And that counts sledog.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_presidential_election

    Anything after the election, in November of 2012 is essentially his second term. Fuckstick. He has nothing else to run on after that time. Idiot.
    So it’s technically (I.e. actually) part of his first term.
    You are stupid if you think that matters in the context of my quote.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Posts: 24,830
    Swaye's Wigwam 10000 Comments 250 Answers Fifth Anniversary
    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.


    Yeah, Hondo's all about facts. That claim is pure bullshit, your specialty Hondo. Hillary's use of a private email server was uncovered during the Congressional investigation of the Bengahzi attack not by a FOIA request. You've heard about the Benghazi investigation haven't you Hondo? That's very same investigation that you Kunts claim found nothing.

    Are you stupid. I wasn't talking about her emails in regards to "I don't have a source..." Which is why you don't pull quotes out of context. Idiot.

    19]

    Initial awareness
    Edit
    As early as 2009, officials with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) expressed concerns over possible violations of normal federal government record-keeping procedures at the State Department under then-Secretary Clinton.[31]

    In December 2012, near the end of Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, a nonprofit group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, filed a FOIA request seeking records about her email. CREW received a response in May 2013: "no records responsive to your request were located."[32] Emails sent to Clinton's private clintonemail.com address were first discovered in March 2013, when a hacker named "Guccifer" widely distributed emails sent to Clinton from Sidney Blumenthal, which Guccifer obtained by illegally accessing Blumenthal's email account.[33][34][35] The emails dealt with the 2012 Benghazi attack and other issues in Libya and revealed the existence of her clintonemail.com address.[33][34][35]



    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy
    Don't blame me because you have the writing skills of a retard. And of course now you're lying. You claimed that most of the FOIA requests in Obama's second term went to Hillary and Bernie. December 2012 wasn't part of Obama's second term. So not only do you write the a retard you're a fucking liar.

    I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.
    You. Sir. Are seriously the dumbest motherfucker here. And that counts sledog.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_presidential_election

    Anything after the election, in November of 2012 is essentially his second term. Fuckstick. He has nothing else to run on after that time. Idiot.
    Essentially you're a lying dumbfuck. Obama second term didn't start until after his inauguration in January.


    Idiot
  • SFGbobSFGbob Posts: 8,620
    Standard Supporter 5000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes
    edited March 21
    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.


    Yeah, Hondo's all about facts. That claim is pure bullshit, your specialty Hondo. Hillary's use of a private email server was uncovered during the Congressional investigation of the Bengahzi attack not by a FOIA request. You've heard about the Benghazi investigation haven't you Hondo? That's very same investigation that you Kunts claim found nothing.

    Are you stupid. I wasn't talking about her emails in regards to "I don't have a source..." Which is why you don't pull quotes out of context. Idiot.

    19]

    Initial awareness
    Edit
    As early as 2009, officials with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) expressed concerns over possible violations of normal federal government record-keeping procedures at the State Department under then-Secretary Clinton.[31]

    In December 2012, near the end of Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, a nonprofit group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, filed a FOIA request seeking records about her email. CREW received a response in May 2013: "no records responsive to your request were located."[32] Emails sent to Clinton's private clintonemail.com address were first discovered in March 2013, when a hacker named "Guccifer" widely distributed emails sent to Clinton from Sidney Blumenthal, which Guccifer obtained by illegally accessing Blumenthal's email account.[33][34][35] The emails dealt with the 2012 Benghazi attack and other issues in Libya and revealed the existence of her clintonemail.com address.[33][34][35]



    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy
    Don't blame me because you have the writing skills of a retard. And of course now you're lying. You claimed that most of the FOIA requests in Obama's second term went to Hillary and Bernie. December 2012 wasn't part of Obama's second term. So not only do you write the a retard you're a fucking liar.

    I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.
    You. Sir. Are seriously the dumbest motherfucker here. And that counts sledog.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_presidential_election

    Anything after the election, in November of 2012 is essentially his second term. Fuckstick. He has nothing else to run on after that time. Idiot.
    Essentially you're a lying dumbfuck. Obama second term didn't start until after his inauguration in January.


    Idiot
    Funny how Mr. Precise language screams like a Kunt when you hold him to the same standard.


    And December 2012 is in no way part of Obama's Second term. Liar.
  • USMChawkUSMChawk Posts: 806
    Standard Supporter 250 Answers 500 Up Votes 500 Awesomes
    2001400ex said:

    USMChawk said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.


    Yeah, Hondo's all about facts. That claim is pure bullshit, your specialty Hondo. Hillary's use of a private email server was uncovered during the Congressional investigation of the Bengahzi attack not by a FOIA request. You've heard about the Benghazi investigation haven't you Hondo? That's very same investigation that you Kunts claim found nothing.

    Are you stupid. I wasn't talking about her emails in regards to "I don't have a source..." Which is why you don't pull quotes out of context. Idiot.

    19]

    Initial awareness
    Edit
    As early as 2009, officials with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) expressed concerns over possible violations of normal federal government record-keeping procedures at the State Department under then-Secretary Clinton.[31]

    In December 2012, near the end of Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, a nonprofit group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, filed a FOIA request seeking records about her email. CREW received a response in May 2013: "no records responsive to your request were located."[32] Emails sent to Clinton's private clintonemail.com address were first discovered in March 2013, when a hacker named "Guccifer" widely distributed emails sent to Clinton from Sidney Blumenthal, which Guccifer obtained by illegally accessing Blumenthal's email account.[33][34][35] The emails dealt with the 2012 Benghazi attack and other issues in Libya and revealed the existence of her clintonemail.com address.[33][34][35]



    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy
    Don't blame me because you have the writing skills of a retard. And of course now you're lying. You claimed that most of the FOIA requests in Obama's second term went to Hillary and Bernie. December 2012 wasn't part of Obama's second term. So not only do you write the a retard you're a fucking liar.

    I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.
    You. Sir. Are seriously the dumbest motherfucker here. And that counts sledog.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_presidential_election

    Anything after the election, in November of 2012 is essentially his second term. Fuckstick. He has nothing else to run on after that time. Idiot.
    So it’s technically (I.e. actually) part of his first term.
    You are stupid if you think that matters in the context of my quote.
    I didn’t create the language, I just mastered it. If you rely on others to interpret your words don’t be a little bitch when they don’t interpret them to your liking. In this case you’ve used the words ‘essentially’ and ‘context’ to cover for a lie/misstatement. Instead of conceding the obvious you’re doubling down; HondoFS.
    RaceBannon
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Posts: 24,830
    Swaye's Wigwam 10000 Comments 250 Answers Fifth Anniversary
    USMChawk said:

    2001400ex said:

    USMChawk said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.


    Yeah, Hondo's all about facts. That claim is pure bullshit, your specialty Hondo. Hillary's use of a private email server was uncovered during the Congressional investigation of the Bengahzi attack not by a FOIA request. You've heard about the Benghazi investigation haven't you Hondo? That's very same investigation that you Kunts claim found nothing.

    Are you stupid. I wasn't talking about her emails in regards to "I don't have a source..." Which is why you don't pull quotes out of context. Idiot.

    19]

    Initial awareness
    Edit
    As early as 2009, officials with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) expressed concerns over possible violations of normal federal government record-keeping procedures at the State Department under then-Secretary Clinton.[31]

    In December 2012, near the end of Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, a nonprofit group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, filed a FOIA request seeking records about her email. CREW received a response in May 2013: "no records responsive to your request were located."[32] Emails sent to Clinton's private clintonemail.com address were first discovered in March 2013, when a hacker named "Guccifer" widely distributed emails sent to Clinton from Sidney Blumenthal, which Guccifer obtained by illegally accessing Blumenthal's email account.[33][34][35] The emails dealt with the 2012 Benghazi attack and other issues in Libya and revealed the existence of her clintonemail.com address.[33][34][35]



    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy
    Don't blame me because you have the writing skills of a retard. And of course now you're lying. You claimed that most of the FOIA requests in Obama's second term went to Hillary and Bernie. December 2012 wasn't part of Obama's second term. So not only do you write the a retard you're a fucking liar.

    I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.
    You. Sir. Are seriously the dumbest motherfucker here. And that counts sledog.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_presidential_election

    Anything after the election, in November of 2012 is essentially his second term. Fuckstick. He has nothing else to run on after that time. Idiot.
    So it’s technically (I.e. actually) part of his first term.
    You are stupid if you think that matters in the context of my quote.
    I didn’t create the language, I just mastered it. If you rely on others to interpret your words don’t be a little bitch when they don’t interpret them to your liking. In this case you’ve used the words ‘essentially’ and ‘context’ to cover for a lie/misstatement. Instead of conceding the obvious you’re doubling down; HondoFS.
    Read for comprehension. Seriously. Try it.
  • pawzpawz Posts: 6,788
    Swaye's Wigwam 5000 Comments 250 Answers Fifth Anniversary
    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.


    Yeah, Hondo's all about facts. That claim is pure bullshit, your specialty Hondo. Hillary's use of a private email server was uncovered during the Congressional investigation of the Bengahzi attack not by a FOIA request. You've heard about the Benghazi investigation haven't you Hondo? That's very same investigation that you Kunts claim found nothing.

    Are you stupid. I wasn't talking about her emails in regards to "I don't have a source..." Which is why you don't pull quotes out of context. Idiot.

    19]

    Initial awareness
    Edit
    As early as 2009, officials with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) expressed concerns over possible violations of normal federal government record-keeping procedures at the State Department under then-Secretary Clinton.[31]

    In December 2012, near the end of Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, a nonprofit group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, filed a FOIA request seeking records about her email. CREW received a response in May 2013: "no records responsive to your request were located."[32] Emails sent to Clinton's private clintonemail.com address were first discovered in March 2013, when a hacker named "Guccifer" widely distributed emails sent to Clinton from Sidney Blumenthal, which Guccifer obtained by illegally accessing Blumenthal's email account.[33][34][35] The emails dealt with the 2012 Benghazi attack and other issues in Libya and revealed the existence of her clintonemail.com address.[33][34][35]



    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy
    Don't blame me because you have the writing skills of a retard. And of course now you're lying. You claimed that most of the FOIA requests in Obama's second term went to Hillary and Bernie. December 2012 wasn't part of Obama's second term. So not only do you write the a retard you're a fucking liar.

    I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.
    You. Sir. Are seriously the dumbest motherfucker here. And that counts sledog.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_presidential_election

    Anything after the election, in November of 2012 is essentially his second term. Fuckstick. He has nothing else to run on after that time. Idiot.
    No. There is just you in a class all by yourself.
    RaceBannonSledog
  • SFGbobSFGbob Posts: 8,620
    Standard Supporter 5000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes
    pawz said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    SFGbob said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:


    So then I have a few questions.

    1) why are they primarily looking at outlets that are perceived to be liberal? Why not look at all the media on both sides?

    Ahhhhh nummmm nummmm nummmm



    The other outlets included in the analysis of mainstream media were the Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS News, the Los Angeles Times, NBC News, MSNBC, Reuters, Daily Beast, The Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

    Among them, only Bloomberg sent a consistent amount of FOIA requests in the final years of the Obama administration, when the EPA released major proposals such as the Clean Power Plan and its new Waters of the United States rule.


    I didn't say they were liberal, you did.
    2001400ex said:


    2) do you think it has anything to do with the actions of the president?

    Lazy. All presidents take actions. It's the self-proclaimed job of the press to cover them, regardless of whether they like the actions or presidents.
    2001400ex said:

    I'd be curious to see this extended to Obama's first term. Maybe experience of his cabinet has to do with it?

    Your only mildly curious point. I'd like to see that too.
    2001400ex said:

    3) with this information, exactly what point are you trying to make?

    My point is that I'm quite surprised and disappointed the requests are orders of magnitude different.
    2001400ex said:

    4) do you really think the conservative media ignored Obama and was easy on him?

    Of course I don't, but that's a telling juxtaposition against NTY, WaPo, AP, etc. I expect a non-partisan press to expend equal effort no matter who is in office. If you were a critical thinker, you'd have the same expectations.
    Yes I do expect a free press to be equally critical. I'm not sure this is a good measure for that, which is my point. Not even being partisan by saying that. Just look at Trump and he he runs things. He didn't divest his assets for one, which creates conflicts that the media would want to investigate.

    I'm a believer that the media chases flashing lights like a cat does. They are lazy and don't want to do any actual investigative work. If this were a liberal that had tons of business and didn't divest them. I'm positive those same media outlets would be chasing the same things they are with Trump. Trump gives a lot of ammo for any media. Obama was boring and frankly didn't do shit and he was a thin skinned pussy about the conservative media. He hated criticism so he did what he could to minimize it. Trump seems to thrive on criticism.

    If we are being honest about it. You will see the same articles critical of the Virginia governor in the NY times and WaPo. It was easy and a shiny light to chase. Even tho he's a Democrat. That's just one example, but those outlets can and are critical of liberals. Where you never see Fox news be critical of a republican unless they buck the establishment like McCain.
    You’re chasing the shiny light of “bias!!!” as it relates to this particular story and what I said. My concern here isn’t in biased reporting; my concern isn’t that they weren’t even looking. I’m talking about investigative effort put forth. FOIA requests are a cornerstone of governmental reporting, and the drudgery of it as well. But that’s real journalism’s job. If Hot Air was making a big deal about a 50% difference I wouldn’t pay it much mind. Four times is significant.

    I would be happy to see an explanation based in fact that showed a legit reason for the difference in investigative work being done. Quite honestly, it’d be a relief.
    Based in fact? We both know that doesn't exist. I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.

    Again, most of those sources are perceived as liberal. I want to see all requests for the last 10 years. Other than that, I can't really make a judgement based on this information. It's too small of a sample and comparing an irrelevant apple to a consequential orange.
    I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.


    Yeah, Hondo's all about facts. That claim is pure bullshit, your specialty Hondo. Hillary's use of a private email server was uncovered during the Congressional investigation of the Bengahzi attack not by a FOIA request. You've heard about the Benghazi investigation haven't you Hondo? That's very same investigation that you Kunts claim found nothing.

    Are you stupid. I wasn't talking about her emails in regards to "I don't have a source..." Which is why you don't pull quotes out of context. Idiot.

    19]

    Initial awareness
    Edit
    As early as 2009, officials with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) expressed concerns over possible violations of normal federal government record-keeping procedures at the State Department under then-Secretary Clinton.[31]

    In December 2012, near the end of Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, a nonprofit group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, filed a FOIA request seeking records about her email. CREW received a response in May 2013: "no records responsive to your request were located."[32] Emails sent to Clinton's private clintonemail.com address were first discovered in March 2013, when a hacker named "Guccifer" widely distributed emails sent to Clinton from Sidney Blumenthal, which Guccifer obtained by illegally accessing Blumenthal's email account.[33][34][35] The emails dealt with the 2012 Benghazi attack and other issues in Libya and revealed the existence of her clintonemail.com address.[33][34][35]



    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy
    Don't blame me because you have the writing skills of a retard. And of course now you're lying. You claimed that most of the FOIA requests in Obama's second term went to Hillary and Bernie. December 2012 wasn't part of Obama's second term. So not only do you write the a retard you're a fucking liar.

    I will say that the second term of Obama he wasn't running anymore. The foia requests went towards Hillary and Bernie. I don't have a source for that but the Hillary email started as an foia request.
    You. Sir. Are seriously the dumbest motherfucker here. And that counts sledog.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_presidential_election

    Anything after the election, in November of 2012 is essentially his second term. Fuckstick. He has nothing else to run on after that time. Idiot.
    No. There is just you in a class all by yourself.
    Did you know that Obama "essentially" served out the beginning of Trump's first term in office?
    USMChawkRaceBannon
Sign In or Register to comment.