MSNBC Reporter Panel Complains Some Are Not Listening to Their Narrative

[GURPS]

Monday night news broadcasts were dominated by a Washington Post report that claims that President Trump may have disclosed classified information to top Russian officials in the Oval Office. Many in the media were quick to pounce on the report and condemn the President. On MSNBC’s The 11Th Hour, host Brian Williams and some of his guests bemoaned how some Americans weren’t buying into their narratives about the President over the last few days, including the day’s breaking news story.

“Jeremy, I've been thinking about you because of the time you spend thinking about and reminding people about our two bubbles,” Williams said, getting ready to tee up The New York Times’ Jeremy Peters. “Is this one skewing both ways? Is this a partisan looking story?” A disheartened sounding Peters responded with: “I think, Brian, it's shaping up to be that way.”

Peters’ analysis was little more than veiled jabs at Fox News, although he didn’t mention them by name, for not having the same narrative as the rest of the media:

I'm hesitant to draw any conclusions just a few hours after the story broke, but in the early cuts of the news cycle here, what you're seeing is are partisans taking—taking the same series of events and picking very different sets of facts out of those events to draw their conclusions.​

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb...-panel-complains-some-are-not-listening-their

 

[vraiblonde]

This is their problem: if they don't get their way, if whatever they're tantruming about is disregarded as the kookery it is, they think it's because nobody's listening. Like a toddler. Like that kid, "Linda, honey, listen to me..."

We've listened.
You're stupid.
Shut up and go away.

 

[SamSpade]

I tried to follow that story last night - because it was on all the major networks. I had on CNN and MSNBC and poked around.
I thought - wow - this must be big news - it must be front page news on all the websites.

Not really. Drudge had it buried pretty low. Even the Post dropped it below the fold pretty soon.
McMaster came out and said nope, didn't happen and I was there - thank you.

So who am I more inclined to believe? The people who were there - or an anonymous source who could not have been there?

I expected that the news sources would just let it stew until they knew more - but they didn't do that.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

I tried to follow that story last night - because it was on all the major networks. I had on CNN and MSNBC and poked around.
I thought - wow - this must be big news - it must be front page news on all the websites.

Not really. Drudge had it buried pretty low. Even the Post dropped it below the fold pretty soon.
McMaster came out and said nope, didn't happen and I was there - thank you.

So who am I more inclined to believe? The people who were there - or an anonymous source who could not have been there?

I expected that the news sources would just let it stew until they knew more - but they didn't do that.

Perhaps you missed the other thread, but Trump basically admitted to it.

Now begins the semantics portion of the argument from both sides where we argue what is classified information, and so on.

 

[GURPS]

Perhaps you missed the other thread, but Trump basically admitted to it.

Now begins the semantics portion of the argument from both sides where we argue what is classified information, and so on.

admitted what ........ the laptop bomb story has been the news since March

 

[vraiblonde]

Perhaps you missed the other thread, but Trump basically admitted to it.

Now begins the semantics portion of the argument from both sides where we argue what is classified information, and so on.

That IS the story: what is and is not classified information. No semantics involved - that's the basis for the whole story. The narrative from the Left is "Trump disclosed classified information to the Russians." If that information is in fact not classified, then the whole story goes to hell.

 

[Lurk]

That IS the story: what is and is not classified information. No semantics involved - that's the basis for the whole story. The narrative from the Left is "Trump disclosed classified information to the Russians." If that information is in fact not classified, then the whole story goes to hell.

In a rational world that might be true. But look at what Chris posted above. He entirely misinterpreted what Trump said to fit his twisted impression of all-that-is-Trump. And he'll defend it obnoxiously for as long as Trump is in the White House.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

In a rational world that might be true. But look at what Chris posted above. He entirely misinterpreted what Trump said to fit his twisted impression of all-that-is-Trump. And he'll defend it obnoxiously for as long as Trump is in the White House.

Feel free to look yourself. No one needs twist words. They are Trump's.

 

[Gilligan]

Me, I think that Trump should never have shared the intelligence about the advances, and source, related to exploding laptops. He should have kept it tight so that the bedwetting liberal people like Chris and Pitt and TJ, etc could mew and pew when another commercial aircraft is blown out the sky and we "could have" done something about it.

But that's just me.

 

[Lurk]

Feel free to look yourself. No one needs twist words. They are Trump's.

But they don't say what you believe they say.

 

[Hijinx]

But they don't say what you believe they say.

I suppose there are two sides to every story, but why does the liberal media always believe the bad side.
Not only the media but those who hate Trump are waiting in ambush at everything Trump says.

I guess I know the answer. They lost.
They would rather have Bill Clinton getting $500,000 dollar speech's from the Russians and Hillary selling more Uranium.