Was the media just punked?

[NightHawkeye]

Was the media just punked?

Today, a memo is leaked to the Associated Press that shows the administration is considering deploying the National Guard (which they can’t, by the way) to help round up and deport illegal immigrants.
...
The media has become a willing participant in the fake news world (or #VeryFakeNews world, if you’re CNN). They rush out stories to keep up with the demands of our news-on-demand society and can’t seem to fully comprehend the Trump phenomenon. Even those who oppose him are becoming sympathetic to him because of the hard-left lurch mainstream media has had in the last couple of years. They deserve to be punked every now and then.
​

 

[Saucy]

I think they are releasing false information to maybe find out who is leaking stuff?

 

[LoAmmi]

Was the media just punked?

Today, a memo is leaked to the Associated Press that shows the administration is considering deploying the National Guard (which they can’t, by the way) to help round up and deport illegal immigrants.
...
The media has become a willing participant in the fake news world (or #VeryFakeNews world, if you’re CNN). They rush out stories to keep up with the demands of our news-on-demand society and can’t seem to fully comprehend the Trump phenomenon. Even those who oppose him are becoming sympathetic to him because of the hard-left lurch mainstream media has had in the last couple of years. They deserve to be punked every now and then.
​

Let me see if I understand this.

A memo was leaked, presumably from somebody in a position where it's possible to have such a memo. It was reported that a memo was leaked saying this. And that's somehow fake.

2+2=5.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Let me see if I understand this.

A memo was leaked, presumably from somebody in a position where it's possible to have such a memo. It was reported that a memo was leaked saying this. And that's somehow fake.

2+2=5.

The question to be asked is, do you depend on the media to report reliable and accurate news ... or is the news media simply a rumor mill, little different from supermarket tabloids?

 

[Moral Orel]

So far the best you could say is that the White House is acting like Ashton Kutcher. Do you have some links to the news overreacting to the leak and reporting it as if it was true? Because all the links in your article just point to more conservative sites mocking the "MSM"...

One article does show the AP made a tweet (which someone else tweeted about), but tweets =/= the news, no matter how many fake news proponents want to believe they do.

According to one of the articles, though, it did really make it to the draft stage. So it seems most like another one of Glorious Leader's bonkers ideas made it further than it ought to have.

 

[Goonie]

The question to be asked is, do you depend on the media to report reliable and accurate news ... or is the news media simply a rumor mill, little different from supermarket tabloids?

Except that the memo is more than just a rumour. its existence is news not rumour.

 

[FanthatSpark]

MSM of any branch is only concerned about ratings/dollars . The biggest lie of all is omission . Read this and understand the deaths accrued in long term omitting.

Editors and producers are guilty of many sins. For my money, however, the biggest and lying-est are the big lies of omission that leave important facts unknown to the public for years and even decades, result in many deaths, and let the perpetrators off the hook both legally and historically.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/02/16/before-trump-the-media-loved-alternative-facts/

The problem is most people are just to busy to fact check and what is heard on TV is plain old fact because everybody else that we work with get the same lie and believe it too. If we are raising kids and working there is no time to fact check our news so lets believe it because it is easier and faster and the people that surround us are on the same "alternative reality" too.

In essence the alternative reality "IS" the reality to those that are just to busy to fact check. This is not to say all news is bad news in gathering facts especially news with high ratings. Look at Youtube and every other piece is on, about or people close to Donald trump. While this is going on check the upcoming Bills being passed right under our noses because our eyes and ears are tuned to the distraction of high rating Donald Trump.

So sad that, and a solution is now impossible because we have to chase that dollar too so our children can eat and have insurance etc... etc...

 

[Rion]

Let me see if I understand this.

A memo was leaked, presumably from somebody in a position where it's possible to have such a memo. It was reported that a memo was leaked saying this. And that's somehow fake.

2+2=5.

The memo exists, but doesn't say what the press claimed:
Read the full draft memo on National Guard immigration enforcement - The Boston Globe

The memo doesn't mention deportations, "mobilizing" the National Guard troops but asks state governors if they want to participate, and doesn't mention the number 100,000. More than likely those were bits given to someone to ferret out the leaks, if I had to guess.

 

[LoAmmi]

The memo doesn't mention deportations, "mobilizing" the National Guard troops but asks state governors if they want to participate, and doesn't mention the number 100,000. More than likely those were bits given to someone to ferret out the leaks, if I had to guess.

How many national guard troops are in the boarder states? Does that number add up to somewhere around 100,000? Would that make it correct to say that it could be "up to 100,000"? Math may be fake news now, I'll have to go check.

It talks about asking governors if they want to use troops to aid in this. In order to have troops aid in this, you would need to find a way to get them there. Perhaps through some sort of mobilizing. I see that it's about potentially expanding a program that identified removable aliens. In order to remove an alien, what process do you use? It might be deportations, but I'm not sure if the meaning of words are fake news now. I'll have to check.

 

[Rion]

How many national guard troops are in the boarder states? Does that number add up to somewhere around 100,000? Would that make it correct to say that it could be "up to 100,000"? Math may be fake news now, I'll have to go check.

It talks about asking governors if they want to use troops to aid in this. In order to have troops aid in this, you would need to find a way to get them there. Perhaps through some sort of mobilizing. I see that it's about potentially expanding a program that identified removable aliens. In order to remove an alien, what process do you use? It might be deportations, but I'm not sure if the meaning of words are fake news now. I'll have to check.

No need to carry water for the AP, dude; this memo may or may not be legit. Remember the memo that got Dan Rather fired? Like I said, if I were to guess, the AP was told about a fake version of this memo, for the purpose of ferreting out leaks.

 

[LoAmmi]

No need to carry water for the AP, dude; this memo may or may not be legit. Remember the memo that got Dan Rather fired? Like I said, if I were to guess, the AP was told about a fake version of this memo, for the purpose of ferreting out leaks.

Not carrying water, just saw you say that it didn't say such and such, and I'm showing you how it might have actually said such and such, just not in that exact way.

 

[Rion]

Not carrying water, just saw you say that it didn't say such and such, and I'm showing you how it might have actually said such and such, just not in that exact way.

Their words, not mine:

The Associated Press

✔@AP
BREAKING: Trump administration considers mobilizing as many as 100,000 National Guard troops to round up unauthorized immigrants.

Basically, what popped up was a draft memo that doesn't sound anywhere near as outrageous as the AP described it. Like I said, I don't think the AP was lying, I think the AP was repeating what their source told them, who was probably misinformed on purpose to ferret out the leaks. If we see aides suddenly resigning, I'll argue that I'm right.

 

[LoAmmi]

Their words, not mine:

The Associated Press

✔@AP
BREAKING: Trump administration considers mobilizing as many as 100,000 National Guard troops to round up unauthorized immigrants.

Basically, what popped up was a draft memo that doesn't sound anywhere near as outrageous as the AP described it. Like I said, I don't think the AP was lying, I think the AP was repeating what their source told them, who was probably misinformed on purpose to ferret out the leaks. If we see aides suddenly resigning, I'll argue that I'm right.

The memo seems to suggest that the administration is considering the idea of allowing governors to mobilize National Guard troops within their states (which may add up to 100,000) in order to enforce immigration policy, specifically naming in the memo identifying removable aliens. Now, were we to sum it up, what kind of sentence might look like?

 

[loveofourlord]

Considering all the raids last weekend with ilegals the idea that trump be doing this isn't all that odd.

 

[Uncle Siggy]

Was the media just punked?

And so were some of his detractors...

 

[Uncle Siggy]

Here Is The "Leaked" Memo Directing The National Guard To Arrest Illegal Immigrants | Zero Hedge

Sounds like a bunch of skulling just like you do for war games, bring up all possible scenarios then write an OP to deal with it...

 

[Uncle Siggy]

Was the media just punked?

Today, a memo is leaked to the Associated Press that shows the administration is considering deploying the National Guard (which they can’t, by the way) to help round up and deport illegal immigrants.
...
The media has become a willing participant in the fake news world (or #VeryFakeNews world, if you’re CNN). They rush out stories to keep up with the demands of our news-on-demand society and can’t seem to fully comprehend the Trump phenomenon. Even those who oppose him are becoming sympathetic to him because of the hard-left lurch mainstream media has had in the last couple of years. They deserve to be punked every now and then.
​

Don't know if you seen this or not or know who Brian Stelter is but it's from yesterday after Trumps presser...

Now, get this. Brian Stelter — (laughing) see if you can understand this. Brian Stelter — I had to write it down. He said that it’s obvious that Trump is watching the media too much, because he had all this criticism for the media, and he needs to stop watching the media and he needs to start doing his job because he’s responding way too much to the media, and he’s responding way too soon to the media. So he’ll watch the media and then he’ll tweet something and — can you believe that? The media guy at CNN basically says, “We think the president should watch less of us.” Well, why is that?

There’s two things at work here. Obviously the media would die to be able to prove they’re influencing presidential action. They would die if they could prove that. Second thing is, who are they doing these shows for? I mean, who are these media people doing these shows for? To say that the president is watching too much media, he’s responding too much to it and too soon, does that mean that there are questionable things in the media that the president ought not be responding to? And if that’s the case, why?

I mean, if everything you people in media are doing is up front and aboveboard and straight down the middle and you’re just doing the news, what’s wrong with anybody watching it and reacting to it? “Well, well, the president, he’s watching too much.” How can that be? It’s almost like saying, “He’s taking us too seriously.” Well, if you think that the president or anybody watching you is taking you too seriously, what does that say about what you’re doing? It’s tantamount to saying, “Gosh, he shouldn’t believe everything he sees here.” Well, why not?

It’s the cable news network, it’s CNN, it’s the truth, it’s whatever, you’re the cable news network of record. Why shouldn’t the president believe what he sees? “He’s responding too much. He’s responding too soon. He’s reacting way too much to the media.” Well, then there must be a reason why, must be a mistake to be doing so, why? Is ’cause what’s there is not true, is it because some of it’s just half-baked, is some of it you’re just making it up and having fun here, you don’t intend for some of it to be taken seriously? Why? Why should the president or anybody else not react to it?

 

[NightHawkeye]

Don't know if you seen this or not or know who Brian Stelter is but it's from yesterday after Trumps presser...

Now, get this. Brian Stelter — (laughing) see if you can understand this. Brian Stelter — I had to write it down. He said that it’s obvious that Trump is watching the media too much, because he had all this criticism for the media, and he needs to stop watching the media and he needs to start doing his job because he’s responding way too much to the media, and he’s responding way too soon to the media. So he’ll watch the media and then he’ll tweet something and — can you believe that? The media guy at CNN basically says, “We think the president should watch less of us.” Well, why is that?

There’s two things at work here. Obviously the media would die to be able to prove they’re influencing presidential action. They would die if they could prove that. Second thing is, who are they doing these shows for? I mean, who are these media people doing these shows for? To say that the president is watching too much media, he’s responding too much to it and too soon, does that mean that there are questionable things in the media that the president ought not be responding to? And if that’s the case, why?

I mean, if everything you people in media are doing is up front and aboveboard and straight down the middle and you’re just doing the news, what’s wrong with anybody watching it and reacting to it? “Well, well, the president, he’s watching too much.” How can that be? It’s almost like saying, “He’s taking us too seriously.” Well, if you think that the president or anybody watching you is taking you too seriously, what does that say about what you’re doing? It’s tantamount to saying, “Gosh, he shouldn’t believe everything he sees here.” Well, why not?

It’s the cable news network, it’s CNN, it’s the truth, it’s whatever, you’re the cable news network of record. Why shouldn’t the president believe what he sees? “He’s responding too much. He’s responding too soon. He’s reacting way too much to the media.” Well, then there must be a reason why, must be a mistake to be doing so, why? Is ’cause what’s there is not true, is it because some of it’s just half-baked, is some of it you’re just making it up and having fun here, you don’t intend for some of it to be taken seriously? Why? Why should the president or anybody else not react to it?