It's one thing looking into Trump's campaign team - or other teams associated with him - but it's another thing altogether looking into the man himself. Nothing Olberman said lead me to the latter conclusion.

The idea that there is "a grand jury now looking into Trump", while extremely appealing to me, is a big stretch. Heads might roll, but I'd say any politician in his position would be happy to throw absolutely anyone under that bus to save themselves. I really wish I could say it was just him that would do so.

@newtboy
you misunderstood.

respectable investigative journalists gain that respect by being consistent with their reporting.

chris hedges is such a journalist.

but,by your metric,him being on RT negates that respect.now this is an assumption on my part,but i am using your words to come to that assumed conclusion.you have yet to agree or disagree with what chris hedges is saying,choosing instead to attack the medium in which he is saying it.this is your right,i just happen to disagree with you on this matter.

i refer back to one of my original comments,and a point i tried (and i guess failed?) to reiterate:discernment is the key.

so in a sense..yes..it is our responsibility to do our due diligence to vette the veracity of an investigative reporter.

those "reporters" who shill for either the democrats or republicans reveal themselves as the whores they are fairly quickly.

demagogues can almost be instantly identified due to their constant appeals to emotion.(keith olbermans new youtube channel from GQ "the resistance" comes to mind).

and reporters who are simply bad or lazy are quickly revealed as well.by other reporters.

let's take @bcglorf review of chomsky,and how chomsky is singular in his constant criticism of american foreign policy and asks the question "why can't he,just for once,speak on the positives that america has done in the world,or speculate on what could have happened had american not intervened in third world country A or B".(paraphrased)

now this is not an entirely unfair question,and in chomsky's books..he does address the very specifics that bcglorf would like to see chomsky address,but in lectures you are lucky to get a sentence in regards to such subjects.

but notice that while bcglorf would like to see chomsky speak in more broad terms,he never once questions the veracity of the details chomsky is laying down.

do you know why?
because chomsky does his homework,and backs up everything he says.

bcglorf respects chomsky for this,while simultaneously wishing he changed the channel once in awhile.

bcglorf utilized discernment to come to the conclusion that chomsky is a worthy,if infuriating,read/listen.

i do not mean to be speaking for Bc,and maybe i am missing the mark by a long shot using him as an example (if i did,please forgive Bc).

but my basic point is that we ALL discriminate and discern using our own subjective tools,our experiences and ultimately our understandings.

the problem here,and it is the underlying message on this thread,is confirmation bias.

we all know about this,and this election cycle REALLY brought this up to the forefront.

what i find interesting,and always makes me giggle,is how people will point to the "mainstream media" as an outlet for:propaganda,fake news,biased and slanted news ..but..it is NEVER the news THEY consume.the news THEY consume is hard hitting journalism.

so when i see people dismiss a piece that may happen to be on a questionable outlet..i laugh..because MOST outlets are ALL questionable.

so yes my friend,it is up to us to discern what is valid and what is bullshit.secondary sources help.concrete,trackable sources help and discussing and talking with one another is probably the greatest help of all.

but if you reside in an echo chamber,and everybody is just smelling each other farts.then some information may come as a shock.

my faith dictates my politics.
i am a dissident,and a radical.
the dynamic is always "power vs powerlessness",and i am always on the side of the powerless.

so it should be no surprise that on my list are people such as chomsky or hedges.

because they criticize power.

Hey, looks like political media coverage is getting fun again. So much angry shouting, I haven't seen that since George W.'s time in office.
I just hope Keith Olberman doesn't get a new job, I enjoyed his talking whale too much.

Well he does say he has no 'smoking gun'.

The thing is, nothing he said is proof, but everything he said follows logical steps and a chain of verifiable evidence to a conclusion, which cannot be said of the 1001 supposedly 'disqualifying' offenses the GOP claims Clinton's been party to. Olberman's story is exactly what investigative reporters are supposed to do and exactly what they've been failing to do in the US for decades now.

How come we're just finding out about Trump's past rapey comments now? Why wasn't the media asking those Miss Teen USA contestants about their experiences until this week? The media has fallen flat and Olberman is one of the few trying to prop it up again. Hell, he's not even a real journalist, he's a sports reporter. Maybe that's why he missed the part in Journalism school about rolling over for big money and special interests like a lap dog.

His conclusions may be questioned, but he is clear from the report they are HIS conclusions, not verifiable facts. I see nothing wrong with that.

I wouldn't in any way suggest that Olberman's credibility is unassailable, however i wouldn't put it one iota above wikileaks anymore.

Your own fairly strong bias not withstanding, i completely understand why wouldn't trust government bodies. However Greenwald's article (as much as i got through) seem to hing entirely on that premise that you can't prove this all hatches from some shadowy russian agency or from the desk of Putin himself. And on that he is probably right, even if US intelligence has proof they'd like not publicly air it.

But to ignore the body of trump's comments, people who've worked for him, his own dealings and associations, isn't 'helping' either. And to do it you have to really want to believe in an organization which increasingly fails to meet its promises and seems to be operating under its own agenda, and a man who seems far more interested in promoting his brand.

To me the point of the video is to demonstrate how easily it is to manipulate Trump, and certainly nothing i saw in that article you posted dissuades me from that.

Argument pro plain incompetence/stupidity: https://theintercept.com/2016/10/11/in-the-democratic-echo-chamber-inconvenient-truths-are-recast-as-putin-plots/

On a personal note: Olberman throwing accusations at foreign governments without solid evidence while claiming that WikiLeaks "hacks Podesta's email" is not helping his credibility. He's always been prone for exaggeration, but at a time when your military is bombing people in nearly a dozen countries and you're fighting a proxy-war against a nuclear-armed superpower in Syria, going off on an almost McCarthy-ite rant is not helping.

Yeah... I'm not condoning what happened, but I'm with @dystopianfuturetoday. Could have just been a freudian slip or a mis-read. Happens to me all the time when I read in class.

Besides, I've watched this show over the years. It's the last place I'd expect a big slant or some slight of hand that might ruin the shows integrity. It's a dull show with slow moving, methodical commentary/interviews. A far cry from Hannity or Olberman.

still, cenk's fake falsetto is more annoying than informative.
same goes for olberman.

It's always amusing when Prog-Lib-Dytes start eating each other.

Yeah, it's weird. His douchebaggery slipped under my radar, maybe because I tended to agree with his critiques and observations.

Well - there's a list of others I can give you who are all equally huge d-bags. Just run down the roster of so-called 'journalists' MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, the AP, NYT, USA Today, FOX... And hey - while we're at it throw in the roster of psuedo-journalists posuers on all the blogs & websites. Not to mention all the politicians who play revolving-door journalists. Basically every news outlet you care to name is staffed to the man with 99.9999% smarmy, arrogant, closed-minded, self-important douches who think the world revolves around them and who are so biased and agenda driven that they cannot be trusted to recite a farm report or the local weather - let alone national news.

Olberman was perhaps one of the most exaggerated of the lot, but not by much. And Bill Maher (a staple of the Videosift) is only two hairs and some air away from Olberman. Intellectually they are the same person. News isn't news anymore. It's become increasingly thinly disguised propoganda, and I don't trust a single word of it.

Case in point. This morning I was highly amused to be flipping channels as the Morning "News" shows started up. ABC, CBS, NBC... EERY SINGLE ONE of them started with the exact same thing... Obama's "Job Report" and how things were looking fantastic. I literally just kept rotating through all three channels without stopping, and it was almost the EXACT same words being parroted at the exact same time with the exact same interpretation. They didn't question anything. They just recited Obama's press release flack on it. They ignored the fact that non-working Americans are at an all-time high. They ignored the fact that jobs were only HALF of what was 'projected'. Nope. Just three completely identical, laughably positive "120,000 new jobs!" stories all being repeated almost verbatim. That isn't news. That is propoganda - and it's creepy just how in lock-step these mental midgets are.

I have been a fan of Hedges' work for awhile now, but lately, I've been losing his thread...

The woman at the end of this clip -- who I remember from her interview with Keith Olberman -- is the reason for my upvote.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by bareboards2.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^alien_concept:
Olberman should have given her a much better send off than that! She deserved a fucking standing ovation for how she put all that across.
@Yogi I think it's less that they're confused and threatened and more that they just do not give a fuck about true justice anymore. Because all of these permits and laws have been put in place cloak and dagger style right under our noses and there is very little any of us are going to be able to do about it. This was a long con and it's paying off nicely for them

I was reading about this dude Adrian Schoolcraft today. I had heard about his story but it's WAY worse than I thought it was. We should really be looking at our Police much more closely.


I heard Adrian Schoolcraft on NPR today.
http://videosift.com/video/NYPD-cop-records-evidence-of-quotas-Retaliation

>> ^alien_concept:

Olberman should have given her a much better send off than that! She deserved a fucking standing ovation for how she put all that across.
@Yogi I think it's less that they're confused and threatened and more that they just do not give a fuck about true justice anymore. Because all of these permits and laws have been put in place cloak and dagger style right under our noses and there is very little any of us are going to be able to do about it. This was a long con and it's paying off nicely for them


I was reading about this dude Adrian Schoolcraft today. I had heard about his story but it's WAY worse than I thought it was. We should really be looking at our Police much more closely.

Olberman should have given her a much better send off than that! She deserved a fucking standing ovation for how she put all that across.

@Yogi I think it's less that they're confused and threatened and more that they just do not give a fuck about true justice anymore. Because all of these permits and laws have been put in place cloak and dagger style right under our noses and there is very little any of us are going to be able to do about it. This was a long con and it's paying off nicely for them

Regarding interview technique: Fox News take note ...
Ask questions.
Wait for guest to answer
Do not stop them if they are answering the question.
Stop them if they aren't answering.
Ask follow up question based on response or,
Ask next question.
If finished early pose counterclaims and ask for defense.

It's pretty easy.

Great work Olberman!