Are innuendos and assumptions a legitimate factor of honest journalism?

2016-12-14T21:26:41-05:00

No direct findings from the CIA or FBI have been announced, by either agency, stating the the POTUS-E was directly assisted in the election but yet liberal media reports that he has. Irresponsible journalism or Productive Assumptions?

Response by 1SG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2016 9:36 PM

2016-12-14T21:36:31-05:00

No "announcement" per se. But even The Hill, which generally leans right, is reporting on it:
http://thehill.com/homenews/news/310496-nbc-putin-personally-involved-in-undermining-us-election

Report: Putin 'personally involved' in undermining U.S. election

U.S. intelligence officials believe Russian leader Vladimir Putin was personally involved in interfering with the U.S. presidential election, two sources toldNBC News.

Response by 1SG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2016 9:41 PM

2016-12-14T21:41:39-05:00

At least one GOP leader has an opinion on it:
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/310497-graham-calls-for-crippling-sanctions-against-russia

Graham: I'd question the judgment of a Trump nominee who opposes Russian sanctions

Graham may be at odds with Trump's pick for secretary of State over Russia.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Dec 14 at 2016 9:42 PM

2016-12-14T21:42:13-05:00

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/dec/10/james-clapper-we-dont-have-good-insight-potential-/

James Clapper: We ‘don’t have good insight’ into alleged Russian hacking

As recently as Nov. 17, James Clapper, the nation’s top intelligence officer, told Congress his agencies “don’t have good insight” into a direct link between WikiLeaks and the emails supposedly hacked by a Russian operation from Democrats and the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Response by SFC George Smith made Dec 14 at 2016 9:42 PM

2016-12-14T21:42:30-05:00

its because the Alphabet soups are full of BHO appointees who want to Keep their Job If HRC were to Take charge... they are once again grasping at straws... just Like Steins Recounts...

Response by MSG Jay Jackson made Dec 14 at 2016 9:48 PM

2016-12-14T21:48:40-05:00

Yea like the same organizations called the anything right in the last 30 years!

Response by 1SG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2016 9:52 PM

2016-12-14T21:52:27-05:00

The activity is being gradually established. The intent, not so much:
"While the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) does not dispute the CIA's analysis of Russian hacking operations, it has not endorsed their assessment because of a lack of conclusive evidence that Moscow intended to boost Trump over Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton, said the officials, who declined to be named."
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-intelligence-idUSKBN14204E

Exclusive: Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking - sources

The overseers of the U.S. intelligence community have not embraced a CIA assessment that Russian cyber attacks were aimed at helping Republican President-elect Donald Trump win the 2016 election, three American officials said on Monday.

Response by PO2 Robert M. made Dec 14 at 2016 9:59 PM

2016-12-14T21:59:01-05:00

I can think when Trump "challenged" a foreign intelligence agency to "find out" what was on the Secretary of State's server. Therein lies the problem.......

Response by Capt Michael Greene made Dec 14 at 2016 10:05 PM

2016-12-14T22:05:34-05:00

Chief Sweezy, a whole lot of high level people say CIA has reached these conclusions, and NBC and NYT say they've been told by CIA. The WH says CIA has including this in the PDB and other briefings for a while.

Wash Post and NY Times and the Obama admin all reported that CIA and other agencies have been briefing about the hacking to the president--and certain leading congress critters--throughout the election. The GOP leaders in congress and the senate were briefed, and McConnell told Obama that if the CIA report went public, he would reject it and call it motivated by politics. However, McConnell recently reversed himself. Now both parties, and 40 members of the electoral college, want to see the CIA's evidence. But, however, it's SECRET! So BHO has ordered CIA to make a report that can be investigated.

Today CIA told NBC that they have a "high level of confidence" that Putin personally directed it.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Dec 14 at 2016 10:51 PM

2016-12-14T22:51:07-05:00

This is a rhetorical question, right?

Response by Capt Michael Greene made Dec 14 at 2016 11:03 PM

2016-12-14T23:03:12-05:00

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member - We responders took your topic seriously. But I've read your words throughout this topic. You didn't really ask a question, you just want to rant. Somehow you became distrusting of all media and all intel. You, sir, are the one that has a problem with bias.

Response by Sgt Joseph Baker made Dec 14 at 2016 11:16 PM

2016-12-14T23:16:19-05:00

Regardless, it all boils down to the Democrats had lots of dirty laundry and were not smart enough not to have it linked to the Internet with lame security. 1st rule in cyber security: don't put your most important data on insecure servers. Duh. If they had not manipulated their own party system to freeze out Sanders, and they didn't communicate in email like the trolls they are, none of those things could have ever came to light regardless of who exposed it. Besides, she lost the election when she insulted half the American population with her elitist comments about people not voting for her being irredeemable. People who worked for her campaign have now come out publicly to admit they watched the polling data among the undecided voters go into a death spiral with those comments. They tried to get her to retract but she would not. She didn't listen to her own husband who told her the same thing. Quit blaming everyone but the candidate for losing the election. Today's journalists are like reality TV. They know they have 6 seconds to gain your attention before you switch to the next channel so they do or say whatever it takes to grab you.

Response by Cpl Joshua Caldwell made Dec 14 at 2016 11:25 PM

2016-12-14T23:25:29-05:00

It went to crap when the reporters stared thinking of themselves as journalists. A reporter reports the news. A journalist tells you their thoughts as it they have any thoughts or understanding of the situation in the first place. I am of the firm belief that if you are too stupid to get the 700 on your SAT to qualify for an athletic scholarship, then they make you a journalism major.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2016 11:40 PM

2016-12-14T23:40:59-05:00

Normal news should be direct and factual, opinionated news is full of opinions based upon facts supporting such opinion and misinformation news is a mash of it all along with made up portions....with that said the consumer of news wants to be entertained more than they want to recieve "the facts" as they are in many cases it seems. This gives them the excuse as to why they should not use the tools at their disposal and do some poking around.....

Response by 1SG Al Brown made Dec 15 at 2016 8:07 AM

2016-12-15T08:07:42-05:00

No, they are not honest. But neither is leaking pieces of intelligence to the public for political reasons. Will either side stop this? Doubt it. It works every time.

Response by 1SG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 15 at 2016 12:49 PM

2016-12-15T12:49:58-05:00

GEN Michael Hayden, Bush 43's NSA and then CIA director has some interesting insights:
http://www.npr.org/2016/12/13/505366002/security-officials-question-russias-intention-on-election-hack

Security Officials Question Russia's Intention On Election Hack

Rachel Martin talks to retired General Michael Hayden, a former director with the CIA and NSA, about the CIA's claims of Russian influence on the U.S. election, and Donald Trump's rejection of that.

Response by GySgt David Weihausen made Dec 20 at 2016 6:20 PM

2016-12-20T18:20:22-05:00

This is classic mainstream media making assumptions and reporting them as fact without verifiable proof. They have moved the term "Objective reporting" into the category of oxymorons.