Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s top IT aide was arrested Monday

[Martin Hash]

If you are convinced that journalists in the MSM are maliciously pushing an ideological narrative, why even concern yourself with whether or not they are running a story?

Exactly. I do NOT read anything sourced from CNN, MSNBC, The Young Turks, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, or The Washington Post. Pure, unadulterated hackery. And there is never a link on Google News that doesn't source them, so you know Google is totally compromised. USA Today & Reuters are also in the bag. Interestingly, I will read a NEWS piece from FOX; their NEWS has always been unbiased, what little they have of it. Forget Slate, Politico, Huffington Post or any of that other Progressive crap, but they at least acknowledge they're partisan pieces of shit.

p.s. INFOWars? You gotta be fuckin' kiddin'

[AverageJoe]

He has been all over thos story for months. Where are the Russia Russia Russia bitches? Suddenly Pakistan it's crickets.

Yup, if this had been a GOP or Trump aide this would be frontpage, 24/7 coverage of every aspect of this. But it's DNC, so little to no MSM coverage.

And news organizations are still scratching their heads on why the public has next to zero trust in them anymore.

My man, average joe has been red pilled.

Clubby, when haven't I said this? Make no mistake, if this was the GOP, I would be here saying the exact same thing. I have no trust of either party or the news. I have even gone so far as to deregister as a 20+ year Independent to No Party Affiliation. I'm sick of all their shit but most folks don't give a crap unless it's "the other side doing it".

[The Conservative]

Now, do you mean your Woodwards, your Bernsteins, the like... or do you mean your Hearsts?

Do we really think the change in how investigative journalism unfolds these days is the fault of individual journalists?

Either way, if I've said it once, I've said it a million times: It was a mistake to teach the peasantry to read.

Well, I think a more educated population is better, what the problem is that we are dealing with a barely educated population, and that is dangerous.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

If you are convinced that journalists in the MSM are maliciously pushing an ideological narrative, why even concern yourself with whether or not they are running a story?

Exactly. I do NOT read anything sourced from CNN, MSNBC, The Young Turks, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, or The Washington Post. Pure, unadulterated hackery. And there is never a link on Google News that doesn't source them, so you know Google is totally compromised. USA Today & Reuters are also in the bag. Interestingly, I will read a NEWS piece from FOX; their NEWS has always been unbiased, what little they have of it. Forget Slate, Politico, Huffington Post or any of that other Progressive crap, but they at least acknowledge they're partisan pieces of shit.

p.s. INFOWars? You gotta be fuckin' kiddin'

You're anti-Reuters too?

I'll admit, they had a real whiff trying to bring their polling data in line with other pollsters... but I really get the impression that was an honest mistake.

[Martin Hash]

You're anti-Reuters too?

I'll admit, they had a real whiff trying to bring their polling data in line with other pollsters... but I really get the impression that was an honest mistake.

I kept my Reuters feed, I got rid of the others, but they're so anti-Trump, it taints everything else.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Now, do you mean your Woodwards, your Bernsteins, the like... or do you mean your Hearsts?

Do we really think the change in how investigative journalism unfolds these days is the fault of individual journalists?

Either way, if I've said it once, I've said it a million times: It was a mistake to teach the peasantry to read.

Well, I think a more educated population is better, what the problem is that we are dealing with a barely educated population, and that is dangerous.

Funny, that is exactly what the coastal, liberal elites think the problem is!

[SuburbanFarmer]

It's as if the profit motive doesn't work with objective journalism. Or medicine.

[DBTrek]

Did Hash just say his only source of information is FOXNews?

[PartyOf5]

Don't need journalists at all, dishonest or otherwise, to determine (on my own) what is true. The problem is that digging through a lot of crap to find the things I want to be true feels an awful lot like digging through a lot of crap to find the truth.

So it's not unanswerable as you suggested before, it's just a lot of work.

If you are convinced that journalists in the MSM are maliciously pushing an ideological narrative, why even concern yourself with whether or not they are running a story?

I wish they would be more honest and do what their actual jobs are supposed to be. At this point they've turned themselves into reality television. It's concerning because a lot of people still take these outlets at their word and believe they are being given the whole story by these outlets.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

You're anti-Reuters too?

I'll admit, they had a real whiff trying to bring their polling data in line with other pollsters... but I really get the impression that was an honest mistake.

I kept my Reuters feed, I got rid of the others, but they're so anti-Trump, it taints everything else.

Most of their appearance anti-Trumpism, I believe, comes from the fact that they are report a lot on how Europe is reacting to Trump, but it isn't really editorialized.

Dang... I don't know why I am so vigorously pro-Reuters all of the sudden.