ABC suspends Brian Ross for fake report
ABC News announced Saturday that Chief Investigative Correspondent Brian Ross had been suspended for four weeks without pay over an erroneous report concerning Michael Flynn:
During a live "special report" Friday morning, Ross reported that Flynn would testify that Donald Trump had ordered him to make contact with Russians about foreign policy while Trump was still a candidate. ABC was then forced to issue a "clarification" to Ross's report, saying that Trump's alleged directive came after he'd been elected president!
This was not the first time Ross has been misleading. There have been many other examples of Ross getting ahead of himself with false stories, (most likely due to his ideology), most notably, Ross reported in 2012 that Colorado movie theater shooter James Holmes may have had ties to the Tea Party movement.
Of course, the problem now for these progressive journalists is their need for "facts" to portray the Flynn case as they see it. They believe Flynn leads to Trump. They knew it all along, you see!
That is indeed a serious problem. Flynn lied about something that was perfectly legal. All of Flynn's conversations with the ambassador to Russia were perfectly legal during the transition period. It's certainly not a crime to communicate with an ambassador of a foreign country about foreign policy when you are the foreign policy adviser to the incoming president. Evidently Flynn must have believed it was his duty to conceal his discussions on foreign policy matters even from the FBI, nor did Flynn believe he needed legal counsel when he spoke to them. Obviously, nobody in the Trump transition team thought they were under surveillance. I think they are all a bit wiser now.
Mueller has had some success in bringing charges against individuals who have nothing to do with "collusion" or Russian interference in the 2016 election, but he is still far from delivering the result liberals have been ravenous for.
Somebody should tell Ross and his comrades in the media that we are still where we were a year ago - with no evidence of collusion between Donald Trump and Russia.
Tags
Who is online
37 visitors
ABC News
Where are all the secular progressive msm apologists now?
As of early Sunday morning, only one of them showed up, praising the msm for having to correct stories (corrections don't equate to headlines) and how well they punish their own (like Brian Williams, chief fabricator & once again chief anchor), with the usual slander against the other two news organizations, which publish news while all the Trump bashing goes on 24/7 at the msm.
Not when they have to be forced to do it.
What NON-MSM media are you talking about?
Cue the crickets.
I'm surprised they even bothered. They mislead all the time, a week doesn't go by that I don't read a headline that implies one thing while the actual article says another. They do this because they know most people will read the headline but not the article so by telling the truth in the article they are technically telling the truth but most of their readership is still being mislead by the lie in the headline.
No. A "journalist" who puts out a story based on a single source and an unreliable one at that, then nobody above him checked it out before it was released? Nothing to be admired there
Are the cable news organizations part of MSM?
Is the Wall Street Journal considered MSM?
If you don't know the answer, just think about which two national newspapers get quoted almost every day, or think about the 3 network news organizations which were once part of our daily lives. I'm sure you'll figure it out
The idea that an ABC report would lie about something so easily seen strikes me as silly. I have the feeling Ross meant to say that Trump was 'not president yet' and he described it in a wrong and careless way. Intentional lying? I seriously doubt it, because it was a virtual certainty that it would be caught, and an outfit like ABC cares about their reputation, whereas Gateway Pundit, Daily Caller, and Infowars and Conservative Tribune have no good reputation to care about and wouldnt make such a correction.
If that strikes anyone as 'whataboutism' that's fine. Then go ahead and stick it up your ass.
Newstalkers is once again taking a turn for the worse. Some of the comments from the right yesterday were pitiful and really drag down the level of 'discussion' on this site.
Of course, such an astute news reader as Ross knew what he was saying. He was lying, hoping somehow it was true. It is a sad and standing joke how much the MSM lies, fabricates, and covers up when it comes to what some called "news"
Comment removed for CoC violations [ph]
I haven't been on NV in any real sense since 2011, and never participated in the management of any nations.
Your comments are among the most silly and careless we see on NT. If anyone leaves it should be you.
Skirting the CoC [ph] If that becomes the norm on NT, (and we are getting there) God help Perrie because she is going to need it.
Fire Ross! If ABC wants to regain any of the credibility that they ever had they need to fire him.
At least one outlet is doing something to stop the false reporting and showing some integrity. Unlike some other outlets.
When things like this happen, my recurring thought is this:
If Donald Trump is so horrible and so heinous, there should be enough ironclad, factual information that could literally impeach him from office. I've been hearing over and over again that he is not qualified, not intelligent enough and lately, not SANE enough to do the job. Shouldn't that be enough? The only thing that Ross' actions do is make Trump's position stronger, since no one is stepping up with legitimate "impeaching" facts, and piling on bullshit in the interim.
A link to a leftists wet dream as "evidence"?
Juvenile discourse.
Putting up a link from a leftist congress critter of the bill he wrote and claiming it is evidence is juvenile.
First of all, I wasn't the one that characterized it as 'evidence'. That was you in you last juvenile comment.
Secondly, I posted a BILL that was filed in the House of the United States. Instead of attacking the author and me, why not address the freaking CONTENT, if you can.
I described the bill as garbage written by a leftist congress critter. That's all that needs to be said about the content of that garbage.
You posted the link in response to the claim of lack of evidence of crimes by Trump.
False.
I posted the link in response to:
Despite your willful misrepresentation, the BILL I posted contains 'legitimate 'impeaching' facts'.
They are not facts but speculation and opinions of a leftist congress critter.
As is your comment. I will give it the same value as you gave the Bill.
Reuters bank record subpoena next in line....