Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 29

Thread: How The MSM Covered Up Fast and Furious

  1. #1
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,289

    How The MSM Covered Up Fast and Furious

    Interesting read...

    [url]http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/04/16/Exclusive-Fast-and-Furious[/url]

    [QUOTE]
    [B]How The MSM Covered Up Fast and Furious[/B]



    by Ben Shapiro 23 hours ago [URL="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/04/16/Exclusive-Fast-and-Furious#comments"][/URL]
    [B]In [URL="http://www.amazon.com/Fast-Furious-Bloodiest-Shameless-Cover-Up/dp/1596983213"]Katie Pavlich’s devastating new expose[/URL] of the Eric Holder Justice Department-approved Fast and Furious operation, Pavlich doesn’t just expose the Obama administration. She exposes the mainstream media for what they are: tools of the Democratic Party, and of the White House.[/B]


    As Pavlich recounts, the first mainstream media outlet to report on Fast and Furious was CBS [I]Evening News[/I], which aired a report by Sharyl Attkinson. She stated that the scandal itself was so awful that “some insiders say it surpasses the shoot-out at Ruby Ridge and the deadly siege at Waco.” She pointed out that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives had been pushing through the sale of guns to Mexican drug cartels, and that gun shops had even tried “to stop the questionable sales, but ATF encouraged them to continue.”

    When the Obama administration saw Attkinson’s report, they reacted with utter fury. Officials from the administration screamed at her; as Pavlich reports, Justice Department communications director Tracy Schmaler called her up to yell at her. White House spokesman Eric Schultz “reportedly directed a barrage of expletives toward her.” Attkinson said that the White House and Justice Department labeled her “not reasonable” – as opposed to other press outlets.

    From their perspective, that was correct – Attkinson wasn’t reasonable because she wasn’t parroting the party line. The rest of the media, however, was only too happy to do so. As Pavlich writes, “The [I]New York Times [/I]and [I]Washington Post[/I] weren’t just ‘reasonable,’ they seemed to act as press officers for the Obama administration.”

    [I]Times[/I] reported Charlie Savage penned a column in which he depicted Republicans as narrow-minded thugs out to get innocent babe-in-the-woods Attorney General Holder. The name of the piece: “Under Partisan Fire Eric Holder Soldiers On.” Meanwhile, in June 2011, the [I]Washington Post[/I] printed an editorial decrying the “paranoia” of the National Rifle Associations and the “gun rights lobby,” even railing against them for fighting “against virtually every proposal to empower the bureau to better track and crack down on illegal firearms.”

    Shockingly, the media covered for the Obama administration even when they unwittingly reported the truth. On December 15, 2010, the same day that Officer Brian Terry was murdered using a weapon sold via Fast and Furious, the [I]Washington Post[/I] wrote a piece blasting border gun shops for dealing guns to sources south of the border. “What is different now, authorities say, is the number of high-powered rifles heading south … and the savagery of the violence,” the [I]Post [/I]reported, neglecting to mention the fact that these gun dealers were working with the ATF to supply the guns. In fact, these gun dealers were stabbed in the back by ATF, which quietly funneled information about them to the [I]Post[/I], showing disproportionate selling of guns south of the border without telling the [I]Post[/I] that the dealers were hand-in-glove with the government the entire time.

    Then, of course, there was the backlash from the extreme left once Fast and Furious broke. [I]Mother Jones[/I] called it “one of the right’s latest conspiracy theories”; Talking Points Memo mocked the claim that the Obama administration had designed Fast and Furious as a gambit to outflank Second Amendment advocates “outlandish.” Jon Stewart said such theories were “f------ crazy.” Rachel Maddow stated that it was all “the insane paranoid message from the NRA.” Her MSNBC colleague Chris Matthews said the theories sprang from a “strain of the crazy far right.” And, of course, David Brock’s Media Matters, which was coordinating regularly with the Obama administration, said it was all “hysterical rhetoric.”

    As it turned out, they were all deliberately obfuscating the truth. As Pavlich reports in [URL="http://www.amazon.com/Fast-Furious-Bloodiest-Shameless-Cover-Up/dp/1596983213http://www.amazon.com/Fast-Furious-Bloodiest-Shameless-Cover-Up/dp/1596983213"]Fast [U]and[/U] [U]Furious[/U][/URL], there can be no doubt that this scandal began and ended with the Obama administration’s willful attempt to ram its anti-gun agenda down American throats. And if Americans had to die – and if the media had to cover up for the administration – that didn’t matter one whit to Obama and his cronies. All that mattered was the scam.
    [/QUOTE]

  2. #2
    The author of this book is the Townhall.com editor and the article about her book is from a columnist for Townhall.com. :zzz:

  3. #3
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,289
    [QUOTE=cr726;4437276]The author of this book is the Townhall.com editor and the article about her book is from a columnist for Townhall.com. :zzz:[/QUOTE]

    Once again attacking the author rather than the points. Fine job, at least you are consistent.

  4. #4
    [QUOTE=Trades;4437294]Once again attacking the author rather than the points. Fine job, at least you are consistent.[/QUOTE]

    A columnist who works with the author writes a column about her book, a book that is a whopping 200 pages, there better be pictures!

    Writing a book about an investigation that isn't over yet it's great journalism, sensationalize what she doesn't grasp, assumptions galore.

  5. #5
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,289
    [QUOTE=cr726;4437301]A columnist who works with the author writes a column about her book, a book that is a whopping 200 pages, there better be pictures!

    Writing a book about an investigation that isn't over yet it's great journalism, sensationalize what she doesn't grasp, assumptions galore.[/QUOTE]

    The article isn't about the investigation it is about the way the media handled the investigation and how the government handled the media.

    Strike 2!

  6. #6
    [QUOTE=Trades;4437304]The article isn't about the investigation it is about the way the media handled the investigation and how the government handled the media.

    Strike 2![/QUOTE]

    It's about the book.

  7. #7
    if cbs is the democrats news outlet, then surely foxnews does the same but for republicans.

    rather than to point out the cbs twist, everyone (democrats and republicans and mods) should be enraged that our media doesnt report the news anymore but merely spews propoganda. how is al jazera any worse? they arent. its sad....

    but that being said, op fast and furious was just a huge black eye on obama and our AG

  8. #8
    [QUOTE=Trades;4437304]The article isn't about the investigation it is about the way the media handled the investigation and how the government handled the media.

    Strike 2![/QUOTE]


    The book is the main source of the article. At least 3 mentions:


    [QUOTE]As Pavlich reports in Fast and Furious[/QUOTE]

  9. #9
    [QUOTE=cr726;4437348]The book is the main source of the article. At least 3 mentions:[/QUOTE]

    I don't think you quite understand how to function among others when discussing something...

    Point out what you feel is an inaccuracy in the post and elaborate...

    If you feel the book and the author are flawed, tell us why you feel that way... Does she have an axe to grind? What in the OP can you refute to prove so?

    We learned this in middle school debating other 10 and 11 year olds... I don't know what you were doing at the time but it obviously wasn't learning...

  10. #10
    [QUOTE=AlwaysGreenAlwaysWhite;4437356]I don't think you quite understand how to function among others when discussing something...

    Point out what you feel is an inaccuracy in the post and elaborate...

    If you feel the book and the author are flawed, tell us why you feel that way... Does she have an axe to grind? What in the OP can you refute to prove so?

    We learned this in middle school debating other 10 and 11 year olds... I don't know what you were doing at the time but it obviously wasn't learning...[/QUOTE]

    Yea, according to the book the Obama Admin started Fast and Furious as a way of going after the gun laws. Its a big conspiracy that hasn't done anything close to what she states. :zzz: Once again, we get to hear "Obama is going to take your guns". Fast and Furious was a boondoggle and the current admin didn't create this type of investigation.

  11. #11
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Farmingdale, NY
    Posts
    2,523
    Every news organization led with this scandal when it broke - there was no "MSM" cover up.

    [QUOTE]Then, of course, there was the backlash from the extreme left once Fast and Furious broke. Mother Jones called it “one of the right’s latest conspiracy theories”; Talking Points Memo mocked the claim that the Obama administration had designed Fast and Furious as a gambit to outflank Second Amendment advocates “outlandish.” Jon Stewart said such theories were “f------ crazy.” Rachel Maddow stated that it was all “the insane paranoid message from the NRA.” Her MSNBC colleague Chris Matthews said the theories sprang from a “strain of the crazy far right.” And, of course, David Brock’s Media Matters, which was coordinating regularly with the Obama administration, said it was all “hysterical rhetoric.”[/QUOTE]

    These people were saying this President wasn't engaged in a massive conspiracy to incite gun violence on the border as a means to bring gun control to America.

    How is that a cover up?

  12. #12
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,575
    [QUOTE=Trades;4437304]The article isn't about the investigation it is about the way the media handled the investigation and how the government handled the media.

    Strike 2![/QUOTE]

    You are wasting key strokes. Without government..he could never function in the real world.

  13. #13
    [QUOTE=southparkcpa;4437645]You are wasting key strokes. Without government..he could never function in the real world.[/QUOTE]

    LOL, you have no clue. FYI, my wife's company with over 1k employees is about to give a employee another job within their company after failing the last two and its not a union job, but you have your hand on the pulse of American companies.

  14. #14
    [QUOTE=SafetyBlitz;4437642]Every news organization led with this scandal when it broke - there was no "MSM" cover up.



    These people were saying this President wasn't engaged in a massive conspiracy to incite gun violence on the border as a means to bring gun control to America.

    How is that a cover up?[/QUOTE]

    done in 11

  15. #15
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    20,541
    [QUOTE=Trades;4437224]Interesting read...

    [url]http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/04/16/Exclusive-Fast-and-Furious[/url][/QUOTE]

    MSM? Ministry of Truth is way more accurate.

  16. #16
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    8,285
    [QUOTE=SafetyBlitz;4437642]Every news organization led with this scandal when it broke - there was no "MSM" cover up.
    [/QUOTE]

    This is an outright and blatant falsehood. And when they did get around to covering it, much of it was in the context of flat-out character assassination pieces on Darrell Issa, rather than on the reality that there are likely hundreds of murders that have been committed with these guns paid for with our tax dollars and given outright to the Sinaloa cartel.

  17. #17
    Holder/Obama wanted for Murder in Mexico/USA. 2 Pigs cut from the same fabric!

  18. #18
    [QUOTE=shakin318;4439452]This is an outright and blatant falsehood. And when they did get around to covering it, much of it was in the context of flat-out character assassination pieces on Darrell Issa, rather than on the reality that there are likely hundreds of murders that have been committed with these guns paid for with our tax dollars and given outright to the Sinaloa cartel.[/QUOTE]

    i have to agree with my mortal enemy


    not so sure it was any kind of "coverup" though. i think these kids of scandals are not very newsworthy these days when kim kardashians dresses seem to be what is important to everyone

  19. #19
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    8,285
    [QUOTE=dickkotite;4439521]i have to agree with my mortal enemy
    [/QUOTE]

    Enemy? Dude, it's a discussion forum.

  20. #20
    [QUOTE=shakin318;4439528]Enemy? Dude, it's a discussion forum.[/QUOTE]

    oh lighten up sweety


    god your so angry

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us