|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
Fake is fake and everybody knows the difference except the mainstream media .
Any takers ? Even liberals must recognize the futility of the news media maintaining the plague of falsehoods.
FAKE NEWS ALERT: Washington Post Misreports High Level State Department Resignations
* http://www.hannity.com/articles/hanpr-e … -15508707/
On Thursday morning The Washington Post reported that top State Department officials had resigned from their positions en masse. The story gave the impression that the mass-resignation had been in protest to the incoming Trump administration.
If you'll remember, Patrick Kennedy's most recent claim to fame is his proposal of a "quid pro quo" to convince the FBI to strip the classification on an email from Hillary Clinton’s server in October.
The breathless headlines that followed from the liberal outlets pushed the anti-Trump mass defection narrative:
SALON: Mutiny at Foggy Bottom: State Department management resigns en masse
THE ROOT: State Department Senior Management Team Resigns Instead of Working With Trump
JEZEBEL: The State Department's Senior Management Just Resigned En Masse
RAW STORY: The 'entire senior level' of State Department management just resigned to avoid working for Trump: report
However, despite The Washington Post's reporting and its parroting by the liberal media, these resignations did not occur as some spur of the moment protest to working with the Trump administration. In fact, the four staffers had been asked to resign by the incoming administration as part of an effort to "clean house" in the State Department.
DRAINING SWAMP 101!
CNN was forced to admit that Trump is doing exactly as he promised he would do as president.
They were famous for saying Trump would never be president along with the other fake news sites and channels...and their fake polls.
I read that story, and Sean Hannity is lying. Again. It did not say there was a mass resignation.
It simply said that the entire senior administration team of four officials had resigned together. Which they did.
If I want fake news, I'll just come here.
No, Sean Hannity is not lying, he does not do that.
"The State Department’s entire senior administrative team just resigned"
Sean said "en mass" to describe the false description in the titles.
SALON used "en mass"
RAW STORY: 'entire senior level'
Maybe re-read what was posted. Its in plain sight, so you seem to be up to the same old same old, nothing new. I know its hard to be objective for some, but it really is better than sticking ones head in the sand and pretending something isn't true.
"FAKE NEWS ALERT: Washington Post Misreports High Level State Department Resignations"
Your words, not mine. The WP did not "misreport" the resignations. The resignations took place. The people who resigned were the four top senior officials.
Jezebel is a dinky blog. Raw Story's headline is accurate -- it was the entire senior level. Salon is a liberal site and doesn't follow the same journalism standards of the Washington Post.
All of the above is true. Feel free to prove otherwise or keep claiming that my head is in the sand.
"The State Department’s entire senior administrative team just resigned"
* https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/jos … 725f97e06d
That is the article from Washington Post that Hannity reported on in his article that I posted here.
* http://www.hannity.com/articles/hanpr-e … -15508707/
"entire" ... is en mass "fake news"... its simply not true.
Still confused? Washington Post has been caught plenty of times publishing fake news, and have had to retract plenty of times for doing so. Bezos owns the WP and is a political Opposition News outlet, always has been. That's not to say they don't publish great articles at times, because they do...and I love it when they do. They have some very good writers, but the site can't be trusted for political bias reasons and just plain old BS. WP has been discredited right here in the forums even.
Its not worth arguing with you about it anymore.
So was it a mass exodus fake news story or were they fired by Trump?
The four (moles/hacks) State Department heads that I know of were asked to resign by the Trump Adm. They did resign because its a lot better than being fired. The entire staff did not depart en mass.
"mass exodus of senior Foreign Service officers who don’t want to stick around for the Trump era"
The fake news above implies they had a choice. They were not offered a job. Their resignations were suggested and accepted out of civility in a round about way, as is normal in this situation, when in fact they were canned. They got a pink slip and the Washington Post tried to paint it as some protest?
Well, of course, the entire senior administrative team of four people did resign as the article says. Are you saying they didn't?
In case it helps, I have added a link to the dictionary's definition of the word entire, which means "whole":
En masse means in a mass, all together and as a group:
In other words, the "whole" senior administrative team resigned "as a group".
But the dictionary must be wrong as well as every credible news organization in the U.S. Only Sean Hannity is right.
While we're at it, please don't post a link to an entirely different article that is labeled Opinion rather than the original. News article in an attempt to evade the point.
"Sean Hannity is not lying. He does not do that."
So you trust this guy to be 100% cast-iron honest, and yet practically EVERY journalist in the Western world is lying?
What makes you so sure this guy is telling the truth? Is it because you have solid evidence of that fact, or is it just because he says the things you want to hear?
Even liberals? There are self-proclaimed conservative news outlets. And then there are news outlets that tell conservatives things they don't always want to hear. If you want to call that liberal - fine. Many of us just want to hear what's happening. We'll take what we like and what we don't like - without labels.
Hello promisem, with Hannity's name involved, I almost didn't want to jump in, but... there might be a couple good points to make.
Are you saying Hannity lied about the "en masse" attribution to the Washington Post article? The article did say there was a "mass exodus."
There might be some spin in your statement too:
"It simply said that the [State Department's] entire senior administration team [senior level of management officials ] of four officials had resigned together. Which they did."
That is saying those four officials were the entire state department senior administration. You and I both know that is not true. So why did they say it? Wouldn't the article have been more truthful if it had said "almost an entire senior management team, (one of many)?" Rather than planting the implication that it was the State Department's entire senior team. That sounds like an alternative fact to me.
Then there is the; "... four officials had resigned together," part. Once again, I am sure you must have done some checking around and discovered the same stuff I did. Surely you saw the mentions of PAS tradition. And that asking for resignation letters from those folks, (political appointees),is a standard practice. Some letters are accepted, and some not. There is no mistake those four were the same as fired, but that is a long way from the implication cast by saying they resigned together. So, if these four resignation letters were accepted, is that the same as saying they resigned together? I don't think so. I think this could be another of those alternate facts.
But worst of all are all the attributions that source this article as; "The Washington Post reported..." They didn't report anything, the article was an 'Opinion piece!' Hell, we are probably as quilty for discussing it as factual reporting too. Geesh, citing an Opinion piece as an authority of fact... "... we both ought to be taken out and shot at dawn."
Hello, GA. I am mostly objecting to the opening statement:
FAKE NEWS ALERT: Washington Post Misreports High Level State Department Resignations.
If four high-level State Department employees resigned, which they did, then the Washing Post didn't "misreport" the event and therefore it isn't fake news.
The opinion piece is one of many news articles from numerous sources all saying that they resigned.
You say, "That is saying those four officials were the entire state department senior administration. You and I both know that is not true."
I said previously, "It simply said that the entire senior administration team of four officials had resigned together. "
Is that not true? But more to the point, did the Washington Post misreport the event and create fake news by saying there was a mass resignation of State Department employees?
The "mass exodus" reference is taken out of context. Here is the context: "part of an ongoing mass exodus of senior Foreign Service officers who don’t want to stick around for the Trump era."
Wikipedia is referencing. The Washington Post Alternate Facts Opinion. The Post has a long history of this sort of stuff. eg there was no deep voice, it wasnt Lovelace, it was a filament of Woodsteins imagination.
Hello again promisem, It looks like I might have to back-peddle a bit. Looking around some more, I did find anj earlier Washington Post, (WP), article that was a reporter's work. So yep, the Washington Post did report it after all.
But... for the rest I am even more committed.
This WP article left a strong impression that the resignations were the entire State department senior management, and that they were voluntary, and that they were targeted to make a statement about the Trump administration.
Do you disagree with this impression?.
To compare, there are prominent and credible sources that discuss the reality of what happened. The PAS, (political appointees), tradition explanation seems credible and logical to me, so that clashes with the WP's choice of wording, (ie. declined, or joined), that implied these four were making a purposeful voluntary act of quitting.
There were other points, but for me, that was a major flaw. What else did they spin? Those four were almost the entire senior management of one departmental team, but they were not the entire senior management team of the State Department.
To the point, the WP facts were mostly correct - standing alone, but in the context of how the story used them, they purposely created a false impression of those facts. New alternate facts?
Seems to me that it is past time to give spin and wording intended to give a false-to-fact impression as what it is: a lie. That may not be PC, and it may not be accepted policy in the political arena, but then neither am I.
With respect, I must disagree. The headline is conservative:
"Several senior diplomats resign as Trump admin takes shape"
So is the first paragraph and others:
"A handful of senior U.S. diplomats are resigning their posts during President Donald Trump’s first week on the job, creating more high-level openings that the new president must fill."
"Although none of the officials has linked his or her departure explicitly to Trump, many diplomats have privately expressed concern about serving in his administration, given the unorthodox positions he’s taken on many foreign policy issues."
Fake news is whatever news that is not supportive of the Trump regime, but that hardly makes that news inaccurate.
We're talking about the disintegration of the news media to - "National Enquirer " of real fact. The mainstream news media took to becoming the 'opposition party' in this entire election process - THAT should bother even those of you on the left !
Its been going on since before GW. The media continued the benghazi lies until.after re election. Then it was their usual the real news is old news song and dance. It wasnt Hillary vs Trump. It was NBC vs Trump and democrats and liberals know that and they are perfectly okay with that.
In case you haven't noticed, I'm in Australia. International media have no axe to grind - so why are British and Australian media, and every other media outlet in the civilised world, publishing "fake news" about Trump?
And if every report in the whole world is fake, where are you getting your facts from? Would you like to name your sources?
I have read the "spillover " of fake news being deciphered as honest reporting by foreign journalists in their reporting of US news , Christina Amapuur BBC for one is a staunch believer of American -leftist -Soros agenda news media or fake news .
If the media honesty scale is tilted left - the world reads it that way too !
So! Do you think Hillary Clinton will be prosecuted for her known crimes and those that have been found in other investigations? I believe they will have to assign a special prosecutor like Trump said he would do...because Jeff Session told Congress he would recuse himself from it and he personally did not say if it happens.
Seems to me George Soros and Hillary (and those guys) still control the eni-media - which are very skilled at fake news and brainwashing. Just my observation and that of many others.
Oh, watch the fangs come out now for exercising my free speech and opinion based on the what was asked and what was said and not said - using an original source.
Mainstream media doesn't always get it right, but that's due to lazy journalism, not a deliberate attempt to fool people. That's not what people are talking about when they talk about fake news.
Something like Alex Jones's Infowars is fake news because they deliberately put out stories that have no basis in reality, or they simply make up "alternative facts," whatever those are.
That's why you should get news from a wide variety of sources.
Good advice, now more than ever. Beware of any source that shamelessly flaunts a point of view: conservative or liberal.
"Not a deliberate attempt to fool people " where have you been for OVER ten years ?
One of the things the Opposition Media has lost by the State Dept. heads being forced to resigning is their insider hacks in the still held Clinton / Kerry State Department. Cleaning out the swamp!
Alex Jones' Infowars was attacked heavily during the campaign by Hillary and other politicians, and the Opposition Media...because that is their mandate to put out fake news and attack. That's still going on and will...and good people believe the dishonest bias without ever giving an honest news outlet the benefit of a doubt, or taking the time to see for themselves. Its really sad to see.
I don't need to defend Inforwars or Alex Jones, because it has become bigger than any of the Opposition Media outlets in viewership because people don't trust MSM to be honest, and know that outlets like Infowars and even MSM/Fox News are not pumping out fake propaganda. Fox News is now the leading MSM outlet, and doing fantastic since that hack/mole Megan Kelly left. That isn't just my opinion.
Infowars posted a real story about the State Department heads that debunked the fake news 'en mass' BS. I chose to post Sean Hannity's article here that debunked the fake news BS.
All four are career foreign service officers who have worked for both Republican and Democratic administrations.
Talk about BS ...
It's much important that the government give accurate information, don't you think?
We must be reading different websites and watching different news channels.
I don't see anyone proving the media are telling lies. I see plenty of people proving Trump is telling lies.
Like the mythical jobs from the pipeline, for instance, and the fact that he is an investor in the company building it. Or the size of the crowd (as if that even mattered, get over it). Or voter fraud. Or denying that he ever said anything nasty about the CIA. Or refusing to accept the information on Russian hackers. Or saying that his cabinet has the highest IQ of any cabinet ever. Or the fact that he said he'd divest his businesses, but he hasn't. Or the fact that he said he'd release his tax returns, but now he won't....there are so many, I'm exhausted just thinking about it.
I do love the latest video doing the rounds, where he talks about how women who are deeply, deeply troubled are the best in bed. of course, he says, you wouldn't want to be with them long-term, but for the short term...
Charming man. And that's not locker-room talk, that's on a TV interview, talking about 18-year-old Lindsay Lohan. And you wonder why women don't like him.
Come out of the phony rumor clouds and lower yourself into reality , I'm not talking soap opera stuff but the real world of politics and face book style ,fake news - I'm talking about reality -that the media has become an Opposition Party to reality !
President Trump signed Executive Order on Refugees
"“I’m establishing new vetting measures to keep radical Islamic terrorists out of the United States of America. We don’t want them here. We only want to admit those into our country who will support our country and love deeply our people.”
~ Trump said in a signing ceremony at the Pentagon
I think the Washington Post's Alternate Facts were more embarrassing than the truth. Made them look like quitters. Marlboro. No blindfold. I'm scared of the dark.
The leftist opposition party of " fake news" media should be thinking about how the media should be balanced for the best , for the best of the history your grandchildren will read about for one , Hitler controlled the media , Stalin , Lenin , Mao controlled the media - DO you really believe a media that is "on one side " manufacturing its own truth ,will still be there to report FOR you when events of historical importance comes down to the wire ?
Hitler controlled less than 3% of the media when he came to power.
Here we go again: a CNN contributor reported Fake News from a Reuters PARODY Twitter account. The account clearly stated it was a parody account, but that didn't stop the reporter from taking and using two fake names in their story on The Daily Beast.
Media analyst Mark Dice has the story. I love the way this guy breaks down the fake news and goes after them for false claims.
by Mike Russo63 minutes ago
How can Trump be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize when his is constantly working at dividing his own country? Ever since he was elected president, he has constantly called the Main Stream Media the "Fake...
by crankalicious8 months ago
Is this something Congress should do?And what exactly is fake news? While President Trump may complain about "fake" news, he continues to make demonstrably false statements at a rate that far exceeds anything...
by Credence216 months ago
To refer to the "press as the enemy of the American people' in the terms he did was the epitome of stupid. This was attacked by many GOP as attacking the very foundation of America Democracy, the Fourth Estate. So...
by Catherine Mostly17 months ago
Should it be Okay for a Christian to lie and create fake news about Hillary to pay rent & bills?A New York Times story titled, 'From Headline to Photograph, a Fake News Masterpiece' - a Christian bought a Christian...
by Randy Godwin4 months ago
As the Mueller investigation homes in on Donald Trump and his alleged collusion with our longtime adversary, namely Russia, it's come to light only Trump's advisor prevented him from firing Robert Mueller. Among the...
by Susie Lehto20 months ago
Office of Inspector General: 78 pages PDF https://cryptome.org/2016/05/state-oig- … emails.pdf Office of the Secretary: Evaluation of Email Records Management and Cybersecurity Requirements This is huge!...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.