jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (4 posts)

How do you feel about the establishment media pulling so hard for Hillary Clinto

  1. aasl profile image79
    aaslposted 18 months ago

    How do you feel about the establishment media pulling so hard for Hillary Clinton?

  2. tamarawilhite profile image91
    tamarawilhiteposted 18 months ago

    Their purpose is to watch those with power, and instead, they are propagandists FOR one particular political party. It is a betrayal of their purpose.
    The watch dogs have become lap dogs for the Democrats.

    1. Dont Taze Me Bro profile image62
      Dont Taze Me Broposted 18 months agoin reply to this

      Well said & is more and more obvious everyday,leaked emails they can't cover up anymore.Just imagine what Democrats would be saying (and doing) were the media shilling for the Republican candidate, secretly emailing debate questions, etc.

  3. bradmasterOCcal profile image28
    bradmasterOCcalposted 18 months ago

    The latest is the attack on Trump and women coming out trying to smear him in the final weeks before the election. This is a desperate move by the MSM and the liberals behind them. They were unsuccessful with all their attacks on Trump, including the Russia implications.
    Now, they are going to the past to try and get something to stick on Trump. It doesn't matter that JFK and Bill Clinton were known to be Misogynists both in and out of office. Now, they are going after Trump, who is a choir boy compared to these two womanizers.

    Yet, no one seems to know about Hillary Clinton's love affairs, and what she was doing  when she was fixing Bill's pr about his impeachment. And actually, Bill Clinton did have a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

    It is an old tactic for the liberals, and make no mistake the MSM is run by liberals, to attack with no holds barred when it is against opponents of the liberals, while ignoring anything about the liberal politicians, or even democrat politicians. Liberals can even make conservative Democrats look better.

    When the democrats have a presidential candidate that has been in War, or even the Military and the republicans don't, they make that an important election issue. But when the reverse is true, the military background is not important.

    This year it was a professional politician, Clinton, against an outsider, so of course they are focusing on Clinton's political experience. They don't care that Clinton has accomplished nothing in her political career, and in fact with Benghazi, Libya, Syria, and her private email server having classified emails, it is a negative accomplishment.

    So how do I feel about it, I think it is propaganda and it smacks of Pavlov.