GOP Senators spied on by Biden Administration

[beej]

I'm tootin something, that's for sure.

BTW I find it hilarious that some (mostly Nutcons) try and claim to be more 'merican than others.

how do you find pillows big enough for your head? It must require a different kind of button to keep all that ego in a shirt.

I think you hate Trump for all the same traits that you, yourself, possess.

[Bucky Cornstarch]

how do you find pillows big enough for your head? It must require a different kind of button to keep all that ego in a shirt.

I think you hate Trump for all the same traits that you, yourself, possess.

Was it you for whom I provided the definition of tongue-in-cheek? If not, I can share it again.

[beej]

Was it you for whom I provided the definition of tongue-in-cheek? If not, I can share it again.

You did, so I thought that was the type of intellectual back and forth you preferred.

[Newbeeee™]

I'm tootin something, that's for sure.

BTW I find it hilarious that some (mostly Nutcons) try and claim to be more 'merican than others.

Not tryin....and it's Murrican....and and WTF is a nutcon

[jstell]

how do you find pillows big enough for your head? It must require a different kind of button to keep all that ego in a shirt.

I think you hate Trump for all the same traits that you, yourself, possess.

Man, it is totally uncool for you to out Bucky as orange.  I think he was trying to keep that in the closet.

[neurosis]

what do you think of Bari Weiss taking over as CBS news editor?

I can tell you what I think of it now.


https://www.npr.org/2025/12/22/g-s1-103282/cbs-chief-bari-weiss-pulls-60-minutes-story


"Weiss told colleagues this weekend the piece — planned for Sunday night's show — could not run without an on-the-record comment from a Trump administration official. That's according to two people with knowledge of events at the network who spoke on condition of anonymity, citing job security.

The correspondent on the story, Sharyn Alfonsi, condemned the decision in an email to 60 Minutes colleagues on Sunday evening, saying she believed it was "not an editorial decision, it is a political one." (The email was obtained by NPR and other news organizations.)"

"Government silence is a statement, not a VETO," Alfonsi wrote in the email. "If the administration's refusal to participate becomes a valid reason to spike a story, we have effectively handed them a 'kill switch'' for any reporting they find inconvenient." (Alfonsi did not respond to an emailed request for comment.)

[CNCAppsJames]

Unless what was in  the story was not verifiable. Let's forget about Trump for a nanosecond... it'll be hard I know... he lives rent free in some of y'alls heads....

How many times in recent memory has the media ran with a story about someone they don't like where "sources close to the... not authorized to speak on the matter" have turned out to be not exactly as advertised? Too many to count. And a few of them have even resulted in SUBSTANTIAL legal wins for the victims of the media's never ending thirst for blood and eyeballs.

Now back to Trump. Someone is going to run a story on the Trump administration... Trump not only has the means to fund a lawsuit against what he perceives/believes as untrue and defamatory "news", but he has the will and the desire to do so. So, maybe just maybe they are crossing all their t's and dotting ALL their i's before running with questionable Intel.

Let's face it, the traditional media has been running fast and loose with the truth for the better part of 25 years. I'm just wondering if legal stepped in and said, you're not running that without more.

JM2CFWIW YMMV

[beej]

fairness is just unfair.

[CNCAppsJames]

fairness is just unfair.

Unless you have boys on your girl's track and volleyball teams, then fairness is just bigoted.

 

[neurosis]

Unless what was in  the story was not verifiable.

I'm not sure why they would need input from the Trump administration to run a story about the conditions at CECOT? Other than it might look bad for the administration after they lied about who was being sent there, and what conditions they're living in? That's another way of looking at it? 

This has more a stink of holding back a story so they don't risk retaliation from a pissed off, thin-skinned administration.

Speaking of Weiss, wasn't her media company named "The Free Press"?  How ironic is that? 

Trump: "THEY ARE NO BETTER THAN THE OLD OWNERSHIP, who just paid me millions of Dollars for FAKE REPORTING about your favorite President, ME!" Trump posted this month on Truth Social. "Since they bought it, 60 Minutes has actually gotten WORSE!"

"In an earlier review of the CECOT report, Weiss had objected to the men being called "Venezuelan migrants" rather than "illegal immigrants" — a term favored by the Trump administration. Many of those sent to the Salvadoran prison were not in this country illegally and had applied for asylum, awaiting a decision on their applications."

[beej]

I'm not sure why they would need input from the Trump administration to run a story about the conditions at CECOT? Other than it might look bad for the administration after they lied about who was being sent there, and what conditions they're living in? That's another way of looking at it? 

This has more a stink of holding back a story so they don't risk retaliation from a pissed off, thin-skinned administration.

Speaking of Weiss, wasn't her media company named "The Free Press"?  How ironic is that? 

the whole point of this NPR story is tell the reader, "she is not one of us."

[beej]

In an earlier review of the CECOT report, Weiss had objected to the men being called "Venezuelan migrants" rather than "illegal immigrants" — a term favored by the Trump administration

a term also preferred by the Obama, bush, clinton, and reagan administrations as well.

[Bucky Cornstarch]

Unless what was in  the story was not verifiable. Let's forget about Trump for a nanosecond... it'll be hard I know... he lives rent free in some of y'alls heads....

How many times in recent memory has the media ran with a story about someone they don't like where "sources close to the... not authorized to speak on the matter" have turned out to be not exactly as advertised? Too many to count. And a few of them have even resulted in SUBSTANTIAL legal wins for the victims of the media's never ending thirst for blood and eyeballs.

Now back to Trump. Someone is going to run a story on the Trump administration... Trump not only has the means to fund a lawsuit against what he perceives/believes as untrue and defamatory "news", but he has the will and the desire to do so. So, maybe just maybe they are crossing all their t's and dotting ALL their i's before running with questionable Intel.

Let's face it, the traditional media has been running fast and loose with the truth for the better part of 25 years. I'm just wondering if legal stepped in and said, you're not running that without more.

JM2CFWIW YMMV

Yo Nutboy, we know it's in your nature to just spout off about shit you know nothing about, but do us all a favor and enroll yourself in an introduction to journalism class. Perhaps there you can learn how stories are sourced, researched, vetted and reported. If you pay close attention, you might even learn how it is possible to use an anonymous source, and the justified reasons for doing so.

1A matters. Just as much, if not more, than your beloved and sacred 2A. As a constitutional scholar, you should know this.

[beej]

Yo Nutboy, we know it's in your nature to just spout off about shit you know nothing about, but do us all a favor and enroll yourself in an introduction to journalism class. Perhaps there you can learn how stories are sourced, researched, vetted and reported. If you pay close attention, you might even learn how it is possible to use an anonymous source, and the justified reasons for doing so.

1A matters. Just as much, if not more, than your beloved and sacred 2A. As a constitutional scholar, you should know this.

mornin' bucky. you're shoes are on the wrong feet.

[neurosis]

the whole point of this NPR story is tell the reader, "she is not one of us."

And here I thought, according to Alfonsi and others at CBS, they were telling the reader that Weiss is willing to bury a story using excuses, effectively handing a "kill switch" to the current Administration when faced with an inconvenient article that may not paint them in the best light? If that's true, then she's not "one of us". She's just another cog in the machine.

That's my takeaway. Funny how we can both come to different conclusions?

I don't imagine this is going to make people trust her *more*.

Out of curiosity, do you think the story is an important story?