CNN, NBC and Washington Post worked with DNC to influence election, new WikiLeaks emails show

Over 8,000 emails from CNN, NBC, and the Washington Post have been hacked and release by WikiLeaks. These emails expose these news agencies working side by side with the DNC (Democratic National Committee), Democrats, and Hillary Clinton's campaign to help influence the election and hurt Republicans. Journalists from CNN, NBC, and the Washington Post emailed DNC staffers, Democratic insiders, and Hillary Clinton campaign staffers including chief of staff John Podesta for help on drafting interview questions with upcoming interviews with Republicans Donald Trump, Jeb, Bush, and Ted Cruz... per report by Political Outsource.

Guys, there is so so so much more to this unfolding story. This is FACISM at it's highest form. Our news agency working with a political party to influence election results, are you f--king kidding me? We need to hold them accountable for this blatant act of facism.

Read the full report, story, and see the emails at Political Outsource. Direct link to article: http://www.politicaloutsource.com/2...te-questions-for-cnn-anchor-wolf-blitzer.html

I really can't believe this blatant act of fascism and going against democracy by the news. I mean, I always knew in my heart they were corrupt - but this corrupt? Are you kidding me? The emails say everything that needs to be said.

 

And Fox News and Brietbart worked with the RNC to influence the election ... this is hardly earth-shattering news, newspapers have endorsed candidates for over a hundred years.

 

There is a world of difference between endorsing a candidate and secretly working with a candidate behind the scenes and it's really discouraging that so many like you don't understand the difference.

 

Propaganda is extremely troublesome for a democracy.

 

Thanks for explaining "endorsing" to us. IOW, what goes on in the dark looks perfectly acceptable in the light.

As for me, the pre-election wikileaks which exposed crimes and true characters of the DNC et al. were far worse. Including the ultra-creepy and evil pizzagate exploits connecting Podesta and company with pedophilia and witches' "banquets." I guess I can't blame the media for running scared of that scoop, people die getting too curious.

 

You can pretend there is a difference - but it's just semantics.

 

Looks like Fox News and Breitbart were better than CNN, MSNBC, WaPo and the NYT at deciding who would become POTUS.

FYI: Unless your unaware and low information, it's the MSM who decides how Americans will vote at the polls. It's how a community organizer got himself elected back in 2008.

 

If I were a liberal pedophile, I would be hanging out at Chuck E Cheese tonight instead of being on this forum.

 

Oh, for goodness sakes! There is a mountain of difference between an endorsement and propaganda. Ask a third grader for the definition.

 

I see you've never worked for a newspaper. No, there really isn't any difference - the paper compiles a list of talking points for the candidate they have chosen and publish them as an endorsement. Semantics.

 

The MSM has been thoroughly discredited, as has the DNC.

All it took was Trump-and Trump was elected EXACTLY for this type of thing.

Drain that swamp!

 

No I've never worked for a newspaper but the media has crossed the line from journalism and endorsement to throwing their entire might behind a candidate and against the other. I'm not a child and I've surveyed the landscape for over 50 years. There is a vast difference in what's going on now and before. I can't make you see it so if you don't you don't. Are you young?

It happens on both sides although the CF on the left is more than I can bear more often than not. I can't take the right at times either but it is not in the same league.

It's frackin' propaganda and it stinks to high heaven. It is enormously concerning to me.

 

More "goodies" from the globalist Left.
Who would have thought.

Clinton News Network for the win!

 

This goes beyond endorsement.
It obfuscates the difference between journalism and editorial.
It crossed the line to involve unethical, immoral behavior.


It sort of reminds me when the Pentagon Papers were released.
Nothing new. All the little factoids I had read in anti Vietnam war pamphlets on campus
yet it was claimed Elsberg release classified information. Well let face, "they" can regard anything they want as classified, even when it isn't.

We know the CNN, The Washington Post and NBC need some remedial journalism classes.
The Washington Post and NBC are pale comparisons of what they were decades ago when they had journalistic integrity.


Moi

r > g

Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic,
regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.​

 

Only to overly simplistic "thinkers".

 

Not that we were supposed to be a democracy in the first place, but yes. Our 'democracy' is long since finished. Welcome to Kleptocracy.

 

Yeah no big deal.

https://longversion.wordpress.com/2012/09/23/the-journalists-creed/

The Journalist’s Creed
I believe in the profession of Journalism.

I believe that the public journal is a public trust; that all connected with it are, to the full measure of responsibility, trustees for the public; that all acceptance of lesser service than the public service is a betrayal of this trust.

I believe that clear thinking, clear statement, accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism.

I believe that a journalist should write only what he holds in his heart to be true.

I believe that suppression of the news, for any consideration other than the welfare of society, is indefensible.

I believe that no one should write as a journalist what he would not say as a gentleman; that bribery by one’s own pocket book is as much to be avoided as bribery by the pocketbook of another; that individual responsibility may not be escaped by pleading another’s instructions or another’s dividends.

I believe that advertising, news and editorial columns should alike serve the best interests of readers; that a single standard of helpful truth and cleanness should prevail for all; that supreme test of good journalism is the measure of its public service.

I believe that the journalism which succeeds the best-and best deserves success-fears God and honors man; is stoutly independent; unmoved by pride of opinion or greed of power; constructive, tolerant but never careless, self-controlled, patient, always respectful of its readers but always unafraid, is quickly indignant at injustice; is unswayed by the appeal of the privilege or the clamor of the mob; seeks to give every man a chance, and as far as law, an honest wage and recognition of human brotherhood can make it so, an equal chance; is profoundly patriotic while sincerely promoting international good will and cementing world-comradeship, is a journalism of humanity, of and for today’s world.

 

I can't go there.

 

We're here. Arguably, we were here by the mid-90's and big corporation took over. Trump is just now King of the Hill.

 

Not sure we're on the same page but it doesn't matter.

 

Semantics? No, it's not 'semantics'. There is a real difference, and you might consider giving the issue more thought before offering the tired 'it's just semantics' excuse.

 

What ever happened to a fair and impartial media?
If all this comes out as true, it's likely a dagger in the heart of the American media as we know it. For the DNC for furnish the media with questions eliminates any semblance of impartiality they had left and calls into question anything they report.

 

Obviously you are not journalist either. What is this opinion above? What your stating there isn't what happened. A media outlet composing an endorsement for their candidate that they have endorsed is normal.

However. That isn't what took place here as the email evidence shows... Major media outlets IE journalists working with their personally chosen candidates team in this case the DNC and Podesta to get help writing questions for interviews against an opponent??! It's not just a little bit over the line its shocking.

One word learned in Journalism 101...

ETHICS.

My God the corruption of Hillary and the DNC is awing.. They must have thought they had this thing in the bag the entire time...

God bless America for not falling for it.

 

Looks like the MSM took a page out of Bill Clinton's playbook: accuse them of what you're doing. They'll spend all their time denying what they're not doing, and if they discover what you really are doing, the public will by then be less inclined to believe it.

 

That's assuming the media was always 'fair and impartial' in the past, and I'm not sure that's true. Walter Duranty is perhaps the most famous of left wing media liars but there were many others.

The difference now is the Internet and the impact of Fox news. Without these two we'd still believe in the NYT and the MSM. Maybe they haven't changed as much as we have.