The top story is Trump's tweet about the oldie that took a tumble at the protests last week: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/06/09/trump-unleashes-twitter-attack-on-elderly-man-injured-by-police-at-buffalo-protest/#
That fact alone seems a bit ridiculous, with everything else that's going on.
Next, the title is "Trump Unleashes Twitter Attack on Elderly Man Injured by Police at Buffalo Protest." Sound kind of "modern Drudgey", doesn't it?
Clicking the article, the opening paragraph reads: "President Donald Trump made the unsubstantiated claim..." Unsubstantiated? The Left MSM LOVES that word...
Moreover, the tweet they have linked in the article itself if from a BUZZFEED REPORTER, and is not-so-subtly implying that the OANN reporter who Trump may have watched is a Russian-asset.
This all feels very much like how it was when Drudge started to turn on Trump.
Details?
I'm sure it comes down to 'the left hates them'
There’s bound to be a cuck, here and there, but Brietbart has been amazing in recent years. One article they picked up somewhere? I’m not a fair weather fan
Okay, I found another article about the same incident on the Daily Wire:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-attacks-75-year-old-man-shoved-by-buffalo-pd-antifa-provocateur
Like the Breitbart article, it has a negative feel to it, AND it links to the SAME tweet from the Buzzfeed Reporter.
Also, they used the ol' "picture of Grimp looking ashamed of himself" trick for the thumbnail.
I just went on the Breitbart website and the story isnt there anymore. Maybe they purged the infiltrator? Edit: its still there but its not the first story anymore. Probably just a softie that couldnt stand seeing an old man bleeding from his ear even if hes a commie
Breitbart is compromised. I left that shithole for a good reason.
Just try to attack Obama or any other high ranking lefty, you'll be met with resistance starting with their moderation police powered by Disqus. I went through 4 accounts and then found TDW. I am good, never going to that crap site.
I'm really liking the Epoch Times.
Quoting the Wikipedia?
The paper is run and staffed by US journalists and is excellent. It's the headlines we should be reading and extremely pro Trump.
Yeah. It was started in China to oppose the state run media and grew from there.
Hey dumb fuck. Is the New York Times a Mexican newspaper because it is owned by a Mexican? Does the Washington Post only print Amazon content? Does the Atlantic mainly print Apple news? Does the Los Angeles Times mainly print Asian BioTech content?
Fuck off. The editorial staff of Epoch Times are Independent, American, white (not Chinese), and fucking excellent Journalists.
Get a copy and read it from cover to cover. I guarantee you will be more knowledagable about a myriad of categories not just politics. The one issue I read had some excellent interviews with a thriller author who has sold hundreds of millions of copies of fiction but is not a part of the "in" crowd because he is deeply religious.
The founder of the Wikipedia has determined that it has a liberal bias. There's your Falun Gong bullshit.
If it IS owned by the most oppressed group in China, I'm fine with it.
They are the most pro Trump news media in the world. This is a pro Trump forum. Get that through your shit filled brain.
They might be changing narrative. Breitbart is propaganda too. Just the less common type, the one that usually goes against the left
Breitbart is not propaganda, that's bs.
Breitbart is propaganda. What do you call a website that cherrypicks stories about a country that fits their narrative but doesn't report anything else of equal importance that doesnt? Honest and true journalism, if you believe in it, dies the moment money comes into play.
That is the most cliche faggotass comment I've read. "When money comes into play" "honest and true journalism". You sound like such a leftist attacking the way you're attacking Breitbart, exactly the same shit they say. Give examples. Propaganda means FAKE AND DECEPTIVE NEWS MEANT TO MISLEAD. Give me those examples from Breitbart. Breitbart covers all current events and they cover them from their own perspective, which is rightwing nationalist. Covering things from your perspective is not propaganda, Goebbels is propaganda, learn the difference before you disparage our few sources with leftist rhetoric. I'll wait for examples of Breitbart being propaganda....
Google "breitbart hungary". Check the list and tell me if you see anything negative. No because hungary is being used by breitbart to promote conservative ideas. Now the reality, if breitbart wasnt propaganda, you would see articles about: -Corruption in hungary (yes there is and its yuge)
So you hate Viktor Orban and are trashing Breitbart because they don't attack him, so that must mean Breitbart is propaganda? Do you have any proof of PROPAGANDA? Being a conservative outlet is not being propaganda, as much as the left may want you to believe.
No. And my feelings about him change nothing about the topic. Its you not being able to answer, so you come at the person writing again. Breitbart has a weird orban fetish. The guy who is not very popular is being idolized as some kind of conservative god. They share carefully selected topics that fit their worldview and ignore everything else that doesn't, or is totally against it. Just like any other media site. How is that different to what propaganda outlets like the china times does? Its not, except this is what you like to hear.
It's completely different. If you think Breitbart and China are the same then you got serious issues and don't even understand what the word propaganda is.
Someone hasn't swallowed the pill yet.
Yeah your faggot ass hasn't. "Trashing Breitbart is super redpilled my fellow caterpillars".
I'm not ready to give the left a "win" by saying what they have been saying for years, that "Breitbart is propagand and conspiracy theories" based on wording of one article that people didn't like, myself included.
Someone is still in his anger phase.
Calling you a faggot doesn't mean i'm mad, faggot. :)
No need to say that. Unlike the leftards, I don't use the word anger as a derogation.
Anger is a natural state of mind when the external conditions and the internal conception model clash, hopefully prompting for future actions (mental or physical) as a means of conflict resolution. It's a phase, we grow out of it.
I've had my worldview proven wrong by reality - I was fucking pissed off for a time. Then I fixed my shit.
I don't give a shit about your life story, seems to me like it's just you trying to derail the conversation because you have no proof or basis on what you are saying. So you are shifting the discussion into what "anger" means to you. I don't give a fuck what anger means to you. No matter how you view, define or use the word "anger' it doesn't apply to me or this discussion, faggot.
Member that time he made “unsubstantiated claims” about 0bama spying on him and media went into overdrive saying he was full of shit? 🎣
I noticed this today too. Andrew Breitbart would be rolling in his grave.
They have bent the knee and write stories while grasping firmly onto their soy latte.
As another commenter said, try Epoch Times for fact based reporting.
Has she started blowing BB editors for a living now?
She's always criticized him when he needs to be criticized.
there is no "our news" and "their news"
every single person in journalism is paid off.
How much money are you paying for these articles?
Even if you click every advertisement, thats maybe $1. How do these people pay the salaries of dozens of journalists, editors, tech people, finance & accounting?
They've been getting more and more tabloidy as times gone by. Maybe someone somewhere realized there's a paper trail that a dedicated President and staff might uncover.
puts on tin foil hat or maybe this has been part of the plan all along...
Brought to you by the fake news MSM who fed us Russian collusion, Stormy Daniels, Omarosa, World War 3, caravans of "refugees", Charlottesville, smirking, Justine Smolett, 2.1 million expected dead from COVID, peeing on hookers, impeachment, white supremacists, Ciaramella, epsteins suicide, trumpgret, etc.
My hackles were raised when Nick Nolte published an article agreeing with WaPo that police TV shows should be cancelled. He just had different reasons.
Never used either Breitbart or Drudge. Seems everyone sells out for enough shmeckles
Breitbart has occasionally been like that lately. Not a whole lot, just a little here and there; TGP too, but only about half as much.
It wouldn't be the first time. When Benji was there he posted all kinds of anti-Trump bullshit and Nolte is often has some pretty cucked takes as well.
What’s even more troubling is why are they trying to cancel the Conservative Treehouse over this? They just ended up on the Newsguard blacklist site and certain media outlets are labelling the blog as a “conspiracy site” amongst other things. The treehouse has been rather nondescript although Sundance was phenomenal in breaking down the George Zimmerman hoax. All of a sudden, Sundance is public enemy number one...and I’ve been critical of him and the blog on numerous occasions.
I started noticing little things like that a while back. It annoyed me to the point I expected it, and was surprised if a little "jab" wasn't in some article. (Seems like not every article, but just when you don't expect it, there is another questionable one). That is why I stopped reading Brietbart, unless something else I am reading is linked to it. I agree with you in other words, OP.
Yeah - we don’t watch him anymore.
they did a fake news story on the "white perp" driving into a crowd...shooting peaceful protesters. you know the latino that was attacked by a mob, nearly got pulled through the driver window...instead of shooting the guy dead he shot him in the arm and was seen fleeing the mob with proper finger discipline on the trigger.
total bunch of faggots over there.