Trump

[Uber Eagle 72]

Any American journalist who has asked Trump "hard" questions (i.e. non softball pitches that flatter him) are promptly either told they are "fake news" & ignored &/or banned from attending any further press conferences.

What does the nationality of a journalist have to do with asking Trump the hard questions?

We need more transparency from the "most powerful man in the world".

There is nothing new whatsoever about the question asked. It has been asked since he entered politics. Again nothing groundbreaking. Note below. As for the nationality question you ask I am pretty sure I have covered that in my initial post.

Trump's conflicts of interest: a visual guide

The president-elect claims he will be leaving his business interests ‘in total’, but the Trump Organization still stands to cross paths with the US government on multiple fronts

www.theguardian.com

 

[47MVEagle]

There is nothing new whatsoever about the question asked. It has been asked since he entered politics. Again nothing groundbreaking. Note below. As for the nationality question you ask I am pretty sure I have covered that in my initial post.

Trump's conflicts of interest: a visual guide

The president-elect claims he will be leaving his business interests ‘in total’, but the Trump Organization still stands to cross paths with the US government on multiple fronts

www.theguardian.com

Yeah, but he’s never answered that question.

 

[Eagle 1]

The latest story about the so called Australian journalist from our tax funded ABC is some poor innocent guy just doing his job according to our government. The hubris to this makes me laugh. Surely American journalists are more than capable of addressing this with Trump!….. why in the hell do we need try hard social justice warriors and proclaimed Trump haters from Australia to do this? It just makes us look like a joke. The saddest thing is… is that our tax dollars fund these zealots.

Did you notice Trumps reply to the ABC reporter, " I'll be seeing your leader soon I think " how funny, Albo may have to introduce himself I guess.

 

[Uber Eagle 72]

Did you notice Trumps reply to the ABC reporter, " I'll be seeing your leader soon I think " how funny, Albo may have to introduce himself I guess.

Agree each way Albo will be sucking up deluxe to Trump.

 

[lsz]

Such a tough man the way he handled the question.

 

[Seagles68]

Man, I just don't understand why even this issue needs to be so partisan. I would just note again that (as I understand it) these couple of questions (absolutely not original) are less than a minutes worth from a 45 min (normally) 4 Corners program. I think it's worth waiting to see how those questions fit into the broader context of the entire program. A program that has historically received broad acceptance as a quality investigative program. Have they always been on the money (no pun intended)? No. But it just seems a very strange thing for anyone to suggest that Australian journos should not involve themselves in other countries issues. Particularly one that has so much influence on this country. That just seems a way of keeping Australians ignorant on the World beyond our shores.

 

[Uber Eagle 72]

Such a tough man the way he handled the question.

Understand this is your view. Would be interested to understand how you think Dan Andrew’s handled questions especially during those famous covid press conferences?

Opinion: Daniel Andrews is a savvy media performer, but that's no substitute for transparency | Australian Studies Institute

ausi.anu.edu.au

 

[Uber Eagle 72]

Man, I just don't understand why even this issue needs to be so partisan. I would just note again that (as I understand it) these couple of questions (absolutely not original) are less than a minutes worth from a 45 min (normally) 4 Corners program. I think it's worth waiting to see how those questions fit into the broader context of the entire program. A program that has historically received broad acceptance as a quality investigative program. Have they always been on the money (no pun intended)? No. But it just seems a very strange thing for anyone to suggest that Australian journos should not involve themselves in other countries issues. Particularly one that has so much influence on this country. That just seems a way of keeping Australians ignorant on the World beyond our shores.

They don’t always get it right and are a lot of times just me too to the associated press. An example being their big Russian collusion story on Trump. They suffer from what some call trump derangement syndrome…

 

[Seagles68]

They don’t always get it right and are a lot of times just me too to the associated press. An example being their big Russian collusion story on Trump. They suffer from what some call trump derangement syndrome…

Yep, as I noted, they don't always get it right. We may differ on where that's been - maybe, maybe not. But my point is that there is absolutely nothing inappropriate for an Australian journo to ask another country's leader a question that may not appear, on the face of it, directly related to Australia.

Would I want them to ask Putin or Xi if there is any truth that they disappear people they see as dangers to their control? Absolutely. I was trying to think of something being asked of an Australian PM but we don't have the same influence on the world. We're pretty boring really. Maybe as a major player in the Pacific Island area - if there was a whiff of corruption or a serious conflict of interest in a deal with a Pacific country, would I care who asked the PM a question about that. Not at all.

Anyway, this is why I don't normally get involved in this (or similar thread) coz I just start to ramble. And I don't have the energy 😀

I just didn't see this episode as another reason for the partisan comments.

But power on all.....

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

An example being their big Russian collusion story on Trump. They suffer from what some call trump derangement syndrom

Not the best example!
The investigation found that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 election in a "sweeping and systematic fashion".

Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, Rick Gates, Michael Cohen, and Roger Stone were all charged with offences as a result. All four had direct or close connections to Trump or his campaign


As we all know, Trump cries Hoax whenever accused of anything!
As for why he was so aggro when questioned about profiting from the presidency, um... maybe something to do with corrupt dealings with UAE and chips in return for mega investment in his crypto?

Just a wild guess

 

[Brookie1973]

Man, I just don't understand why even this issue needs to be so partisan. I would just note again that (as I understand it) these couple of questions (absolutely not original) are less than a minutes worth from a 45 min (normally) 4 Corners program. I think it's worth waiting to see how those questions fit into the broader context of the entire program. A program that has historically received broad acceptance as a quality investigative program. Have they always been on the money (no pun intended)? No. But it just seems a very strange thing for anyone to suggest that Australian journos should not involve themselves in other countries issues. Particularly one that has so much influence on this country. That just seems a way of keeping Australians ignorant on the World beyond our shores.

I think we can all guess what the broader context of the program will be. “Orange man bad”.
Involving yourself in other countries issues is fine, provided it has some relevance to Australia. All the question was intended to do was to imply that Trump is using the Presidency to profiteer. Not only is it disrespectful to the office, it has zero implications for Australia and quite frankly, is borderline slanderous and frankly embarrassing. Just another leftist mouthpiece looking to get his 5 second sound bite/moment of fame. With all that is happening in US and world politics, this is what they choose to ask about.

And yes, four corners used to be respected. I would give them some credit if they were to ask some similarly loaded questions to say Keir Starmer, Emmanuel Macron or any other left of centre world leader.

 

[Uber Eagle 72]

Not the best example!
The investigation found that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 election in a "sweeping and systematic fashion".

Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, Rick Gates, Michael Cohen, and Roger Stone were all charged with offences as a result. All four had direct or close connections to Trump or his campaign


As we all know, Trump cries Hoax whenever accused of anything!
As for why he was so aggro when questioned about profiting from the presidency, um... maybe something to do with corrupt dealings with UAE and chips in return for mega investment in his crypto?

Just a wild guess

We can agree to disagree on this one. What about this one? I personally found this very disturbing.

Findings of independent review into ‘misleading’ ABC reporting revealed

The review found the error was made in an attempt to create a ‘compelling piece of current affairs television’.

7news.com.au

 

[Brookie1973]

Not the best example!
The investigation found that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 election in a "sweeping and systematic fashion".

Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, Rick Gates, Michael Cohen, and Roger Stone were all charged with offences as a result. All four had direct or close connections to Trump or his campaign


As we all know, Trump cries Hoax whenever accused of anything!
As for why he was so aggro when questioned about profiting from the presidency, um... maybe something to do with corrupt dealings with UAE and chips in return for mega investment in his crypto?

Just a wild guess

Uber eagle - If interested, I recommend you have a quick look at where a quite lengthy discourse on this topic landed earlier in this thread. Needless to say, I disagree with the summation above, and of course, the recent uncovering of the hoax that was the Russia collusion story by Tulsi Gabbard tells you everything you need to know about where the collusion really lay.

 

[Uber Eagle 72]

I think we can all guess what the broader context of the program will be. “Orange man bad”.
Involving yourself in other countries issues is fine, provided it has some relevance to Australia. All the question was intended to do was to imply that Trump is using the Presidency to profiteer. Not only is it disrespectful to the office, it has zero implications for Australia and quite frankly, is borderline slanderous and frankly embarrassing. Just another leftist mouthpiece looking to get his 5 second sound bite/moment of fame. With all that is happening in US and world politics, this is what they choose to ask about.

And yes, four corners used to be respected. I would give them some credit if they were to ask some similarly loaded questions to say Keir Starmer, Emmanuel Macron or any other left of centre world leader.

The Line of Fire” story was a national disgrace. Journalism at its grubbiest worst.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

We can agree to disagree on this one. What about this one? I personally found this very disturbing.

Findings of independent review into ‘misleading’ ABC reporting revealed

The review found the error was made in an attempt to create a ‘compelling piece of current affairs television’.

7news.com.au

Media watch is a worthwhile show, highlights stuff like this all the time, from all news agencies including ABC. The commercial networks are worse, not so surprising

 

[Brookie1973]

The Line of Fire” story was a national disgrace. Journalism at its grubbiest worst.

Agreed. Sadly, not surprising.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

We can agree to disagree on this one

Which bit do you disagree with - the finding of Russian interference?
Or the fact those Trump associates were convicted?

 

[Uber Eagle 72]

Which bit do you disagree with - the finding of Russian interference?
Or the fact those Trump associates were convicted?

I think it was a hoax and one of many attempts by the democrats to circumnavigate democracy.

 

[Brookie1973]

I don’t think we need to go back down the Russia Russia Russia path, given it would already account for more pages in this and any other Trump related thread than anything else.

I think we can all agree that lawfare was actively practiced against Trump and his associates, that this continues to this day, and that the Tulsi Gabbard findings implicate key democrats in allegedly concocting the whole story to unseat a democratically elected President.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

The Line of Fire” story was a national disgrace. Journalism at its grubbiest worst.

There's been far worse than that!

Anyway, on the other hand joint investigation by ABC and Fairfax Media into Ben Roberts-Smith actions in Afghanistan in 2017 uncovered alleged war crimes, which courts have subsequently held to be likely true, including unlawful killings

It's important to criticise news media but blanketly calling everything fake is simply playing into the hands of those who hold the biggest megaphone, they can tell you what's true or false