RLLD

How can it not be about the President? I mean you all seem intent that he should fire someone, how can I exclude the person from the conversation who you insist must act?

Mike Waltz accepted accountability. Now I could object to Trump not doing something to him, but then I would be a hypocrite since I did not insist that Biden bench anyone. Especially since this mistake resulted in no American deaths..... If I decide to call out a reporters behavior it would be perfectly in line with my ongoing issue with "journalism" not anything new. Lets not pretend I have not had this concern for some time, ok?

Why would I do such a thing? That makes no sense. In Biden, well with any Democrat and almost every politician, you have people who refuse to admit anything and instead lie and redirect.....for the first time in memory in this instance we have someone admitting fault....and then the President saying it was a mistake.... It is a refreshing change.

I did not. When the conversation arose I participated only because they were calling out Biden for the problem, and I objected to Biden being the one accountable. My position remains that you point at Biden is inane, instead you need to point to the leaders in charge of the operation itself.....did they follow the plan? If that did follow the plan, was it a bad plan? Who created it. Rather than go after Milley or some other senior official....just to be a focking d!ck.....we should instead look to those who planned and executed and address it where it matters. So, who the the mistake, and what was the outcome? Did people die? No....so then its just about being a d!ck....nothing more...

This is an activist journalist, who should have done better. I am fine with him reporting on this, but ask yourself....after the last four years of the media actively protecting Biden...do you honestly believe this guy would have handled the same situation the same way? C'mon, be honest....

Now see, here is the difference. I called out both situations using the same approach, I did not demand firings but instead accountability. YOUR version of accountability may differ from mine, and "I" will not insist you hold my expectations.....unlike you are doing right now..... More importantly, "I" will not base my ethics and morality on a corrupt political movement, such as you do. It is weak people like you that create the most harm, because YOUR morality will ebb adnd flow based on politics. That is the big difference between us, I strive to stay intellectually honest, you are just a common sycophant to the powerful

Nor would I expect it to, maybe they care copying the Biden admin

Agree. Should conservatives now be empowered to burn liquor stores and ditributers etc? because their witteul feewings have been huwt?

It is notable that you attempt to project your behavior on to me. I only wish the energy associated with this event were evident around Afghanistan, but that is a Democrat president. I am fine with the accountability, in fact it is rather nice to have some sense that media will now do its job, if only to server the political masters of the Democrat party. Right now we are more safe from corrupt power than in years....because it serves the partisan activism of the media to finally work for us. I win because power is absolutely going to be held to account, you win because your ideological opponents get mud slung at them. So lets just enjoy the wins.

Not my job. Do your own research.

I get that, and that is part of the problem that has resulted in the ongoing loss of credibility and trust with the media. You do you. But as long as we accept activist journalism we only lose

He did the right thing, he just failed to uphold the standards of proper journalism in confirming and that is why they had to of course change their subject line. I have no problem with the accountability, we only ever get it from media when a Republican is in the WH, so this is nice. Of course he could have more than notified, he could have interviewed and sought more information so as to properly inform the public,...but that wasnt really his goal here.

I do hold certain contempt for his past reporting which was also improper, and demonstrates he is more interested in activism than informing, so I still hold a poor perspective of him. But this was absolutely something he should have reported on, and he did, in his own way of course. And yes, there is accountability, it is entirely refreshing after fours years of liberal lying, gaslighting and no accountability for anything to see someone step up and actally do it I welcome the change, I can say that I hope Democrats watch and do the same, but we know they never will

I am fine with it, as i stated. Since there is a Republican in office we can trust that legacy media will enthusiastically do their job, now.....so all those things they reported, and which we now know were false and simply protections for the Democrat president, will no longer be in place. In effect, we can now enjoy actual accountability for those in power, and I love it.

Oh, well, normal journalism would include an interview if allowed, question and answer so that a report can be produced that has all the relevant information. Otherwise you produce reports that are incomplete and inaccurate, and then later you have to revise or amend your reporting to make it accurate. As the legacy media has done repeatedly. But when your goal is to manipulate public sentiment, you do not follow those old ethical standards. I cannot insist firing since I did not do so for Milley et al when those service members perished under their poor leadership, to now suddenly demand firing would be hypocritical, and I am trying to avoid that.

He notified them? And that is enough for you? OK, I mean, if that is enough for you to then allow him to run his spot it certainly explains the lack of trust with the media......I mean, notifying is a half-assed act, and in this instance I see they amended their initial headline, smart on their part. I would say sure, fire Hegseth f he wants....but then again 13 people died under the last admins leadership, no one fired.....but here...all the sudden, firing is back on the menu.....good to know causing death....not fireable...you must instead text the wrong person for firing.... you do you....

There is no reason to defend him for removing himself, that was a proper thing to do. And then he sat on it, also appropriate. But he failed to come back to them, so in terms of what he has to say....coupled with his past deficiencies, I would take anything he might state or write with heavy scrutiny. Now, setting all that aside, making the problem known was the right thing to do of course. This is not a Democrat presidency, so we know we will finally enjoy accountability. See how nice that feels? And then, rather than blame others......dance around it...... pretend it away..... or outright lie as liberals tend to do, they stood up and took accountability. This my frined....is how adults act. I hope Democrats are paying attention, though I have no real hope they ever show such spine.

I find th efficacy of his work in this instance to fall below journalistic standards, JMHO. But perhaps you like his approach here, why might you find his lack of follow up or verbal alert to those involved to be acceptable? The SPJ states they should do so.....so toodoes the Reuters Handbook, and BBC editorial guidlines.....but dont let standards for journalists interrupt your desire for the denigration of a political player you dislike....sacrificing standards for political aims seems to be part and parcel for liberalism today.

We can agree to disagree on what is ethical journalism I surmise. I find it rarely exists today, and this person is another example of how to not approach these situations.

I surmise you may not have understood the initial question. If you or I were on a call we understood we should not be, we might simply hang up. or, we might apologize the let folks know they accidentally included us. Later we might report on it, but first we would allow for those involved to be quoted, learn more about it etc....so we can accurately inform the American people. This reporter, unsurpisingly, wanted to enrich his career and denigrate Trump, two things he likely craves..... So, where it is true that this person says or writes something, we should first understand his qualities.....

There is no career benefit in doing that.

I think politicians lie, peddle fear and do what they can to manipulate. From my perch, she is no different that any of the others, maybe a little less refined, but still doing the political dance.....and the sheep eat it up

I am on the fence on her intent. I hesitate to apply intent, I mean, just look at how liberals do so.....I dont want to do that to people, its wrong. So for ow I suggest we allow her some grace. Assume she was not trying to say anything much, nor make it bigger than it is....another liberal trait we should assiduously avoid.

What I would point to as the strongest response ever in that Dale thread

Awww man. I was hoping some of the tariffs would stick. Domestic producers would benefit mightily from these things, hire more people and really pump up the job market.