The Brian Mudd Show

The Brian Mudd Show

There are two sides to stories and one side to facts. That's Brian's mantra and what drives him to get beyond the headlines.Full Bio

 

Q&A: Questions about the political donations of the (Godless, soulless, slanderous) media:

Cheat Sheet Q&A: Questions about the political donations of the (Godless, soulless, slanderous) media:

Today's entry: You have me cracking up with your description of media! Well done! While I don't want to rule out the possibility that you're right about them isn't most of the Trump bashing in the media explainable by who they donate to and vote for politically? I remember hearing that almost all political donations went to Clinton last year.

Bottom Line: Well if you'd like me to delve deeper into the affairs of the Godless, soulless, slanderous media...I'll play ball. 

Getting straight the to point you referenced, the Center for Public Integrity studied the donations of media professionals and found the following: 

  • In the general election cycle 96% of political donations for President went to Hillary Clinton
  • There were 430 donations made to Clinton vs. 40 made to Trump (91.5% Clinton)

So, no it's not a surprise that the same media types that donated directly to Clinton's campaign would necessarily be inclined to slander President Trump or attempt to stop his agenda by perpetuation of whatever distraction they can assist with but...

Awhile back I created a story based on the media's political party of choice overtime. It showed that the average media professional was slightly left of center politically in the 1970's and had slowly drifted leftward overtime to where those who ID'd as being right of center were down to the single digits by last election cycle. Here's where that matters most in today's political landscape. Whether it was out of professionalism or proximity, you just simply didn't used to have outright daily slander of a President taking place. In the event that a media outlet was shown to have lied or misreported a story it would be a big deal with a retraction issued at a minimum. Outlets like the Washington Post have made a sport out of demonstrably slandering the President of the United States and never addressing, let alone on made up lie before perpetuating the next.

In today's environment you have so many hard-core leftists running media outlets, and working in them, that the checks, balances and professionalism that used to be in place often doesn't exist anymore and 96% of the country wasn't with "Her" like they were but that's who's reporting news to you.  That's the real change that's led to the current state of Godless, soulless (operating theory that they sold their souls to Chuck Schumer or the Devil assuming they aren't one in the same), slanderous media from my perspective

If you have a topic or question you'd like me to address email me: brianmudd@iheartmedia.com


Sponsored Content

Sponsored Content