Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Nevada Reporter Who Falsely Claimed Sanders Supporters Threw Chairs Just Got What He Deserves [View all]Octafish
(55,745 posts)153. Bush pardoned those Walsh indicted.
For some reason, this never gets mentioned on tee vee much:

THIS is why the conservatives -- no matter their jersey color -- HATE Robert Parry. He reports the truth:
Firewall: Inside the Iran-Contra Cover-up
By Robert Parry
1995
EXCERPT
Those combined interests likely will lead to very few favorable reviews of a new book by a man who put himself in the way of that cover-up -- Iran-contra independent counsel Lawrence Walsh. In a remarkable new book, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover-up, Walsh details his six-year battle to break through the "firewall" that White House officials built around President Reagan and Vice President Bush after the Iran-contra scandal exploded in November 1986.
For Walsh, a lifelong Republican who shared the foreign policy views of the Reagan administration, the Iran-contra experience was a life-changing one, as his investigation penetrated one wall of lies only to be confronted with another and another -- and not just lies from Oliver North and his cohorts but lies from nearly every senior administration official who spoke with investigators.
According to Firewall, the cover-up conspiracy took formal shape at a meeting of Reagan and his top advisers in the Situation Room at the White House on Nov. 24, 1986. The meeting's principal point of concern was how to handle the troublesome fact that Reagan had approved illegal arms sales to Iran in fall 1985, before any covert-action finding had been signed. The act was a clear felony -- a violation of the Arms Export Control Act -- and possibly an impeachable offense.
SNIP
"
CONTINUED
http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/story34.html
What had come earlier makes the Iran "dealings" understandable. Reagan and Poppy owed the Ayatollah a major.
Debunking the Debunkers of October Surprise
Magazines mangled facts to dismiss Reagan campaign collusion with Iran
By Robert Parry
March 1, 2013
EXCERPT...
The New Republic faulted Nightline for failing to find out that Casey was not in Madrid, but in London. The magazine also mocked anchor Ted Koppel for a Nightline update, which was the first story to note that Casey had made the unannounced trip to London, despite his campaign duties. Koppel had observed that Madrid was only a 90-minute flight from London, making Jamshid Hashemis story possible. Nightline was wrong again, Emerson and Furman gloated.
I was ridiculed, too, as one of the entrepreneurial journalists who had investigated the October Surprise story, presumably for financial gain. (Because of my extensive work on the Iran/Contra scandal, I had been recruited by PBS Frontline in 1990 to look into the longstanding October Surprise mystery, leading to an hour-long documentary which aired in April 1991.)
The dual debunking stories from Newsweek and the New Republic brought relief and delight to many corners of the WashingtontoNew York power corridor, especially at the White House, where President George H.W. Bushs team could now go on the offensive against the remnants of the broader Iran/Contra scandal. On Capitol Hill, the impact of the one-two punch of Newsweek and the New Republic could not be overstated. Whatever momentum there was for a thorough investigation of the October Surprise issue quickly dissipated.
On the Senate side, Republicans mounted a filibuster to block special funding for an investigation. On the House side, an investigative task force was created but it was soon clear that its principal role would be to ratify the debunking, not dig aggressively for the truth. There was less happiness inside Nightline, where the producer who had arranged the Jamshid Hashemi interview soon found herself out of a job.
There also was little attention when our reporting team at Frontline determined that the London alibi, which Newsweek and the New Republic featured so prominently, was false. It turned out that the magazines had misread the attendance records and failed to interview some of the key people at the conference, including that mornings speaker, historian Robert Dallek. He told us that he had looked for Casey around the modest-sized board room at Londons Imperial War Museum and found him missing.
A closer examination of the attendance records also revealed a notation next to Caseys box saying came at 4 p.m. In other words, the much-trumpeted debunking by Newsweek and the New Republic had itself been debunked. But the debunking of the two magazines drew virtually no public notice. No corrections were run. No one was held accountable. The conventional wisdom about the supposedly bogus October Surprise story stuck.
CONTINUED...
http://fair.org/extra/debunking-the-debunkers-of-october-surprise/
Secret Government means Secret Beneficiaries.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
206 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Nevada Reporter Who Falsely Claimed Sanders Supporters Threw Chairs Just Got What He Deserves [View all]
arcane1
Jun 2016
OP
This is actually an example of a very good investigative political journalist
lapucelle
Jun 2016
#86
His "journalism" leaves something to be desired. This was similar to what Fox News
rhett o rick
Jun 2016
#112
It is not "just a detail". That untruth was seized upon and Bernie was pretty much beaten with it
djean111
Jun 2016
#12
Which I never understood, I mean why hold a candidate at fault for something that
cstanleytech
Jun 2016
#39
He was not entirely wrong - At least, one person did raise a chair threateningly -
OhZone
Jun 2016
#4
Actually, dropping a chair would require letting go. The person put it down with his hands.
floriduck
Jun 2016
#14
They persuaded him to put it down and then they hugged each other, that's miles away from
Uncle Joe
Jun 2016
#35
They persuaded him, they didn't tackle him and this still didn't equate to how the event was
Uncle Joe
Jun 2016
#37
You can see 3 people grabbing the chair from the guy in the video. That's why someone got hit
TeamPooka
Jun 2016
#51
You can see one person put his hand on the man's arm and another person take the chair away
Uncle Joe
Jun 2016
#107
I watched it multiple times and he never let go of the chair until it was down. Why is it so
floriduck
Jun 2016
#192
Because people want to smear the journalist as a liar, and he was not 100% lying.
OhZone
Jun 2016
#193
Just ask yourself...if someone raised a chair at you, would you be so flippant?
BlueCaliDem
Jun 2016
#78
Easy for you to "lol" sitting safely behind your desk. But had you stood in that atmosphere of
BlueCaliDem
Jun 2016
#142
You continue to "lol" because you know you're wrong, basing your responses
BlueCaliDem
Jun 2016
#148
This is a personal attack on another poster. We have moved beyond that.
DisgustipatedinCA
Jun 2016
#176
The intent was clearly there. It was a volatile event. Thank god cooler heads prevailed and coaxed
BlueCaliDem
Jun 2016
#196
The report wasn't that someone standing near the chair guy feared for their safety,
hughee99
Jun 2016
#202
Also the lies and outrage stemming from Capehart's and Joy Read's false statements of Bernie's
Akamai
Jun 2016
#16
Reid and Capehart were shameless. They weren't the only MSNBC pundits who lost credibility.
OwlinAZ
Jun 2016
#114
Yes, flinging chairs up and setting them down again, implored by bystanders.
Starry Messenger
Jun 2016
#7
Really? Depending on the angle someone might have thought something might have
rhett o rick
Jun 2016
#32
He waved a chair around above his head among his friends. He was threatening no one.
rhett o rick
Jun 2016
#48
No intelligent person could think it was okay to wave a chair in the air in the middle of
pnwmom
Jun 2016
#60
This thread is about a reporter that lied to gain favor with the Corp-Media. This is an old Fox
rhett o rick
Jun 2016
#82
Based on the video, it doesn't look like a lie to me. It looks like an understandable
pnwmom
Jun 2016
#85
He made the mistake of thinking he saw people throwing chairs? And reported on it?
rhett o rick
Jun 2016
#110
Just stop it, pnwmom. The lie has been exposed forever. You're just embarrassing yourself. (nt)
w4rma
Jun 2016
#41
Ralston lost his show because a right wing billionaire threatened to cut off donations to PBS
lapucelle
Jun 2016
#135
if the guy didnt pick up the chair and threaten the crowd we wouldnt be having this discussion
DonRedwood
Jun 2016
#165
The film footage was all over the internet. I mean we (DUers) knew what happened. So he lied.
YOHABLO
Jun 2016
#28
Ralston criticized local Republicans so he was a former guest on her show.
Spitfire of ATJ
Jun 2016
#130
The only people who think the chair stories were a smear are Sanders supporters.
lapucelle
Jun 2016
#89
"he reported what eyewitnesses told him." He reported what some people told him
rhett o rick
Jun 2016
#171
Even worse, the anti-circumcision advocates really missed out on that domain name.
NuclearDem
Jun 2016
#68
Could have referenced the influence of false reporting on political primaries too
Person 2713
Jun 2016
#106
I'm sure there will be lots of editorial board meetings over this, reforms will happen, apologies...
L. Coyote
Jun 2016
#94
Don't you just love it when a liars pants actually catch on fire. (so to speak?)
jillan
Jun 2016
#118
Jon Ralston was too obnoxious to belong on PBS even if hadn't spread that lie.
Eric J in MN
Jun 2016
#133
Barbara Boxer can't be voted out because she's not running for re-election. NT
Eric J in MN
Jun 2016
#190