Nov. 29, 2025
Trump Put His Naughty List on WhiteHouse.Gov; Whoopi, Joe, Nate...You Better Watch Out
Apple Podcasts 
Spotify 
Castro 
RSS Feed The White House has just put up a new webpage of “media offenders” where it lists an offense, the truth, the reporter and the category of each offense. There’s even an offender hall of fame, a running leaderboard and a list of repeat offenders. Amy and T.J. talk about the impact of this latest attack on the press and why it could have far reaching effects.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
00:00:02
Speaker 1: Hey there, folks. It is Saturday, November twenty ninth. Then, just in time for the holiday season, President Trump has put out his naughty List and who's on it. Nate Burleson, Whoopee Goldberg, Joe Scarborough, the entire staff of CNN and the BBC, you name it. And with that, welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ Full Disclosure Robes. This was not the episode we planned to do this morning, but I when you got up, I said, babe, you have got to see what the President put out, and we switched things up.
00:00:34
Speaker 2: That is a true story. I woke up and you said, babe.
00:00:37
Speaker 3: Overnight, or at least late last night, the White House, the President put up basically a I don't know, would it be their version of a wanted poster like media offenders list. It basically lists who, what and what the crime was basically.
00:00:53
Speaker 1: And the criminals are all reporters and publications. I say criminal in quotes there, but you get what I'm saying. Well, I guess he probably has cues some of them of being actual criminals. But this is just a continuation of the ongoing assault that the President has had on the media, on the fake news as he puts it in on oftentimes the liberal media, but this roades it's messaging is one thing. Responding is another thing. But this is this seems targeted, It seems it seems a little I say, it seems petty. But a lot of work put in this.
00:01:25
Speaker 3: This is a oh I was thinking the same thing. How much time, resources, how much effort, and how much of our tax dollars went to create this website that basically is exposing, to use.
00:01:39
Speaker 2: Their word, what they don't like.
00:01:43
Speaker 3: And who they think is against them, and who they think is biased and misleading. But they're using government resources to expose members of the media for coverage that they don't agree with or like.
00:01:56
Speaker 1: They say agree with theike what they say is wrong. They this is their argument. They're saying that these people are putting out false stories, false narratives, they are not giving a proper context to things, and their bias is coming through. Fine, that is not new from what we have heard from this administration. But this is new at least I don't remember another administration or any point anybody putting out what is essentially a list folks, a list of offenders in the media every single week that they claim are telling stories that don't they say accurately convey what the President has either said or has done.
00:02:38
Speaker 3: Do you worry what the reaction might be? Obviously, folks can read this and say duh. If you are more right leaning, you're gonna look at this and say, yeah, I know, I agree, and you're going to yes, be validated by what you feel the coverage is. And then you see what the White House is also saying what is wrong about the coverage. But I worry about the fringe and just this whole concept of words matter and naming people and pointing the finger and saying you're doing this to us. You're going against the United States, You're going against our government. And I worry about having a list of names. It's not just outlets, but he goes after, as you pointed out at the beginning, specific people, and that worries me. With what we've seen in this country in recent months.
00:03:25
Speaker 1: Okay, so let's tell you what we've been seeing here, folks. Is not a This isn't some secondary or website or some new thing that was created. Whitehouse dot gov the official White House web page that you go to. There's a menu on the left and I drop down menu and it'll show you things you can check on the news, the administration. You has a whole bio on Donald Trump. JD Van's Melania Trump. This is stuff we used to seeing, the whole cabinet. Then the next section is media and it has a gallery. It says live news, video library, and media offenders. So this is on white House dot gov. You don't have to try too hard, to go too far to find this, and it comes up misleading, biased, exposed, media offender of the week, and rogues. We had three, I guess for the inaugural launching of this website, he had three media offenders of the week, The.
00:04:19
Speaker 3: Boston Globes exposed, CBS News exposed, the Independent exposed.
00:04:26
Speaker 1: Okay, you made me think. Now you're making me see this a little differently when you said you worry about how the fringe right folks might see this in a list of names, and they actually say on here that the offense right, as if it was a crime. But we're explaining here it's stamped all right, CBS News, Boston Club. It has a stamp over it like you would see captured. Yes, it's it's exposed. Wanted posters.
00:04:48
Speaker 3: That's the feeling and the image I got when I looked at the specific choices they made for the art they used, how to depict which media outlets they feel like have gone a against them and therefore against the country with that type of rhetoric, and that yes, it looks like these people are wanted and need to be captured.
00:05:09
Speaker 1: So they lay out here. So they have the video first of all, and I guess that was the story of the week with the president, the six members of Congress who put out a video telling members of the military that they do have the right to refuse illegal orders. The President, of course got upset about that. It's called it seditious and said it was punishable by death. He put this out in social media. So this is the basis for our offenders of the week. Now it lists and the reasons they say these are your offenders, but it says outlet, the offense, the reporter, the truth, the claim, the key points, and the category of what they have done wrong. Road's time went into this.
00:05:50
Speaker 3: This was I was my jaw dropped. You said, you won't believe when you go onto this. You're like, I'm not even going to explain it. You just need to go on the website and see for yourself. And that was one of my first thoughts. First I thought this could be dangerous, and second I thought, my god, how much time and effort and money went into putting this list together. And by the way, this isn't a one off, as it suggests media offender of the week. This is now going to be an ongoing situation. In fact, they have an offender Hall of Shame and at the bottom of it they allow you to sign up so that you can get alerts for basically, do you want the truth? Each week it asks sign up for the offender alerts delivered to your inbox. So now you sign up, you put your email address, and you get alerts every time there is an outlet or a reporter that they that does something or write something, or disseminate something that the White House doesn't agree with.
00:06:46
Speaker 1: It's brilliant if just as a media strategy, brilliant. No, I'm not taking any stand right wrong and who's got the right messaging, But this dude is a media master. Now I'm not. This is not a stance on any policy or anything he has done, but as far as media goes, he is fighting the media every sece. He's putting them on notice. We are actually watching and we're gonna call you out, and we are going to pump this into the inboxes of all the people that support us to reinforce once again, make sure they know not to like you and don't believe anything you say, and only believe us. It seems as if Robes we're in a point in the country where someone has a monopoly on the truth. It can only be this or that. Either we have it or they have it. We're in an argument now where CNN, CBA, We've worked all these places. We know there's things that you don't get right. But generally speaking, in newsrooms there are decent folks trying to do a good job who are not in there having a meeting, say, how are we gonna go after Trump today? That's just not happening.
00:07:59
Speaker 3: Is happening at least it wasn't happening when we were in the media, and I doubt things have changed that much in the last three years. But I will say I do agree with you. I think most journalists want to tell the truth. They want the public to know the truth, and they want to let the public decide given the information they disseminate without any leaning. Now do we always get it right? Do certain reporters and certain outlets perhaps have a leaning or a slant one hundred percent? And look, I think we should take out certain cable outlets that absolutely have agendas or are known to be left leaning.
00:08:36
Speaker 1: They a lot of They're clear.
00:08:37
Speaker 3: Fox and SNBC are not correct hiding that correct, So I think that should be pointed out. Yes, Fox on one side, MSNBC on the other end. Look, I worked at MSNBC, so yes, that is all. And they don't deny that. Well maybe Fox News does. They say they're fair and balanced. I think MSNBC knows exactly who they are, okay, but I think they would say that they're the ones who actually do tell the truth.
00:08:59
Speaker 1: From seven to eleven o'clock at night. I'm saying, it's okay, we get it. You're a conservative leaning thing. Fine, and what you're saying you believe to be the truth or these are your beliefs. That is fine. That was funny ro And.
00:09:11
Speaker 4: I know, I know I just want to fine in defensive Fox News, But I do think that that that's what is disturbing to me because I think everyone who understands and we all get how democracies work. You need a free press, and you need a press that is curious, a press that presses further, that asks the follow ups, that doesn't just take what the White House or whoever is in charge gives you as the absolute truth. Corruption exists on all levels, in the media and in the government, and we have to be able to check one another. So I get that they're saying, hey, we're checking you journalists. Because you're checking us, We're gonna check you. I don't think there's anything wrong with calling into questions this report, because we do get things wrong, yep.
00:09:55
Speaker 3: And there are such things as media bias and sometimes folks don't soar things the way they should. We've been the recipient of that. So I get that, you get that, and I acknowledge that, But is this the way to go about doing it? Does this potentially lead to something dangerous? That's my biggest issue. And then again, the time and resources spent to this. It's just you know, we're paying for this as taxpayers.
00:10:19
Speaker 1: None of this necessarily is new. The arguments being made and all of these breakdowns or how this out they did wrong and this reporter did wrong. Some of the stuff's not new. We've heard the President call out and complain about how the reporting is done. But yes, to your point, to see a list, to see a list of offenders every week kind of a wanted thing. It does, and that is how it feels. I didn't take that initially until you started saying then the exposed thing that you just pointed out, it does. It does have that kind of sense. So what you were just arguing there about the truth is going to be the problem now. So we're going to go through the offender of the week here, and this is how they do it. One section says outlet. So it lists CBS News, the Boston Globe, and the Independent. Those are the ones who offended. Now rope what their offense is. And this is immediately will signal to everybody, Well, that's not necessarily the truth. It's just your your feeling. You didn't like that they reported what the fuck you said, exactly what it said. But the offense is it's this hard to I don't know, it's hard to argue that.
00:11:21
Speaker 2: So here's the offense.
00:11:21
Speaker 3: The media misrepresented President Trump's call for members of Congress to be held accountable for inciting sedition by saying that he called for their execution.
00:11:31
Speaker 1: Okay, they said he called for their execution. Did they say that he called for.
00:11:38
Speaker 3: Them No, he said that they were guilty of sedition. And remember, sedition is punishable by death.
00:11:43
Speaker 1: That's what he said, sedition. He posted this they are they should be investigated for sedition and sedition is punishable by death. Now, if you just report what the president said, are you giving the wrong impression that that you're saying the President wants them executed?
00:12:00
Speaker 3: And I think a lot of times we just read his truth social posts and say.
00:12:05
Speaker 2: Take that for what it is. How you interpret it, that's on you.
00:12:09
Speaker 3: But he did specifically call for those six lawmakers to be imprisoned. They should be in jailaid that.
00:12:17
Speaker 1: So in this section of the Offenders of the Week, he says the truth. This is how they have it listed the truth. The Democrats and fake news media subversively imply that President Trump had issued illegal orders to service members. Every order President Trump has issued has been lawful. It is dangerous for sitting members of Congress who incite in subordination in the United States military, and President Trump called for them to be held accountable. He says that's what the truth is. He does not mention in there at all that the president actually said that it is seditious and that sedition is punishable by death. He said it, I didn't. If he would have just said it was seditious, I wouldn't have immediately jumped to I think that one's punishable death.
00:12:56
Speaker 3: And he also reposted, let's just remind everyone some conservative commentors who were talking about nooses and hanging folks, and he reposted them so to act as if it was some big leap or some big horrific offense that the media jumped to the conclusion he breadcrumbed that and left a trail heading straight to a noose.
00:13:18
Speaker 2: I mean, that is just.
00:13:19
Speaker 3: And he also, by the way, sorry, specifically lists the names the reporters within the outlets. This is next to the offense the truth, and he lists the reporter Alisa Vega, and then there's a link and you actually can click on her name. It's just Andrew Feinberg, Eric Garcia, Nancy Cordes. I know Nancy Cordes. You know, we all are in this community. And just to see these names singled out, that is what's concerning to me.
00:13:45
Speaker 1: Do you know what's going to happen. You're going to have some reporters out there trying to make the list. Trump has made stars of reporters. He has gotten people promotions. I say he has gotten because when people take the moment to say, let me go after this guy, let me get him to talk about me, let him point me out, I will be a star. I will get an anchor job, I will get more followers. Oh. Absolutely, you got some working every day trying to make this list.
00:14:10
Speaker 3: I know you're right, but I would be the opposite. I would be feeling like I needed to get extra security. I would be nervous if my name was on that list.
00:14:17
Speaker 1: You would feel absolutely targeted. Now down at the bottom, where you talked about a Fender hall of shame? What got me here? It says a Fender hall of shame. It's essentially, I guess a database of all the past offenders. But it has its four sections as to claim, the publication, the reporter, and the category. The categories are the ones that kind of were intriguing to me. One of the categories was woke. You can classify some of the offenses under just being woke.
00:14:43
Speaker 3: Wow, because if you are thinking about someone other than the community you live in. And if you're regarding how someone else feels versus how you feel, you're too woke and therefore you should be on the leaderboard.
00:14:56
Speaker 1: All right, But I thought this was a while that on Black Friday, this thing come out when we were starting to think about the Christmas holiday season, and he has literally a naughty list. But when we come back, I mentioned some of those on the naughty list, including Joe Scarborough, you know, the whole CNN BBC staff, Nate Burlson over at CBS, and also mentioned Whoopy Goldberg. What in the world did Whoopby Goldberg do to get on the list? Stay here, all right, folks, We continue now with the President's naughty list of reporters. This was fascinating. It did launch on Friday, the folks over at the White House. There is on the White House Web, theofficial white House dot gov page, there was a section for media Offender of the Week. It was just launched yesterday and it really is a collection I guess, of the people the president and the organizations the President has taken an issue with any of their reporting, yes.
00:15:57
Speaker 3: And he so he has the media Offenders of the Week he actually picked three of them this week. But if you go down to the offender Hall of Shame, he has already won two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten.
00:16:11
Speaker 2: And that's just on like there are how many pages. I don't there was so much work.
00:16:16
Speaker 3: Put into this, but he has gone through all of these stories. He didn't like all of the reporters who were attached to the stories, and then put them in a category, as you mentioned, But this is tremendous and Whoopy Goldberg does.
00:16:32
Speaker 2: Stand down among them.
00:16:34
Speaker 3: She was upset that she made up a song to slam Trump for building the White House ballroom. So it says publication ABC News reporter Whoopy Goldberg.
00:16:42
Speaker 2: Category left wing Lunacy.
00:16:44
Speaker 1: That's one of my favorites.
00:16:45
Speaker 2: That's one of the categories.
00:16:47
Speaker 1: I like that one.
00:16:48
Speaker 3: In all of these, you can click on and the presumption is in the days and weeks to come, when you click on left wing lunacy, you'll have a list of offenders and defenses.
00:16:57
Speaker 1: The other one listed under left wing lunacy. The only other person that category is an Anabara over at the View. I don't think he likes the show.
00:17:06
Speaker 2: No, I don't think he does either, but you have.
00:17:08
Speaker 3: We listed all the categories here because this is interesting.
00:17:11
Speaker 1: I just say I woke.
00:17:12
Speaker 3: Okay, there's woke, there's misrepresentation, there's a mission of context, bias, malpractice. Uh, there's another, Okay, I'm looking lie. There's just one that just says lie. There's one that says false claim. There's just bias.
00:17:30
Speaker 1: Yes.
00:17:30
Speaker 3: So those are all the different categories. And sometimes when you have a story that he doesn't like, he'll put you in multiple categories. So you can click on the different categories and just see all the different stories that fall into this.
00:17:41
Speaker 1: And his list of publications. I guess this is a who's who. The ones that stand out at least people have been talking about with CBS News, Fox News on this list, those are at least Fox News of publication that's very friendly to him, and then CBS News, of course, is going a direction that maybe he likes. But he did call out a couple of reporters, but no Fox News and and CBS News don't appear a lot, frankly on this list. He also has a list of repeat offenders, and there's a little graphic the leader board. What is that about?
00:18:10
Speaker 3: So the leader board I was looking at that it looks like it's a race to who's the worst, and the Washington Post right now is first, it says, MSNBC made it second, CBS News was third, CNN, New York Times, Political, Wall Street Journal. Maybe that's just weekly, but yeah, it's almost like you're watching a race to the finish line, and he is the Washington Post at number one right now.
00:18:31
Speaker 1: Yeah, consider it just plays over and over. Really, folks, it's a little graphic that shows all of the kind of graphics of each of these publications, and they're racing across the race to the bottom or.
00:18:43
Speaker 3: A race to the bottom. And then you have the repeat offenders that he has them in circles, and the bigger the circle, the worse you are. So right now again, the Washington Post is number one. I'm curious do you believe, because there have already been suggestions that because of all of the lawsuits that he has been successful where he sues any publication who he thinks did not give him an accurate or a fair shake.
00:19:05
Speaker 1: It has been coming out on top.
00:19:07
Speaker 2: Like wildly on top.
00:19:09
Speaker 3: Do you think putting up this sort of web page that folks are now going to subscribe to and read and you're going to be called out with links to your names, your reporters you're reporting. Do you think this is going to change the way journalists do their jobs.
00:19:25
Speaker 1: I think it already asked before this. I can't imagine being in a root news room. People are running scared. You're scared. You're so careful in what you say and how you say it about this guy because it could get you sued. I bet there are whole departments now and people dedicated just to reviewing Trump coverage.
00:19:43
Speaker 3: I totally agree with you, because I know this, and you know this, and every single journalist knows this.
00:19:50
Speaker 2: The biggest single obstacle to getting.
00:19:54
Speaker 3: A story on the air, even before Trump, before any of this, was to get through the process of having it legally reviewed so that the newsroom and the network massively reduces their chances of getting sued.
00:20:10
Speaker 2: And it has been a frustrating. It's been a frustrating obstacle course to go through. Throughout the three.
00:20:17
Speaker 3: Decades I've been reporting, I had stories that I pushed to get on there that couldn't, that were valuable and good because they were too afraid of getting sued. I can't even imagine what isn't being told and how.
00:20:28
Speaker 2: Carefully things are being reported.
00:20:29
Speaker 3: Look, it's a good thing to make sure your sources are checked and rechecked and validated and resourced. I applaud that we shouldn't be putting out something we aren't absolutely certain of.
00:20:40
Speaker 1: I agree with that, But it's been the case though. That hasn't changed. We just got somebody with the biggest microphone on planet Earth, who happens to have maybe one of the biggest personalities that we've ever seen, in the White House, who doesn't give a damn, who will go forward and do what he was. Yes, we got a different do I don't think we haven't all of a sudden started the industry, I mean started reporting poorly because he's in the White House. No, we just got a guy who wants to push back and he's not afraid to do so in these bullying manners sometimes so, Yes, that makes you change your change your stance, change how you report, be a little careful tiptoe. Yes, it will cause you to not go after and do your job as aggressively as you would have. Maybe that's a good thing. Maybe it call to you to check a third and a fourth and a fifth and a sixth source before you put that out there. Maybe it does push folks to do a better job and be more accurate in their reporting, or maybe it just.
00:21:37
Speaker 3: Scares or maybe yes, they aren't going to be as willing to go after or to follow sources down a path that they think could put them in in the line of fire.
00:21:49
Speaker 2: With the president of the United States.
00:21:52
Speaker 1: You know what, I can't remember it. I'm only going to mention this. I don't remember the story and it's not connected to this one. But it was a guy. It was I think it was a state lawmaker who he was asked about going against Trump and why he wouldn't do some simple thing. I'm sorry, I don't have the accurate description of the story, but it was this ropes he had. This was his response, I'd rather not have my house fire bombed exactly. So that mindset is not just a matter of this president's going to come after me. There might be somebody crazy enough to execute his orders, at least in their mind of what they're hearing. That's scary, and this is not helping to your original point. I first saw it, and I would I'll admit, I'm like, wow, this is crazy. Almost you hold him to a different standard. Oh it's chopped, done this thing again. But you you're right, this stuff is dangerous and the way it looks doesn't add It doesn't do what we need to be doing, which is bring the temperature down.
00:22:48
Speaker 3: Yes, and again, if my name, if your name was on this list, I would I would operate differently. I would actually consider security. I would actually I would be I would be worried and concerned. That's just I mean, maybe that's me jumping, maybe I'm taking it too far, but we've just seen enough. We've seen enough people take the smallest of hints and or take him at his actual word and think somehow that they're being personally called to action.
00:23:20
Speaker 2: That makes me nervous.
00:23:23
Speaker 1: Well, folks, it's there for you to see. Just go to White House dot gov. It will take you seven seconds to get to it. The media offender of the week. And with that, folks, we always appreciate you spending some time here with us. Rose. We had to work to stay off this list.
00:23:39
Speaker 2: Yeah, I would like to.
00:23:41
Speaker 3: I was actually just thinking, Yes, I fully agree, and I don't think that we have. We've been very careful to try and not be political. I will say things about anything personally, or a choice or words. Those are all things that it doesn't matter what side of the alley on. You can still agree with someone's policies and not like how they are speaking of them or talking about other people in regards to them. But in terms of politics, I think we've tried really hard to stay in the middle of the road when it comes to policy or party affiliation. You can still call people out for scary or bad behavior regardless of what you think about their politics.
00:24:20
Speaker 1: Yes, we don't do politics. We don't endorse candidates other than Sean Duffy for the next president of the United States. All right with that, we always appreciate you listening. We will talk beyond
Speaker 1: Hey there, folks. It is Saturday, November twenty ninth. Then, just in time for the holiday season, President Trump has put out his naughty List and who's on it. Nate Burleson, Whoopee Goldberg, Joe Scarborough, the entire staff of CNN and the BBC, you name it. And with that, welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ Full Disclosure Robes. This was not the episode we planned to do this morning, but I when you got up, I said, babe, you have got to see what the President put out, and we switched things up.
00:00:34
Speaker 2: That is a true story. I woke up and you said, babe.
00:00:37
Speaker 3: Overnight, or at least late last night, the White House, the President put up basically a I don't know, would it be their version of a wanted poster like media offenders list. It basically lists who, what and what the crime was basically.
00:00:53
Speaker 1: And the criminals are all reporters and publications. I say criminal in quotes there, but you get what I'm saying. Well, I guess he probably has cues some of them of being actual criminals. But this is just a continuation of the ongoing assault that the President has had on the media, on the fake news as he puts it in on oftentimes the liberal media, but this roades it's messaging is one thing. Responding is another thing. But this is this seems targeted, It seems it seems a little I say, it seems petty. But a lot of work put in this.
00:01:25
Speaker 3: This is a oh I was thinking the same thing. How much time, resources, how much effort, and how much of our tax dollars went to create this website that basically is exposing, to use.
00:01:39
Speaker 2: Their word, what they don't like.
00:01:43
Speaker 3: And who they think is against them, and who they think is biased and misleading. But they're using government resources to expose members of the media for coverage that they don't agree with or like.
00:01:56
Speaker 1: They say agree with theike what they say is wrong. They this is their argument. They're saying that these people are putting out false stories, false narratives, they are not giving a proper context to things, and their bias is coming through. Fine, that is not new from what we have heard from this administration. But this is new at least I don't remember another administration or any point anybody putting out what is essentially a list folks, a list of offenders in the media every single week that they claim are telling stories that don't they say accurately convey what the President has either said or has done.
00:02:38
Speaker 3: Do you worry what the reaction might be? Obviously, folks can read this and say duh. If you are more right leaning, you're gonna look at this and say, yeah, I know, I agree, and you're going to yes, be validated by what you feel the coverage is. And then you see what the White House is also saying what is wrong about the coverage. But I worry about the fringe and just this whole concept of words matter and naming people and pointing the finger and saying you're doing this to us. You're going against the United States, You're going against our government. And I worry about having a list of names. It's not just outlets, but he goes after, as you pointed out at the beginning, specific people, and that worries me. With what we've seen in this country in recent months.
00:03:25
Speaker 1: Okay, so let's tell you what we've been seeing here, folks. Is not a This isn't some secondary or website or some new thing that was created. Whitehouse dot gov the official White House web page that you go to. There's a menu on the left and I drop down menu and it'll show you things you can check on the news, the administration. You has a whole bio on Donald Trump. JD Van's Melania Trump. This is stuff we used to seeing, the whole cabinet. Then the next section is media and it has a gallery. It says live news, video library, and media offenders. So this is on white House dot gov. You don't have to try too hard, to go too far to find this, and it comes up misleading, biased, exposed, media offender of the week, and rogues. We had three, I guess for the inaugural launching of this website, he had three media offenders of the week, The.
00:04:19
Speaker 3: Boston Globes exposed, CBS News exposed, the Independent exposed.
00:04:26
Speaker 1: Okay, you made me think. Now you're making me see this a little differently when you said you worry about how the fringe right folks might see this in a list of names, and they actually say on here that the offense right, as if it was a crime. But we're explaining here it's stamped all right, CBS News, Boston Club. It has a stamp over it like you would see captured. Yes, it's it's exposed. Wanted posters.
00:04:48
Speaker 3: That's the feeling and the image I got when I looked at the specific choices they made for the art they used, how to depict which media outlets they feel like have gone a against them and therefore against the country with that type of rhetoric, and that yes, it looks like these people are wanted and need to be captured.
00:05:09
Speaker 1: So they lay out here. So they have the video first of all, and I guess that was the story of the week with the president, the six members of Congress who put out a video telling members of the military that they do have the right to refuse illegal orders. The President, of course got upset about that. It's called it seditious and said it was punishable by death. He put this out in social media. So this is the basis for our offenders of the week. Now it lists and the reasons they say these are your offenders, but it says outlet, the offense, the reporter, the truth, the claim, the key points, and the category of what they have done wrong. Road's time went into this.
00:05:50
Speaker 3: This was I was my jaw dropped. You said, you won't believe when you go onto this. You're like, I'm not even going to explain it. You just need to go on the website and see for yourself. And that was one of my first thoughts. First I thought this could be dangerous, and second I thought, my god, how much time and effort and money went into putting this list together. And by the way, this isn't a one off, as it suggests media offender of the week. This is now going to be an ongoing situation. In fact, they have an offender Hall of Shame and at the bottom of it they allow you to sign up so that you can get alerts for basically, do you want the truth? Each week it asks sign up for the offender alerts delivered to your inbox. So now you sign up, you put your email address, and you get alerts every time there is an outlet or a reporter that they that does something or write something, or disseminate something that the White House doesn't agree with.
00:06:46
Speaker 1: It's brilliant if just as a media strategy, brilliant. No, I'm not taking any stand right wrong and who's got the right messaging, But this dude is a media master. Now I'm not. This is not a stance on any policy or anything he has done, but as far as media goes, he is fighting the media every sece. He's putting them on notice. We are actually watching and we're gonna call you out, and we are going to pump this into the inboxes of all the people that support us to reinforce once again, make sure they know not to like you and don't believe anything you say, and only believe us. It seems as if Robes we're in a point in the country where someone has a monopoly on the truth. It can only be this or that. Either we have it or they have it. We're in an argument now where CNN, CBA, We've worked all these places. We know there's things that you don't get right. But generally speaking, in newsrooms there are decent folks trying to do a good job who are not in there having a meeting, say, how are we gonna go after Trump today? That's just not happening.
00:07:59
Speaker 3: Is happening at least it wasn't happening when we were in the media, and I doubt things have changed that much in the last three years. But I will say I do agree with you. I think most journalists want to tell the truth. They want the public to know the truth, and they want to let the public decide given the information they disseminate without any leaning. Now do we always get it right? Do certain reporters and certain outlets perhaps have a leaning or a slant one hundred percent? And look, I think we should take out certain cable outlets that absolutely have agendas or are known to be left leaning.
00:08:36
Speaker 1: They a lot of They're clear.
00:08:37
Speaker 3: Fox and SNBC are not correct hiding that correct, So I think that should be pointed out. Yes, Fox on one side, MSNBC on the other end. Look, I worked at MSNBC, so yes, that is all. And they don't deny that. Well maybe Fox News does. They say they're fair and balanced. I think MSNBC knows exactly who they are, okay, but I think they would say that they're the ones who actually do tell the truth.
00:08:59
Speaker 1: From seven to eleven o'clock at night. I'm saying, it's okay, we get it. You're a conservative leaning thing. Fine, and what you're saying you believe to be the truth or these are your beliefs. That is fine. That was funny ro And.
00:09:11
Speaker 4: I know, I know I just want to fine in defensive Fox News, But I do think that that that's what is disturbing to me because I think everyone who understands and we all get how democracies work. You need a free press, and you need a press that is curious, a press that presses further, that asks the follow ups, that doesn't just take what the White House or whoever is in charge gives you as the absolute truth. Corruption exists on all levels, in the media and in the government, and we have to be able to check one another. So I get that they're saying, hey, we're checking you journalists. Because you're checking us, We're gonna check you. I don't think there's anything wrong with calling into questions this report, because we do get things wrong, yep.
00:09:55
Speaker 3: And there are such things as media bias and sometimes folks don't soar things the way they should. We've been the recipient of that. So I get that, you get that, and I acknowledge that, But is this the way to go about doing it? Does this potentially lead to something dangerous? That's my biggest issue. And then again, the time and resources spent to this. It's just you know, we're paying for this as taxpayers.
00:10:19
Speaker 1: None of this necessarily is new. The arguments being made and all of these breakdowns or how this out they did wrong and this reporter did wrong. Some of the stuff's not new. We've heard the President call out and complain about how the reporting is done. But yes, to your point, to see a list, to see a list of offenders every week kind of a wanted thing. It does, and that is how it feels. I didn't take that initially until you started saying then the exposed thing that you just pointed out, it does. It does have that kind of sense. So what you were just arguing there about the truth is going to be the problem now. So we're going to go through the offender of the week here, and this is how they do it. One section says outlet. So it lists CBS News, the Boston Globe, and the Independent. Those are the ones who offended. Now rope what their offense is. And this is immediately will signal to everybody, Well, that's not necessarily the truth. It's just your your feeling. You didn't like that they reported what the fuck you said, exactly what it said. But the offense is it's this hard to I don't know, it's hard to argue that.
00:11:21
Speaker 2: So here's the offense.
00:11:21
Speaker 3: The media misrepresented President Trump's call for members of Congress to be held accountable for inciting sedition by saying that he called for their execution.
00:11:31
Speaker 1: Okay, they said he called for their execution. Did they say that he called for.
00:11:38
Speaker 3: Them No, he said that they were guilty of sedition. And remember, sedition is punishable by death.
00:11:43
Speaker 1: That's what he said, sedition. He posted this they are they should be investigated for sedition and sedition is punishable by death. Now, if you just report what the president said, are you giving the wrong impression that that you're saying the President wants them executed?
00:12:00
Speaker 3: And I think a lot of times we just read his truth social posts and say.
00:12:05
Speaker 2: Take that for what it is. How you interpret it, that's on you.
00:12:09
Speaker 3: But he did specifically call for those six lawmakers to be imprisoned. They should be in jailaid that.
00:12:17
Speaker 1: So in this section of the Offenders of the Week, he says the truth. This is how they have it listed the truth. The Democrats and fake news media subversively imply that President Trump had issued illegal orders to service members. Every order President Trump has issued has been lawful. It is dangerous for sitting members of Congress who incite in subordination in the United States military, and President Trump called for them to be held accountable. He says that's what the truth is. He does not mention in there at all that the president actually said that it is seditious and that sedition is punishable by death. He said it, I didn't. If he would have just said it was seditious, I wouldn't have immediately jumped to I think that one's punishable death.
00:12:56
Speaker 3: And he also reposted, let's just remind everyone some conservative commentors who were talking about nooses and hanging folks, and he reposted them so to act as if it was some big leap or some big horrific offense that the media jumped to the conclusion he breadcrumbed that and left a trail heading straight to a noose.
00:13:18
Speaker 2: I mean, that is just.
00:13:19
Speaker 3: And he also, by the way, sorry, specifically lists the names the reporters within the outlets. This is next to the offense the truth, and he lists the reporter Alisa Vega, and then there's a link and you actually can click on her name. It's just Andrew Feinberg, Eric Garcia, Nancy Cordes. I know Nancy Cordes. You know, we all are in this community. And just to see these names singled out, that is what's concerning to me.
00:13:45
Speaker 1: Do you know what's going to happen. You're going to have some reporters out there trying to make the list. Trump has made stars of reporters. He has gotten people promotions. I say he has gotten because when people take the moment to say, let me go after this guy, let me get him to talk about me, let him point me out, I will be a star. I will get an anchor job, I will get more followers. Oh. Absolutely, you got some working every day trying to make this list.
00:14:10
Speaker 3: I know you're right, but I would be the opposite. I would be feeling like I needed to get extra security. I would be nervous if my name was on that list.
00:14:17
Speaker 1: You would feel absolutely targeted. Now down at the bottom, where you talked about a Fender hall of shame? What got me here? It says a Fender hall of shame. It's essentially, I guess a database of all the past offenders. But it has its four sections as to claim, the publication, the reporter, and the category. The categories are the ones that kind of were intriguing to me. One of the categories was woke. You can classify some of the offenses under just being woke.
00:14:43
Speaker 3: Wow, because if you are thinking about someone other than the community you live in. And if you're regarding how someone else feels versus how you feel, you're too woke and therefore you should be on the leaderboard.
00:14:56
Speaker 1: All right, But I thought this was a while that on Black Friday, this thing come out when we were starting to think about the Christmas holiday season, and he has literally a naughty list. But when we come back, I mentioned some of those on the naughty list, including Joe Scarborough, you know, the whole CNN BBC staff, Nate Burlson over at CBS, and also mentioned Whoopy Goldberg. What in the world did Whoopby Goldberg do to get on the list? Stay here, all right, folks, We continue now with the President's naughty list of reporters. This was fascinating. It did launch on Friday, the folks over at the White House. There is on the White House Web, theofficial white House dot gov page, there was a section for media Offender of the Week. It was just launched yesterday and it really is a collection I guess, of the people the president and the organizations the President has taken an issue with any of their reporting, yes.
00:15:57
Speaker 3: And he so he has the media Offenders of the Week he actually picked three of them this week. But if you go down to the offender Hall of Shame, he has already won two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten.
00:16:11
Speaker 2: And that's just on like there are how many pages. I don't there was so much work.
00:16:16
Speaker 3: Put into this, but he has gone through all of these stories. He didn't like all of the reporters who were attached to the stories, and then put them in a category, as you mentioned, But this is tremendous and Whoopy Goldberg does.
00:16:32
Speaker 2: Stand down among them.
00:16:34
Speaker 3: She was upset that she made up a song to slam Trump for building the White House ballroom. So it says publication ABC News reporter Whoopy Goldberg.
00:16:42
Speaker 2: Category left wing Lunacy.
00:16:44
Speaker 1: That's one of my favorites.
00:16:45
Speaker 2: That's one of the categories.
00:16:47
Speaker 1: I like that one.
00:16:48
Speaker 3: In all of these, you can click on and the presumption is in the days and weeks to come, when you click on left wing lunacy, you'll have a list of offenders and defenses.
00:16:57
Speaker 1: The other one listed under left wing lunacy. The only other person that category is an Anabara over at the View. I don't think he likes the show.
00:17:06
Speaker 2: No, I don't think he does either, but you have.
00:17:08
Speaker 3: We listed all the categories here because this is interesting.
00:17:11
Speaker 1: I just say I woke.
00:17:12
Speaker 3: Okay, there's woke, there's misrepresentation, there's a mission of context, bias, malpractice. Uh, there's another, Okay, I'm looking lie. There's just one that just says lie. There's one that says false claim. There's just bias.
00:17:30
Speaker 1: Yes.
00:17:30
Speaker 3: So those are all the different categories. And sometimes when you have a story that he doesn't like, he'll put you in multiple categories. So you can click on the different categories and just see all the different stories that fall into this.
00:17:41
Speaker 1: And his list of publications. I guess this is a who's who. The ones that stand out at least people have been talking about with CBS News, Fox News on this list, those are at least Fox News of publication that's very friendly to him, and then CBS News, of course, is going a direction that maybe he likes. But he did call out a couple of reporters, but no Fox News and and CBS News don't appear a lot, frankly on this list. He also has a list of repeat offenders, and there's a little graphic the leader board. What is that about?
00:18:10
Speaker 3: So the leader board I was looking at that it looks like it's a race to who's the worst, and the Washington Post right now is first, it says, MSNBC made it second, CBS News was third, CNN, New York Times, Political, Wall Street Journal. Maybe that's just weekly, but yeah, it's almost like you're watching a race to the finish line, and he is the Washington Post at number one right now.
00:18:31
Speaker 1: Yeah, consider it just plays over and over. Really, folks, it's a little graphic that shows all of the kind of graphics of each of these publications, and they're racing across the race to the bottom or.
00:18:43
Speaker 3: A race to the bottom. And then you have the repeat offenders that he has them in circles, and the bigger the circle, the worse you are. So right now again, the Washington Post is number one. I'm curious do you believe, because there have already been suggestions that because of all of the lawsuits that he has been successful where he sues any publication who he thinks did not give him an accurate or a fair shake.
00:19:05
Speaker 1: It has been coming out on top.
00:19:07
Speaker 2: Like wildly on top.
00:19:09
Speaker 3: Do you think putting up this sort of web page that folks are now going to subscribe to and read and you're going to be called out with links to your names, your reporters you're reporting. Do you think this is going to change the way journalists do their jobs.
00:19:25
Speaker 1: I think it already asked before this. I can't imagine being in a root news room. People are running scared. You're scared. You're so careful in what you say and how you say it about this guy because it could get you sued. I bet there are whole departments now and people dedicated just to reviewing Trump coverage.
00:19:43
Speaker 3: I totally agree with you, because I know this, and you know this, and every single journalist knows this.
00:19:50
Speaker 2: The biggest single obstacle to getting.
00:19:54
Speaker 3: A story on the air, even before Trump, before any of this, was to get through the process of having it legally reviewed so that the newsroom and the network massively reduces their chances of getting sued.
00:20:10
Speaker 2: And it has been a frustrating. It's been a frustrating obstacle course to go through. Throughout the three.
00:20:17
Speaker 3: Decades I've been reporting, I had stories that I pushed to get on there that couldn't, that were valuable and good because they were too afraid of getting sued. I can't even imagine what isn't being told and how.
00:20:28
Speaker 2: Carefully things are being reported.
00:20:29
Speaker 3: Look, it's a good thing to make sure your sources are checked and rechecked and validated and resourced. I applaud that we shouldn't be putting out something we aren't absolutely certain of.
00:20:40
Speaker 1: I agree with that, But it's been the case though. That hasn't changed. We just got somebody with the biggest microphone on planet Earth, who happens to have maybe one of the biggest personalities that we've ever seen, in the White House, who doesn't give a damn, who will go forward and do what he was. Yes, we got a different do I don't think we haven't all of a sudden started the industry, I mean started reporting poorly because he's in the White House. No, we just got a guy who wants to push back and he's not afraid to do so in these bullying manners sometimes so, Yes, that makes you change your change your stance, change how you report, be a little careful tiptoe. Yes, it will cause you to not go after and do your job as aggressively as you would have. Maybe that's a good thing. Maybe it call to you to check a third and a fourth and a fifth and a sixth source before you put that out there. Maybe it does push folks to do a better job and be more accurate in their reporting, or maybe it just.
00:21:37
Speaker 3: Scares or maybe yes, they aren't going to be as willing to go after or to follow sources down a path that they think could put them in in the line of fire.
00:21:49
Speaker 2: With the president of the United States.
00:21:52
Speaker 1: You know what, I can't remember it. I'm only going to mention this. I don't remember the story and it's not connected to this one. But it was a guy. It was I think it was a state lawmaker who he was asked about going against Trump and why he wouldn't do some simple thing. I'm sorry, I don't have the accurate description of the story, but it was this ropes he had. This was his response, I'd rather not have my house fire bombed exactly. So that mindset is not just a matter of this president's going to come after me. There might be somebody crazy enough to execute his orders, at least in their mind of what they're hearing. That's scary, and this is not helping to your original point. I first saw it, and I would I'll admit, I'm like, wow, this is crazy. Almost you hold him to a different standard. Oh it's chopped, done this thing again. But you you're right, this stuff is dangerous and the way it looks doesn't add It doesn't do what we need to be doing, which is bring the temperature down.
00:22:48
Speaker 3: Yes, and again, if my name, if your name was on this list, I would I would operate differently. I would actually consider security. I would actually I would be I would be worried and concerned. That's just I mean, maybe that's me jumping, maybe I'm taking it too far, but we've just seen enough. We've seen enough people take the smallest of hints and or take him at his actual word and think somehow that they're being personally called to action.
00:23:20
Speaker 2: That makes me nervous.
00:23:23
Speaker 1: Well, folks, it's there for you to see. Just go to White House dot gov. It will take you seven seconds to get to it. The media offender of the week. And with that, folks, we always appreciate you spending some time here with us. Rose. We had to work to stay off this list.
00:23:39
Speaker 2: Yeah, I would like to.
00:23:41
Speaker 3: I was actually just thinking, Yes, I fully agree, and I don't think that we have. We've been very careful to try and not be political. I will say things about anything personally, or a choice or words. Those are all things that it doesn't matter what side of the alley on. You can still agree with someone's policies and not like how they are speaking of them or talking about other people in regards to them. But in terms of politics, I think we've tried really hard to stay in the middle of the road when it comes to policy or party affiliation. You can still call people out for scary or bad behavior regardless of what you think about their politics.
00:24:20
Speaker 1: Yes, we don't do politics. We don't endorse candidates other than Sean Duffy for the next president of the United States. All right with that, we always appreciate you listening. We will talk beyond