Talking about hate crime statistics, the FBI have released their 2017 hate crime statistic report here.

This contradicts what you say in the first part of 2)
That aside, why? What if the article just mentions the two most serious offenders out of many?
What the article does is one way to put it. The other would be to call them serial liars, which would require proof - a rather high hurdle.
Target the messenger, not the argument?

Not true. Not all stories are based on singular events. Moreover, the underlying basis of many reports require an understanding of data sources and data manipulation. In my former life, I worked with health and medical journalists and they absolutely needed to better understand statistics. Many times they did not. It‘s not, as you suggest, all about anecdotes.

This is amusing.....

https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...-causes-cancer

And I quote:


——————————————————

President Trump on Tuesday stepped up his attacks against wind power, claiming that the structures decrease property values and that the noise they emit causes cancer.

“If you have a windmill anywhere near your house, congratulations, your house just went down 75 percent in value. And they say the noise causes cancer,” the president said while delivering remarks at the National Republican Congressional Committee's annual spring dinner. He offered no evidence to support the claim.


The president also said wind turbines are a "graveyard for birds."

“If you love birds, you never want to walk under a windmill, because it’s a sad, sad sight," he said, though the Department of Energy has noted that bird deaths from the structures are rare.


Trump was making the comments while talking about his 2016 presidential opponent, Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, who had proposed investing in wind power to lower carbon emissions.

Trump has previously voiced his disapproval of wind power. He said at a rally in Michigan last month that wind power doesn't work because the wind doesn't always blow.

"If it doesn't blow, you can forget about television for that night," Trump said.

" 'Darling, I want to watch television.' 'I'm sorry! The wind isn't blowing.' I know a lot about wind," he added.

——————————————————-


Well, he does indeed know quite a lot about wind.......

Good grief, that man's a buffoon.

And that's being nice.

Latest example
Source

Does not matter, his base believes every word he says; no matter how ridiculous.

At least it is true that his mother's last name was Christ. Would that make him a descendant of Jesus Christ?

Even the fake news machine couldn‘t invent something as mental as that. Had to read your post a couple of times to let it sink in.

What a time to be alive! Kids in history lessons in years to come will be begging to hear stories of Mad Donald Trump.

So let me get this straight Reids, you are unaware the "Steele dossier" was the impetus for Mueller's investigation? Comey handed this info to Trump in January of 2017 which led to Buzzfeed's publication (note that other outlets had this info/dossier but no one else dared to publish it because it could not be verified). Until, Comey, gifted the media with the event. And that dossier was financed by the Clinton campaign to get some "dirt" on Trump should they need it (remember, Hilary, had this election locked in according to the media) And now you claim whether those facts are true or untrue or mere supposition is irrelevant?

Wow..on all levels (no exclamation point need here )

<patchwork of pastes apparently out of order with contradictions introduced with an exclamation mark as if that makes a point more valid>
…..

PS..Not a patchwork of pastes Reids, but an actual article:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politic...usions-813171/

Please read Tabbai's account on the media's failure regarding journalistic integrity. That said, it may not support your own bias, so perhaps you should give it a miss?

Again, I never voted for Trump and am not a Trump supporter, but I would like to think the media could do its job regarding fair and balanced reporting.

there is so much wrongness and misinterpretation here that I'm not even going to bother, thanks for playing.

Really? Now THAT I find very amusing

Read the Rolling Stone article and that may help clarify things...

https://www.rollingstone.com/politic...usions-813171/

During a night of heavy drinking at an upscale London bar in May 2016, George Papadopoulos, a young foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign, made a startling revelation to Australia’s top diplomat in Britain: Russia had political dirt on Hillary Clinton.

The revelation that a member of the Trump campaign may have had inside information about the Russian hack of DNC emails were driving factors that led the F.B.I. to open an investigation in July 2016 into Russia’s attempts to disrupt the election and whether any of President Trump’s associates conspired.

You will notice this FBI investigation started long before Mueller was appointed, so nothing to do with the "Steele dossier"?

The impetus for Mueller's investigation was actually Trump firing Comey which could have been obstruction of justice; a criminal act that Mueller himself was unable to rule out.

Now you are quoting fake news media? Any port in a storm

Source Marton? Not buying it! I believe Trump fired Comey because Comey opened the floodgates (with the dossier) and tried to manipulate Trump and hold him ransom. In Trump's position, I would do the same.

Try reading the GOP led House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Report on Russian Active Measures March 22, 2018

For example;

How could Comey manipulate Trump and hold him ransom when multiple people had already distributed the dossier; including to the media?

I don't think you understand how a ransom process works??

Anyway Trump gave multiple conflicting reasons for firing Comey; none of which coincide with your theory!

And we are supposed to believe the so-called "coffee boy" - Papadopoulos? So the FBI started their "investigation" with his account. But no one in the media touched it. Why? Perhaps there were holes in his account? And then the dossier comes out, but again no one in the media touches it (as its claims cannot be verified). Until, lo and behold, Comey hands Trump the report in January 2107, opening the floodgates for the media to pounce.

Marton, why did the media not act sooner? Because they could not substantiate/verify the accounts/accusations? They knew about the dossier but chose not to report it. Why exactly? In January, Comey, by handing the report to Trump, gave them the ammunition, hence the Buzzfeed article which led to the "investigation" by Mueller.