Priebus said: “Look, I’m not going to rule out anything. But, we are not going to have a registry based on religion.” NBC News reported only the first sentence, to give the impression that he was leaving the door open to a Muslim registry, which he had explicitly ruled out. One of the best revelations of the 2016 presidential campaign was the release of definitive evidence that the mainstream media is just a propaganda arm for the hard-Left, and not in any sense a reliable news source. This is just another example.
“NBC Blasted, Bias Reporting on Priebus’ Muslim Registry Rejection,” by Cathy Burke, Newsmax, November 20, 2016 (thanks to Lookmann):
NBC News was blasted Sunday for tweeting out a half-quote from President-elect Donald Trump’s chief of staff that made it seem the new administration was leaving the door open to a Muslim registry.
During an interview with Republican National Committee head Reince Priebus, Trump’s newly named chief of staff, on NBC News’ “Meet the Press,” moderator Chuck Todd asked if he could “rule out a registry for Muslims.”
Priebus replied: “Look, I’m not going to rule out anything. But, we are not going to have a registry based on religion.”
The network’s public relations department, however, posted only the first sentence in a pair of tweets to promote the segment.
“This quote is in fact opposite of what PR tweet indicates,” New York Times political correspondent Maggie Haberman noted in her own tweet of the exchange.
A senior technology writer for BuzzFeed, Charlie Warzel, lashed out at the tweet as an “irresponsible half-quote w/o even a link for context.”…

Angemon says
This is the kind of bulls*** that gets people to distrust the MSM. You have no one to blame but yourselves when you go out of business – lying and deceiving the audience, as well as insulting them, is NOT a good business model for companies dealing in reporting news…
August West says
Angemon, you are assuming that their primary function is to report the news.
These “news” outlets are not independent, but are owned by corporate entities which may have agendas can be driven by these “news” outlets.
Corporate entities can very easily gain favor with powerful Washington insiders by tailoring news reports to suite those interests of these powerful insiders.
In return, these powerful Washington insiders have the ability to regulate the industry a certain way, or approve mergers and acquisitions which might otherwise be rejected, or drive legislation which is in the interests of the corporate entity.
I personally view this behavior as a monopolistic abuse which is being carried out by very highly concentrated corporate interests.
NBC et al are not in the business of reporting the news. They are in the business improving the political environment for their corporate owners.
American-Pragmatism says
I agree on american-pragmatism.com I wrote an article about how the MSM blamed everything but islamic terrorism for Secretary Clinton’s loss.
How the MSM not only failed in its mission to be impartial but also failed to alert the public of the threat of jihadist terror.
Aforementioned article can be found here http://www.american-pragmatism.com/uncategorized/why-did-hillary-lose/
A Harris USA says
CNN NBC CBS ABC and even Fox is not immure to this crap.. I pay no attention to these heathen Muslim enablers.. I watch OANN One America News, if that is avaliable to you, may I offer that alternative. You get 80 % less adds, and no talking heads, except on their shows like, Daily Ledge, which is pro-Trump, and anti Islamic . Give it a try, I think you will be happy with that news, vs the MSM idiots that no one listens to anyway!!
August West says
The behavior of NBC generally and other “outlets” such as CNN, NYT, WaPo etc are well known at this point.
Why is the future Trump administration giving them air time?
Why are people watching?
I would fully support a decision to keep these “outlets” out of executive branch press rooms and I would support a pause in executive branch officials giving these “outlets” any time at all on Sundays.
Cut them out of the loop and let their “News” departments go out of business. There are plenty of other news networks in the world that can take up the slack.
PRCS says
Yup.
And, to make it crystal clear why he’s doing so (if he does) he should publicly cite specific issues such as this one.
eduardo odraude says
We can probably expect the left to mount some extreme — i.e., dishonest and/or violent — forms of resistance against any efforts to contain Islam. Parts of the left will go to extremes about this, because they see Trump as a sort of Hitler, or a fascist. They come to that conclusion because they have swallowed whole the view that Islam is a religion of peace that has been hijacked by a small minority. From that point of view, Trump is just a bigot motivated by a sick hatred and fear of Muslims and wants to do terrifying things to them — somewhat as Hitler wanted to do things to Jews. It’s not surprising that if you believe that about Trump, you might start to go dishonest or even violent in opposition.
I do think there are a lot of fairly innocent Muslims who are not well-informed about their religion’s core texts, and are not aware of the monstrous things those core texts show their “prophet” commanding and doing. But much of the leadership of Islam knows what Islam is. Much of the leadership is not innocent at all. They are fanatics who support the totalitarianism of the core texts and will do what they can to spread that around the world. They will hide their goals while weak, and show them more openly as they grow stronger.
Liberals think that Trump is illiberal — but the truth is arguably the reverse: the policies of the so-called liberals, such as bringing millions of Muslims into Germany in the fashion of Merkel, or as Hillary Clinton proposed to do in the U.S., will gradually destroy liberalism utterly. As a Muslim population grows, freedom of speech and freedom of conscience comes under assault. Trump, in resisting Islam, has at least a chance of saving liberalism — liberalism in the sense of freedom, not in the sense of an ever-expanding social welfare system.
vlparker says
I do think there are a lot of fairly innocent Muslims who are not well-informed about their religion’s core texts, and are not aware of the monstrous things those core texts show their “prophet” commanding and doing.
That may be true, but if so there is no excuse for it 15 years after 9-11 and almost 30,000 deadly jihad attacks later. If that many people were committing violence in the name of your religion wouldn’t you find out what it was all about? And once you learned that your prophet was one of the most evil men to ever walk the face of the earth wouldn’t you find a new spiritual path?
Debi Brand says
Indeed.
gravenimage says
Most Muslims appear to be all too aware of what their foul creed teaches–and we see that in the mushrooming Jihad all over the world.
PRCS says
You’d never know that from this HuffPo article (or the brain dead booger eating commenters there).
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/reince-priebus-muslim-ban_us_5831c773e4b058ce7aaba1f9
Reince Priebus Voices Support For Altered Muslim Ban
He called parts of Islam “problematic.”
John A. Marre says
They do this intentionally. Don’t let them off the hook. Go to the feedback page http://www.nbcnews.com/id/10285339/t/contact-nbc-news/ and let them have it.
They don’t care, but will pay attention if they get enough feedback.
ECAW says
Thanks. Done.
gravenimage says
Thanks for the link, John.
Don McKellar says
I understand that Trump is meeting with top people from mainstream media right now in an off the record discussion. I hope it is a dressing down and a laying out of the new ground rules which will require accountability from them if they want to continue to have access in a Trump administration.
vlparker says
There shouldn’t be a religious registry but there should be a muslim registry. Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Christians, etc. are no threat to the country. But every muslim is a potential threat and they don’t have to be violent to be a threat. The US Constitution forbids an establishment of religion. Islam demands an establishment of religion. Totally irreconcilable. Halt all muslim immigration, deport all muslims who are not US citizens and close down all mosques.
JawsV says
Yes, there should be a Muslim registry. They are a constant threat and danger to our country.
Keys says
vlparker is right: “The US Constitution forbids an establishment of religion. Islam demands an establishment of religion. Totally irreconcilable.”
For Muslims, Islam and its Sharia law trumps everything and all – Islam is “uber alles” – until this supremacist system is over all life, there will be justified war and struggle against the infidel – jihad.
gravenimage says
True, vlparker.
simpleton1 says
I had an impression that muslims really loved registries, as they can control ‘unbelievers’ more easily.
This can be seen in Egypt,
Yet muslims want to impose registry on non muslims as well
There will be more than likely many other examples in muslim countries.
Why are they not protested against by muslims?
Surely these registries used in muslim countries are just a part of good government. 🙂
Walter Sieruk says
The message needs to be made known to all the Muslims who live in the United States of America who dislike and maybe even despise the US Constitution and would like to replace it with Sharia law. Those same Muslims instead in trying to force Sharia law on American citizens and their nation those are free to leave and really should leave the USA and then go to live in either Shii ‘ite, Iran or Sunni , Saudi Arabia if they actually feel the Sharia law is the grand, great and wonderful .
Moreover, all this is a strong reminder of the wise words declared by Theodore Roosevelt in a speech. “There can be no fifty –fifty Americanism in this country. There is room here for only one hundred percent Americanism , only for those who are Americans and nothing else.”
Stan Lee says
Most of these Muslims here have been enabled by Obama Regime policies. If he wonders what his legacy will be, he can be honest with himself, the bulk of Muslims here in our country came as result of Obama’s undermining of American immigration laws and our Constitution, plus his quiet arrangements with private entities to expedite “refugee” relief by “fast track” admittance.
There were UPS transport aircraft flying into northern NJ private business airports, unloading their cargos of refugees, who boarded waiting buses and thence to communities known to have Muslim populations. Governor Christie,( NJ) spoke of discovering such UPS flights and stated that neither he nor his administration were ever consulted concerning any such arrangements to bring Muslim refugees into NJ, yet they had come in anyway.
Bill says
They are not “news” organizations or “journalists”. They are propaganda agents for the Democrat National Committee. Their response to the election is to lie more, slander more, and insult more.
Walter Sieruk says
Actually there is really no such word as “Islamism” it’s just Islam. The bogus word “Islamism” is a PC artificial word that was made up after 9/11 in order not to give offense to the followers of the religion of Islam who are not violent. The fake word of “Islamism” was fabricated after September 11,2001 and that fake word is not in any reference book on the topic of Islam before the date and day of 9/11. Likewise, the same is true for the false and pretend word “Islamist” that fake word was made up after September 11,2001 for the same reason that the fake word “Islamism” was fabricated after 9/11. Therefore, call things as they really are .For example, it’s wrong to use the term “Islamist terrorist” in contrast is keeping within the bounds of reality to use the term Muslim terrorist.
JawsV says
Agree, there’s no “Islamism” there’s just Islam. The followers should not be permitted into our country.
Debi Brand says
Well said.
billybob says
I find the word “Islamism” useful to denote the promotion of Islam, as the Muslim Brotherhood does. I might refer to some person in the news as an “Islamist”. I see no problem with it.
Nor is it wrong to say “Islamist terrorist”. It shows that the motivation for terrorism is derived from Islam, as opposed to some other cause.
However, I have no problem with you using any term you wish, and can see some advantages to using the Muslim instead. …but you can’t expect to change other people’s language.
David says
Lets face it!
If you prefer to worship SATAN!
THEN BECOME A MUSLUM!
john spielman says
they should register and monitor all mosques and other places where violent extremists gather, that includes KKK Black Panthers, Aryan Nations, Freeman of the land etc. and close down by law suit any and all that advocates violence against any body!
note Christian “extremist’ since they follow the Jesus to the extreme will be like Mother Theresa of Calcutta, or Franklin Grahaem of Samaritan’ purse
davej says
Muslims who know little about their religion (because they haven’t bothered to study it) are still dangerous. They can be “reminded” at any time and are more likely to go along with it than quit their “religion”. Just like the 2nd and 3rd generations can revert at any time, we have seen this happen more than once.
aDhimmiSaysWhat? says
I would argue that the Muslims who decide to study their religion later in life are the most dangerous of all. They might drink, smoke, and have premarital sex. You know, like a normal person. But they know the entire time that these are un-islamic activities. And once they decide to take their religion seriously, they might have a tremendous amount of guilt for the lifestyle they have lived. But, they always have that one free ticket into rapist heaven: jihad against the infidels.
brane pilot says
Obama paid the Iranians $150 Billion IN CASH in anticipation of something like this.
No way is any of that money coming back.
Obama looks after his Muslim pals.
Mona G says
To be honest, we have a terror watch list and the majority of people on it are muslim. It’s essentially a muslim who’s who. But since individuals like Reza Aslan, Linda Sarsour, Keith Ellison, etc. are not listed, it’s incomplete. There should be a comprehensive database of who enters the US but that ship has sailed.
ECAW says
Can we have a Useful Idiots watch list too please. First name to go on…Craig Considine.
John Barry says
what else can these people do. Stir up the rioters and then ask why the protests will not stop protesting the new president. Maggot infested media will only cover the negative outcome of a made up story. Not cover the dishonest made up story.
Havoc says
Everyone is missing the point, here. A Muslim Registry (followed up by prompt revocation of citizenship and deportation) is a great idea.
.
It’s going to be Yuuge.
gravenimage says
NBC News tweets out half-quote from Priebus to give impression Trump administration open to Muslim registry
………………………..’
Disgusting–but this should not surprise.
There was a smear piece on one of the cable news stations where they claimed Rudy Giuliani was sexist. The “proof”? They quoted him saying (I’m paraphrasing here, but this is fairly accurate) ‘Donald Trump is a successful business man with a long string of successes, but Hillary Clinton is a woman…’
It was quite obvious that there was more to the quote–that he went on to say something along the lines of, ‘who has never run a business’, or ‘who has never handled a budget’, or some such. But this truncation made it appear–to people not paying much attention, anyway–that he was saying that she was not fit for the the presidency because she is female.
This is not journalism–some of these creeps have no shame.
PRCS says
Just speculating:
He might have been noting–facetiously–that being a woman, per she and her sycophants, was more important than his business background.
davej says
Maybe we should all volunteer to be on a registry – we already are in the commercial sense. Google something and get targeted by advertising within minutes. Posting on this site I’m sure puts you on some agency’s list.
So equal opportunity, every religion gets a registry, including atheists. At least we would know where the real threats to civilization are.
billybob says
We already know “real threats to civilization are”. Just read the articles on Jihad Watch regularly and you will know too. No need for a registry for religions other than Islam, or for atheists, because there is no organized threat emanating from these. And if you worry about being monitored, use the Tor browser.
citycat says
So Trump is taken out of context of the situation that has been assisted by traitors regarding the 100% intention of every devout Muslim to rule the good Earth, using Islam’s myriad forms of attack-
like snake-like smiling confidence tricksters who blag the unsuspecting infidels-
like gaining the infidel’s attention in order to redirect it to Islam-
like us Muslims are smiling while we outbreed you-
like we’re smiling while our naughty boys rape your daughters, underage or not, maybe a few babies for Allah there too-
like we’re redirecting your education, which you gave us, against you-
like we divert your attention from the real occult evil to the superficial violence that we have you believe has nothing to do with Islam-
like we permanently update our occult evil-
like it could be time for the tide of Islam to recess while we breed and creep all friendly until the time is ripe for the next Islamic tidal flow.
Maybe not, but it will be seen soon by all by the looks of things.
citycat says
Trump may have subconsciously hit on a point.
There are differences between men and women.
I’m not being sexist when I say that I’ve noticed that when women are in charge and things get out of hand that some women go over the top, which can be dangerously not necessary. Whereas men don’t that much lose the plot.
But even men can go mental on a full moon.
Who’s perfect?
Jean-Francois Morf says
I-slam is NOT s religion: it’s a law system, the sharia, with judges, the imams and mullahs.
Sharia IS illegal in the West.
Peter says
Trotsky said it best: “the ends ennoble the means.” New Bolshevik Comrades (NBC) are just doing their duty to the socialist international cause.
Carolyne says
News people like to describe themselves as “Bulldogs” and say their function is to keep the government “Honest.” I haven’t noticed that they have done that, especially with regard to Hillary Clinton. They say they work for the people.
Years ago, When Nixon went to China and Sam Donaldson was there, the Chinese wouldn’t let him go to a certain place where the leaders were meeting. He had a hissy fit and said “I work for the people America.” I wrote him a letter telling him that if he thought he worked for me then I thought he was fired.
Things haven’t changed. Megyn Kelley said that all of that harassment of Trump and her sneering was “Good journalism.” I thought it was crap.