Number9 Posted May 17, 2017 Report Share Posted May 17, 2017 FOX News Is discussing Chelsey Manning saying she is out of jail and the people after Trump for giving classified info to the R are not mad about her release. I try to listen to both sides to find commonality, but this is past ridiculous. I think this why some people are so ill informed. You would think people would be more capable of seeing reality. But remember POTUS called all the mainstream media fake news. Now his defense is he's being treated unfairly by the media. The media is not making any of this up. Half of it is what he's doing. I still fear too large a percentage of the population will believe anything he says. He's destroying America. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Earl Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 So this WaPo hit piece runs a quote from a former senior U.S. official who is close to current administration officials. That’s an anonymous source quoting hearsay from other anonymous sources. Meanwhile all people at the meeting denied the accusations. Previously the WaPo ran a story that claimed AG Rod Rosenstein threatened to resign, a story based on the anonymous accounts of more than 30 officials at the White House. Rod naturally said no way to the fake news. So much for all those anonymous sources and for the Post's credibility. But the media keeps shoveling out hits based on anonymous sources and confirmed by anonymous sources while ignoring the disavowals by those public officials who are willing to go on the record. The Washington Post has turned into a joke. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamalisms Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 ^ lol Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 1 hour ago, Little Earl said: So this WaPo hit piece runs a quote from a former senior U.S. official who is close to current administration officials. That’s an anonymous source quoting hearsay from other anonymous sources. Meanwhile all people at the meeting denied the accusations. Previously the WaPo ran a story that claimed AG Rod Rosenstein threatened to resign, a story based on the anonymous accounts of more than 30 officials at the White House. Rod naturally said no way to the fake news. So much for all those anonymous sources and for the Post's credibility. But the media keeps shoveling out hits based on anonymous sources and confirmed by anonymous sources while ignoring the disavowals by those public officials who are willing to go on the record. The Washington Post has turned into a joke. ^^ straight off Fox News. Saw them talking about it this morning. Gotta get away from Fox, bro. Gotta do it. They're lying and misleading you. I know you won't believe it but... I had to say it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Earl Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 14 minutes ago, reo said: ^^ straight off Fox News. Saw them talking about it this morning. Gotta get away from Fox, bro. Gotta do it. They're lying and misleading you. I know you won't believe it but... I had to say it. Nope. Don't watch Fox News. Got it from here. http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/266714/anonymous-sources-washington-post-and-cnn-fake-daniel-greenfield Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 20 minutes ago, Little Earl said: Nope. Don't watch Fox News. Got it from here. http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/266714/anonymous-sources-washington-post-and-cnn-fake-daniel-greenfield Conservative blogs and Fox and conservative radio all trumpet the same conspiracy/spin/lies. Hard to tell where it originated. Point remains. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythos27 Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 2 hours ago, Little Earl said: So this WaPo hit piece runs a quote from a former senior U.S. official who is close to current administration officials. That’s an anonymous source quoting hearsay from other anonymous sources. Meanwhile all people at the meeting denied the accusations. Previously the WaPo ran a story that claimed AG Rod Rosenstein threatened to resign, a story based on the anonymous accounts of more than 30 officials at the White House. Rod naturally said no way to the fake news. So much for all those anonymous sources and for the Post's credibility. But the media keeps shoveling out hits based on anonymous sources and confirmed by anonymous sources while ignoring the disavowals by those public officials who are willing to go on the record. The Washington Post has turned into a joke. You don't even entertain the possibility that the people close to Trump are lying to save their own asses do you? That white house is a sieve and has been says day one.The pipes in Flint leak these than these clowns. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Earl Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 15 minutes ago, Mythos27 said: You don't even entertain the possibility that the people close to Trump are lying to save their own asses do you? That white house is a sieve and has been says day one.The pipes in Flint leak these than these clowns. That is possible. Doesn't change the fact that this was shitty journalism on the part of the WaPo. They didn't get the story from any of the players, only hearsay from anonymous sources. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamalisms Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 For the record, I'm pretty sure that Flint's water problem isn't leaky pipes. It's crazy to me how little people know about journalism. But then the problem is probably with me. People know so little about most shit that I shouldn't be surprised. No, an anonymous source isn't a sign of bad journalism. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 5 minutes ago, Little Earl said: That is possible. Doesn't change the fact that this was shitty journalism on the part of the WaPo. They didn't get the story from any of the players, only hearsay from anonymous sources. Just b/c a source is anonymous doesn't make it a bad source... it just means you don't know who they are. Multiple people have said that the source is sound. Harping on it being an anonymous source is just a way to attack credibility and try to get the WaPo to reveal their source.. which would get the Trump admin a way to crack down on leaks. Don't fall for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythos27 Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 8 minutes ago, Little Earl said: That is possible. Doesn't change the fact that this was shitty journalism on the part of the WaPo. They didn't get the story from any of the players, only hearsay from anonymous sources. You don't know that these were WaPo's only sources. And let's say those were the only sources; the story has clearly proven to be true enough that they were asked not to publish a lot of it. I'll admit that I don't know who their sources are but given how quickly this story got out/escalated and it's accuracy, I assume that their source is a lot closer to the administration than you think. It's not shitty journalism if you get the story right and WaPo did. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythos27 Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 21 minutes ago, Jamalisms said: For the record, I'm pretty sure that Flint's water problem isn't leaky pipes. It's crazy to me how little people know about journalism. But then the problem is probably with me. People know so little about most shit that I shouldn't be surprised. No, an anonymous source isn't a sign of bad journalism. I know but I imagine that pipes pumping out that much lead can't be in the best condition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 27 minutes ago, Little Earl said: That is possible. Doesn't change the fact that this was shitty journalism on the part of the WaPo. They didn't get the story from any of the players, only hearsay from anonymous sources. wait wait... you do know that when they say "anonymous sources", that doesn't mean the WaPo doesn't know who they are, right? It's not like someone just dropped off info at their office and they have no idea where it came from. It just means the WaPo isn't telling who their sources are. Just making sure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Earl Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 19 minutes ago, reo said: wait wait... you do know that when they say "anonymous sources", that doesn't mean the WaPo doesn't know who they are, right? It's not like someone just dropped off info at their office and they have no idea where it came from. It just means the WaPo isn't telling who their sources are. Just making sure. Its from sources that were not there. And the story did not seek confirmation from anyone that was there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 Just now, Little Earl said: Its from sources that were not there. And the story did not seek confirmation from anyone that was there. It's an anonymous source. How can you say he wasn't there or doesn't know who was there? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.