Little Earl Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 4 minutes ago, reo said: It's an anonymous source. How can you say he wasn't there or doesn't know who was there? The WaPo said it was from “a former senior U.S. official who is close to current administration officials.” Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 34 minutes ago, Little Earl said: The WaPo said it was from “a former senior U.S. official who is close to current administration officials.” Which doesn't say much at all Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justafan Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 12 minutes ago, reo said: Which doesn't say much at all That's because he's either full of shit, a moron, or lying. I lean towards all three. “It is all kind of shocking,” said a former senior U.S. official who is close to current administration officials. They quoted a former official in the article. At no point have they hinted at who the actual source was for the original story. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pat Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 why even cite anonymous sources when you can just make shit up to get people to believe it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justafan Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 22 minutes ago, patsplat said: why even cite anonymous sources when you can just make shit up to get people to believe it Because people eventually figure it out and stop listening to you. At least that's the way it used to be until Rush proved that conservatives will literally gobble up anything as long as someone they trust said it in a convincing way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamalisms Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 51 minutes ago, patsplat said: why even cite anonymous sources when you can just make shit up to get people to believe it Because other journalists work to confirm reports with similar or the same sources and if they can't or, worse, if they refute your report... it looks bad for you and for your newspaper. Which is why news organizations generally produce quality reporting when it's actually reporting and but an opinion piece. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pat Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 56 minutes ago, Justafan said: Because people eventually figure it out and stop listening to you. At least that's the way it used to be until Rush proved that conservatives will literally gobble up anything as long as someone they trust said it in a convincing way. 22 minutes ago, Jamalisms said: Because other journalists work to confirm reports with similar or the same sources and if they can't or, worse, if they refute your report... it looks bad for you and for your newspaper. Which is why news organizations generally produce quality reporting when it's actually reporting and but an opinion piece. The lunatics quoting articles without bylines ranting about anonymous sources are of course missing the irony Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charleytolar Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 On 5/15/2017 at 8:44 PM, Justafan said: Come on guys. You're better than this. This is a pretty strong denial. Don't become what you hate. Not to mention that IF Trump is as dumb as everyone thinks he is, he would have no mastery or even facile understanding of this kind of intelligence that would be necessary to "share" it-- unless we are just talking about giving out copies! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justafan Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 3 minutes ago, charleytolar said: Not to mention that IF Trump is as dumb as everyone thinks he is, he would have no mastery or even facile understanding of this kind of intelligence that would be necessary to "share" it-- unless we are just talking about giving out copies! Oh, I absolutely believe that Trump let something slip in his own incompetence. I also believe that McMasters was very firm in his denial. A shame because I liked McMasters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 7 minutes ago, Justafan said: Oh, I absolutely believe that Trump let something slip in his own incompetence. I also believe that McMasters was very firm in his denial. A shame because I liked McMasters. McMasters was very firm in his denial but he was also very specific in what he said. Look at exactly what he denied. McMasters could've told the truth and Trump still told the Russians highly classified info. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justafan Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 3 minutes ago, reo said: McMasters was very firm in his denial but he was also very specific in what he said. Look at exactly what he denied. McMasters could've told the truth and Trump still told the Russians highly classified info. Deliberate lie or deliberately misleading... doesn't matter to me. The second is almost worse to me because it shows a cowardice to uphold principles over sucking up to your boss. At least with a deliberate lie your being a team player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 1 minute ago, Justafan said: Deliberate lie or deliberately misleading... doesn't matter to me. The second is almost worse to me because it shows a cowardice to uphold principles over sucking up to your boss. At least with a deliberate lie your being a team player. Honestly I think he's the one that leaked it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justafan Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 4 minutes ago, reo said: Honestly I think he's the one that leaked it. What is your reasoning for that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 33 minutes ago, Justafan said: What is your reasoning for that? Not much really. Just looking at who was there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justafan Posted May 18, 2017 Report Share Posted May 18, 2017 12 minutes ago, reo said: Not much really. Just looking at who was there. It does make sense that the source would be someone in the room but it could just as easily be someone who overheard a conversation or even the Russians trying to stir the pot a little more. I have a lot of speculations but at the end of the day, who knows? The only thing I know for sure is that I believe it. If the bet is between Trump was incompetent and said something stupid or the WaPo just made the whole thing up, i'll take the Trump was incompetent narrative all day long. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.