CIA Found Putin's Direct Order to Help Trump

Don't forget Trumps unnamed sources are legit, the others are fake news.
 
Oh I get it. So because the news can't release their sources (and with good reasoning) I have no choice but to just believe them right? Even after what Comey said I should just go ahead and continue to believe? That's the answer you've come up with? Listen I get the way news and anonymous sources work but the problem is their credibility has been called into question after what Comey said and now we need to take a step back and figure this out. I say we as in this country does. The answer shouldn't be to hear what Comey said and simply shrug your shoulders and ignore it while continuing to parrot anonymous sources.

Frankly if any media outlet had any sense of credibility they would come out and address what Comey said. At they very least they would address it and announce plans to further vet these sources and where they are getting their information. There not doing that though are they?

How is immediately dismissing the info any less dangerous?
 
How is immediately dismissing the info any less dangerous?

If we all start to dismiss the information and hold these institutions to a higher standard we will all benefit from it that's how.
 
Oh I get it. So because the news can't release their sources (and with good reasoning) I have no choice but to just believe them right? Even after what Comey said I should just go ahead and continue to believe? That's the answer you've come up with?

Don't be a gullible fool, man.

Never take the press's claims at face value.

Only do that with Trump's tweets.
 
If we all start to dismiss the information and hold these institutions to a higher standard we will all benefit from it that's how.

So we call for them to abandon the practice of using anonymous sources altogether? That's completely impractical and essentially impossible. We don't live in a world where that's gonna happen.

The only thing a smart person can do is weigh the information, not attribute a value to it based simply on where it comes from.
 
Wait.... what? The Russians interfered in the election? this story is going to be huge.
 
>june of 2017
>still believing washington post when they cite anonymous sources about trump

giphy.gif

looks weirdly like Mike Tyson
 
drumpf BTFO for real this time
 
So we call for them to abandon the practice of using anonymous sources altogether? That's completely impractical and essentially impossible. We don't live in a world where that's gonna happen.

The only thing a smart person can do is weigh the information, not attribute a value to it based simply on where it comes from.

Nope didn't say that. I say we hold them to a higher standard i.e. make them not just accept any random anonymous source which they seem to be doing at this point. Make them vet the source get multiple sources. Just giving up and not even bothering to try and do something or even have the conversation doesn't seem like a good idea.
 
Nope didn't say that. I say we hold them to a higher standard i.e. make them not just accept any random anonymous source which they seem to be doing at this point. Make them vet the source get multiple sources. Just giving up and not even bothering to try and do something or even have the conversation doesn't seem like a good idea.

Why do you think they're not doing that? More importantly, how would you know if they were or were not doing that?
 
Is there any sensible (read: non-"deep state" bullshit) reason why the Washington Post's seeming ties with the CIA would invalidate their reporting on Trump? And does any affirmative answer you have likewise apply to Trump's relationship with Fox, Alex Jones and Breitbart?
 
Back
Top