Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Immediately turn off the TV or stop reading when a 'journalist' says, "If this story is true..."
Definitely if a journalist is reporting and puts in a discussion -- it isn't news.
But if you are watching political pundits discuss the news of the day and all about it -- discussing if it is or isn't news of the day is legit.
That's where you folks get confused.
Whether it is Hannity or Don Lemon -- they aren't reporting the news...they are discussing the news -- including a rather large media site reporting something that may or may not be true.
now you are playing games with words......Mueller declared that the story is inaccurate.
Mueller did no such thing. Let's read it carefully:
BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the special counsel’s office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s congressional testimony are not accurate
This is not a blanket denial of the BuzzFeed story -- it does not actually deny that Trump ordered Cohen to lie to Congress.
Mueller did no such thing. Let's read it carefully:
BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the special counsel’s office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s congressional testimony are not accurate
This is not a blanket denial of the BuzzFeed story -- it does not actually deny that Trump ordered Cohen to lie to Congress.
Give it up man, you lost this round. Everyone with a brain knows that if only minor details of the piece were inaccurate the special counsel wouldn’t have said anything. Combined this with no major outlet being able to corroborate the report, the author admitting that he didn’t see the evidence, buzzfeed having a history of false and misleading stories it becomes clear that this was totally bogus. You’re not being objective here.
Over and over I saw the important qualifier posted "IF" this is true....then....it would be really bad.
And that's correct.
No one got played. People posting here recognized it hadn't been verified and were good about making sure they qualified their comments first with a bold IF.
Yes, if it was an accurate story it would be bad. But Mueller's office has since made a statement that the story as published is not accurate.
Give it up man, you lost this round. Everyone with a brain knows that if only minor details of the piece were inaccurate the special counsel wouldn’t have said anything. Combined this with no major outlet being able to corroborate the report, the author admitting that he didn’t see the evidence, buzzfeed having a history of false and misleading stories it becomes clear that this was totally bogus. You’re not being objective here.
Neither are you. To be objective, you must at least consider that Mueller's office has egg on their face, so they're claiming that "certain parts" are "inaccurate". Those are weasel words. They might mean the whole story is bogus, or some minor part of it is. We simply don't know.
Then there's the "use-your-brain" aspect. Cohen has already admitted to lying about the date of last Trump tower activity. Can you honestly picture a scenario where Trump wouldn't be involved with that decision to lie? Remember, Trump lied about knowing about the payoff to Stormy Daniels, and he lied about reimbursing the money. Of course Trump told Cohen to lie. The only question is whether there is proof or just Cohen's word for it. So let's not get ahead of ourselves either way here. The jury is still out, so to speak.
Neither are you. To be objective, you must at leat consider that Mueller's office has egg on their face, so they're claiming that "certain parts" are "inaccurate". Those are weasel words. They might mean the whole story is bogus, or some minor part of it is. We simply don't know.
Then there's the "use-your-brain" aspect. Cohen has already admitted to lying about the date of last Trump tower activity. Can you honestly picture a scenario where Trump wouldn't be involved with that decision to lie? Remember, Trump lied about knowing about the payoff to Stormy Daniels, and he lied about reimbursing the money. Of course Trump told Cohen to lie. The only question is whether there is proof or just Cohen's word for it. So let's not get ahead of ourselves either way here. The jury is still out, so to speak.
I doubt it. Mueller's statement is unusual to make and he knows how it reads, in spite of the potential for such pedantic analysis as you undertake. He knows that most people won't indulge in that type of self-soothing, and how his statement would be reported and analyzed by the media. And it was.
If he didn't want to kill the Buzzfeed story because it lack substance, he wouldn't have taken the unusual step to make a statement. I'd bet the farm that this story is dead and that the media will continue to be the ones cleaning the egg. In another week or two, you'll have quietly left this behind as well.
You can't take away the fact that people on C-D used the qualifying IF / Then statement.
Doesn't matter what you think people's feelings are or are not. They sourced it the right way and provided the correct qualifier.
This particular piece of possible news was published in multiple places, including on the Trumplings beloved FOX. Of course people along the entire political spectrum were going to discuss it. It was out there.
Yup...and you could not tell the ideologues out here that. They would not listen.
I told them before Mueller came out with statement, and "vacoder" threw out a couple of personal attacks. Par for the course.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
