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.
IDK he's your guy, you tell me. From everything you said seems like a slam dunk, and Trump campaigned chanting "lock her up", and your party controls all three branches of the government, sounds like it should be a no brainer yet nothing has even been attempted.
I agree with you...other than there are circumstances that we don't know....
And yes, if it was me with those charges....I'd be under the jail....
Is this really that surprising? One thing that we know for sure is that Mueller runs a tight ship with few, if any, leaks. I had already assumed that all of what the media is reporting as to what Mueller does/does not have as far of evidence is concerned is information coming from people who have been a subject of Mueller's investigation and drawing logical inferences from the questions asked.
Its fun to speculate but I think most of the people who support Mueller's remit are in the "lets wait and see what he has once the investigation is over" approach - which is very much in line with not relying on what the media is reporting as gospel. At the end of the day, the Mueller announcement in this regard is basically a vague "don't believe everything you hear and instead wait for us to reveal our findings before drawing conclusions." This should not be an Earth-shattering suggestion for anyone who isn't an extreme partisan on either side of the aisle.
It should be noted that many media sources have also claimed that Mueller has nothing regarding collusion or that he is trying to get any dirt on Trump he can. I would assume the "many stories about our investigation have been inaccurate" mantra applies equally to them.
I have been following the McClatchy story just because of it's potential to be a game set match as far as collusion. Right now McClatchy are the only ones running with the story. Usually if a story has legs it is corroborated by other news organizations in this case that hasn't happened yet. Many on both the left and right have been skeptical of this story. Here is a twitter thread from Benjamin Wittes from the Lawfare blog critiquing this story. The Lawfare people are highly critical of Trump https://twitter.com/benjaminwittes/s...50024538578945
He expands on this further on his twitter feed. So a healthy amount of skepticism is warranted. The thing that stands out to me is that McClatchy DC is not a left leaning or center left leaning news organization. They are ranked "least Biased" on the media bias fact check page.
They also have a really strong track record with these types of breaking stories. They were out in front and alone on the Iraq WMD's or lack thereof when the NY Times and Washington Post were reporting they did have WMD's in the days leading up to the Iraq War. So you can't really just toss this story away right now either. They obviously have sources nobody else has. As of right now the reporters are standing by this story and from the way they describe it there is more to come. These guys are definitely out on a limb right now.
Yes, the Washington Times has a right lean to it, but how is that any different than WaPo leaning left? In fact, the WT was started as a alternative to the WaPo. Most media watchdogs treat WT as a credible news source.
Special counsel Robert Mueller’s office is warning that “many” news articles on the Trump-Russia probe have been wrong.
The statement from a spokesperson did not single out particular stories. But the warning did come after media inquiries about a McClatchy News story on Friday that said Mr. Mueller has evidence that President Trump’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen, did in fact travel to Prague in 2016 as alleged by the Christopher Steele dossier.
“What I have been telling all reporters is that many stories about our investigation have been inaccurate,” the Mueller spokesperson said. “Be very cautious about any source that claims to have knowledge about our investigation and dig deep into what they claim before reporting on it. If another outlet reports something, don’t run with it unless you have your own sourcing to back it up.”
The statement was reported by the Daily Caller and confirmed by The Washington Times.
I'm not surprised at all. First, our "mainstream" news media only looks for stories that offers support for the position they are promoting. They use "anonymous sources" and "secret reports", virtually never quote anyone on-the-record and never fact check. They are promoting the propaganda they want to pass along. Look at the fictional "Steele Dossier", prepared by a foreign operative to provide sound bites for the Clinton campaign. It was never verified-it wasn't supposed to be. It was written as a hit piece to put Clinton in the Oval, then was supposed to quietly disappear.
Worse, those looking for their daily dose of cognitive reinforcement from sources such as CNN and MSNBC don't want to see any information that upsets there prejudiced world view. Facts are to be hidden-they cause them to do things like put on genitalia headwear and scream at the sky. And of course the MSM doesn't want to cause aneurysms for their target audience.
Most media watchdogs treat WT as a credible news source.
LOL, that's funny! Did you type that with a straight face? Wash Times is so far out there that the Sunday edition includes a free sheet of aluminum foil so its readers can make hats.
LOL, that's funny! Did you type that with a straight face? Wash Times is so far out there that the Sunday edition includes a free sheet of aluminum foil so its readers can make hats.
Notes: The Washington Times is a daily newspaper from Washington DC that was one of the first broadsheets in the United States to adopt color photography. The political leanings of The Washington Times are often described as conservative. They do usually source well and can be reasonably trusted for their reporting with a right-center bias. (7/18/2016) Updated (7/5/2017)"
Here's the Washington Post for you, just to make sure you can't call mediabiasfactcheck.com biased
Notes: The Washington Post is an American daily newspaper. It is the most widely circulated newspaper published in Washington, D.C., and was founded on December 6, 1877. The newspaper has won 47 Pulitzer Prizes. This includes six separate Pulitzers awarded in 2008, the second-highest number ever awarded to a single newspaper in one year. Post journalists have also received 18 Nieman Fellowships and 368 White House News Photographers Association awards. The Washington Post has a liberal bias in reporting choices, however they are typically well sourced to credible information. Sometimes they rush stories to be the first to break them, which leads to poor sourcing. This has occurred on a few occasions in 2016. When an error is made the Washington Post responsibly makes corrections. (5/18/2016) Updated (1/12/2017)"
I’m not getting your point. It doesn’t say what stories are incorrect. Why the assumption that it’s left sources that are wrong? It’s not like we don’t see tons of news from the Right seeking to discredit the investigation.
Less than 2 weeks ago we get a statement from Muller saying Trump is not under criminal investigation. Yesterday we get a statement from Muller that most of the stories that the media is reporting are false...ie...#FAKENEWS. Lefties and Dems aren't reading in between the lines. Muller is trying his best to let them down easy when he doesn't bring any charges of substance or any at all. He has punted the ball to the SDNY.
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.
