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.
So it’s legitimate. Liberals claimed to be against war, then suddenly cozied up with warmongers and supported conflicts just because it went against Trump somehow
Oh, it is legitimate, but what does it have to do with Trump's alleged claim that America's soldiers are losers and suckers?
And your reasoning is a big part of why I disavow any connection to liberals (well that and their foundation in corporate capitalism, lip service to identity politics, etc.)
The liberal wing of the Democrat party has always been quick to support war. They only look like doves compared to neocons for whom war was a central part of their platform and had a few "conflicts of interest" in terms of connections to the military industrial complex and profiteering.
That was my immediate reaction...but then Trump's attack on Kelly, media outlets saying they 'checked' the sources and stand by the claims in the article.....I dunno.
Trump would have been better to just dismiss it as hearsay and moved on --- but he went toddler on Kelly and that just looks defensive.
He might have said it, but the media is not exactly a neutral source with this president and this president has many disgruntled past employees who can also go along with something.
We had unnamed sources on the Russiagate stuff that the stuff those sources said were later debunked. I think it is foolish to assume the media is neutral.
This just seems like an invention that came out of a focus group that realized that they could connect it into his past bad comments about McCain.
Hardly. Many Trump supporters recognize his personality flaws and his sometimes poor sounding tweets, etc.
Character flaws.
Quote:
He's far from perfect and tends to counter punch in a childish manner and is an ego maniac.
No, he lashes out. He does this because he's thin skinned and insecure and lacks self control.
Quote:
However, those traits also make him someone that gets positive things done for the country and its citizens. He does put America first which is what a President is elected and hired to do.
But the alleged anonymous sources, or the guy who wrote the article for the Atlantic, they aren't lying?
How do you know? We don't even know if there are any actual sources at all.
I would believe something like this. Given what he has said publicly about McCain and others. Its right on par. Just ONCE, I would like to hear him say, Yea I said that, I was wrong. I'm not holding my breath. Narcissist arent too apologetic.
All media uses anonymous sources to gather information, and they do not reveal their sources. If they did, there would be no more information forthcoming. Jennifer Griffin confirmed the story with her own sources, also anonymous. There was no reason for the "All Trump" station to even comment on the story, except to refute it, but they did. They confirmed it. They they refuted it. Then they confirmed it again.
If you have a source for news that only uses named sources, please advise which one it is. I'd like to take a quick look before they go out of business, which will probably only take them 20 minutes or so to do.
Anonymous sources wish to remain anonymous for a lot of reasons, just like people who use fake names on social media. Some want to be able to comment honestly without being in trouble at work, some are hiding from ex-SOs, some are prominent people who don't want to be mobbed by either friendly or unfriendly crowds. There is currently a case of Brian Henry who owns a company called Palmetto Cheese that sells pimento cheese on 9,000 locations. He is also the mayor of Pawley's Island, South Carolina. He posted on Facebook last week that BLM was a terrorist organization, and he is in very real danger of losing most of his business. People on FB are swapping homemade pimento cheese recipes left and right, and recommending competing brands. My guess is that Mr. Henry wished he had been using a sobriquet when he made an inflammatory political statement.
The Anonymous Sources used by leading news gathering organizations are the same way. They could be in sensitive positions where they cannot comment openly, or could fear very real threats to their lives if their identities become known. Judging from some of the comments on this board, that would be a very real consideration.
It's like any other leak or whistleblower scenario. It doesn't matter who the anonymous sources are, it only matters whether what they said is correct. When three different news organizations confirm an article separately, I'd take it as a pretty good indicator that the original article was dead on the money.
If you want to discuss Sarah Sanders' lies, start a thread. I'll meet you over there. This is not the place to get sidetracked.
Ever notice how whenever there's some inflammatory "news" story from a far right wing website, Trumpers are the first to jump onto the story and believe basically...everything, even if the story is completely fabricated? Forget about sources. Then, someone with a thinking brain, usually comes in and posts the actual story, sometimes with quotes from an actual named source, and then they do their best to de- legitimize that source, and proceed to yell fake news. lol.
Trumpers have no problem with anonymous sources, as long as they serve their agenda. If separate news articles came out about Biden saying the same thing they'd believe the story 100% without a single piece of verification.
Color me surprised!
They can publish anything bad about Trump or anyone else, and just claim the sources are anonymous.
How convenient.
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.