One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
What's Wrong With This?
Dec 18, 2017 22:28:25   #
Larry the Legend Loc: Not hiding in Milton
 
There is a glaring problem with this article. It jumps right off the page in just the second sentence and keeps doing it again and again.

Look at this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-teams-meeting-with-muellers-office-poised-to-ratchet-up-tensions/2017/12/18/15dac668-e41d-11e7-a65d-1ac0fd7f097e_story.html

We get so used to seeing it, we don't even notice it after a while. Here's what's wrong:

"people familiar with the probe"
"according to administration officials"
"advisers close to Trump"
"People with knowledge of the investigation"
"according to a person familiar with the Trump team’s plan who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private conversations".
"according to a person who spoke with Trump last week and spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe a private conversation".
"He is living in his own world," the person said
"Another associate said"
"Among people familiar with the probe"
"A White House adviser said"

I make that a total of 10 anonymous sources in an article spanning little more than a few hundred words.

Either the reporter is monumentally lazy or this is a total fabrication. Either way, it garners very little veracity in my mind.

Reply
Dec 18, 2017 22:41:36   #
PoppaGringo Loc: Muslim City, Mexifornia, B.R.
 
Larry the Legend wrote:
There is a glaring problem with this article. It jumps right off the page in just the second sentence and keeps doing it again and again.

Look at this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-teams-meeting-with-muellers-office-poised-to-ratchet-up-tensions/2017/12/18/15dac668-e41d-11e7-a65d-1ac0fd7f097e_story.html

We get so used to seeing it, we don't even notice it after a while. Here's what's wrong:

"people familiar with the probe"
"according to administration officials"
"advisers close to Trump"
"People with knowledge of the investigation"
"according to a person familiar with the Trump team’s plan who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private conversations".
"according to a person who spoke with Trump last week and spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe a private conversation".
"He is living in his own world," the person said
"Another associate said"
"Among people familiar with the probe"
"A White House adviser said"

I make that a total of 10 anonymous sources in an article spanning little more than a few hundred words.

Either the reporter is monumentally lazy or this is a total fabrication. Either way, it garners very little veracity in my mind.
There is a glaring problem with this article. It ... (show quote)


Undoubtedly 90% fabrication.

Reply
Dec 19, 2017 00:10:27   #
Hemiman Loc: Communist California
 
PoppaGringo wrote:
Undoubtedly 90% fabrication.


The other 10%are lies.

Reply
Dec 19, 2017 07:56:27   #
no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun
 
Hemiman wrote:
The other 10%are lies.



Reply
Dec 19, 2017 17:31:13   #
PLT Sarge Loc: Alabama
 
The reporter is not lazy. He/she has entered every dodge, way out the left uses to spin their fabrications.
Larry the Legend wrote:
There is a glaring problem with this article. It jumps right off the page in just the second sentence and keeps doing it again and again.

Look at this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-teams-meeting-with-muellers-office-poised-to-ratchet-up-tensions/2017/12/18/15dac668-e41d-11e7-a65d-1ac0fd7f097e_story.html

We get so used to seeing it, we don't even notice it after a while. Here's what's wrong:

"people familiar with the probe"
"according to administration officials"
"advisers close to Trump"
"People with knowledge of the investigation"
"according to a person familiar with the Trump team’s plan who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private conversations".
"according to a person who spoke with Trump last week and spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe a private conversation".
"He is living in his own world," the person said
"Another associate said"
"Among people familiar with the probe"
"A White House adviser said"

I make that a total of 10 anonymous sources in an article spanning little more than a few hundred words.

Either the reporter is monumentally lazy or this is a total fabrication. Either way, it garners very little veracity in my mind.
There is a glaring problem with this article. It ... (show quote)

Reply
Dec 19, 2017 19:11:52   #
wuzblynd Loc: thomson georgia
 
Hemiman wrote:
The other 10%are lies.





90% fab +10 % lies= 100% truth!!!!

Reply
Dec 19, 2017 19:16:13   #
lindajoy Loc: right here with you....
 
Larry the Legend wrote:
There is a glaring problem with this article. It jumps right off the page in just the second sentence and keeps doing it again and again.

Look at this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-teams-meeting-with-muellers-office-poised-to-ratchet-up-tensions/2017/12/18/15dac668-e41d-11e7-a65d-1ac0fd7f097e_story.html

We get so used to seeing it, we don't even notice it after a while. Here's what's wrong:

"people familiar with the probe"
"according to administration officials"
"advisers close to Trump"
"People with knowledge of the investigation"
"according to a person familiar with the Trump team’s plan who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private conversations".
"according to a person who spoke with Trump last week and spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe a private conversation".
"He is living in his own world," the person said
"Another associate said"
"Among people familiar with the probe"
"A White House adviser said"

I make that a total of 10 anonymous sources in an article spanning little more than a few hundred words.

Either the reporter is monumentally lazy or this is a total fabrication. Either way, it garners very little veracity in my mind.
There is a glaring problem with this article. It ... (show quote)


You are right of course but when anyone takes just a moment to digest what these lying rag news media are trying to give us You know right away..That is if you have the reasoning of a 5 year old that is..

Perhaps that’s why so many of the left eat it up so readily....????

Reply
Check out topic: Populism
Dec 19, 2017 19:21:16   #
Larry the Legend Loc: Not hiding in Milton
 
wuzblynd wrote:
90% fab +10 % lies= 100% truth!!!!


That may pass for mathematical logic in your universe, but in mine, 90% fabrication + 10% lies = 100% lies = 100% fabrication, because a fabrication is the same as a lie.

Failure to cite a credible source provides grounds for accusations of fabrication. Since a fabrication is a lie, failure to cite a credible source is equivalent to lying.

Having established that these are lies, the big question remains: Why? What do they gain by so obviously lying like that? That's the $64,000 question. If you can provide a credible answer, you just might become famous.

Reply
Dec 19, 2017 19:29:40   #
Larry the Legend Loc: Not hiding in Milton
 
lindajoy wrote:
You are right of course but when anyone takes just a moment to digest what these lying rag news media are trying to give us You know right away..That is if you have the reasoning of a 5 year old that is..

Perhaps that’s why so many of the left eat it up so readily....????


I think it's more about positive reinforcement. They see something that appears to affirm a predetermined bias and they automatically latch onto it whether it makes sense or not. Actually, having the reasoning ability of a five-year-old would probably overrule many of these biases in the first place... Sad, isn't it?

Reply
Dec 19, 2017 19:32:31   #
Crayons Loc: St Jo, Texas
 
Larry the Legend wrote:


Having established that these are lies, the big question remains: Why? What do they gain by so obviously lying like that? That's the $64,000 question. If you can provide a credible answer, you just might become famous.


if you study the 'prog cult' long enough you'll find they all have
group think, and they all whole heartedly believe if they
repeat the lie often enough and long enough it becomes the truth.

Reply
Dec 19, 2017 19:50:03   #
PLT Sarge Loc: Alabama
 
Double Speak, 1984.
wuzblynd wrote:
90% fab +10 % lies= 100% truth!!!!

Reply
 
 
Dec 19, 2017 20:09:39   #
lindajoy Loc: right here with you....
 
Larry the Legend wrote:
I think it's more about positive reinforcement. They see something that appears to affirm a predetermined bias and they automatically latch onto it whether it makes sense or not. Actually, having the reasoning ability of a five-year-old would probably overrule many of these biases in the first place... Sad, isn't it?


Well can’t argue your Logic....

The predetermined bias is of course their own bias they relate to so well...

Reply
Dec 20, 2017 09:55:37   #
wuzblynd Loc: thomson georgia
 
Larry the Legend wrote:
That may pass for mathematical logic in your universe, but in mine, 90% fabrication + 10% lies = 100% lies = 100% fabrication, because a fabrication is the same as a lie.

Failure to cite a credible source provides grounds for accusations of fabrication. Since a fabrication is a lie, failure to cite a credible source is equivalent to lying.

Having established that these are lies, the big question remains: Why? What do they gain by so obviously lying like that? That's the $64,000 question. If you can provide a credible answer, you just might become famous.
That may pass for mathematical logic in your unive... (show quote)





I meant it adds up to 100%truth about what is being reported, it's 90% fab and 10%lies and that's the truth . I do live in my own universe, it's pretty kool here.

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.