To: SeekAndFind
When a source provides faulty info the source should be exposed.
3 posted on
03/15/2021 6:35:02 PM PDT by
piasa
(Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge)
To: piasa
I believe that the legal standard is once you have shown to have told a lie on the witness stand, everything else you say can also be assumed to be a lie. I believe sources of news should be held, at least, to the same standard.
This was not an 'error'. This was a lie.
7 posted on
03/15/2021 6:45:16 PM PDT by
fhayek
To: piasa
It's the Post. The source could have been the reporter, making it up.
12 posted on
03/15/2021 6:51:18 PM PDT by
JennysCool
( "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." ― Mark Twain )
To: piasa
To: piasa
“attributes the misquote to faulty “information provided by a source””
Full audio recording of the call was available. I listened to the whole thing. There’s no need for “a source” to attribute information through when anyone can listen to the whole thing.
Lame excuse.
15 posted on
03/15/2021 7:03:01 PM PDT by
ctdonath2
(The claim of consensus is the first refuge of scoundrels.)
To: piasa
What if the source answers to the name of “Jeff?”
16 posted on
03/15/2021 7:10:48 PM PDT by
ptsal
(Vote R.E.D. >>>Remove Every Democrat ***)
To: piasa
Nope Trump should be able to sue the Washington post for Damages. You got to hit them where it hurts.
20 posted on
03/15/2021 7:40:15 PM PDT by
Bailee
To: piasa
No surprise they were played. It’s unlikely they will burn the so-called source as this one will make up any conspiracy theory the eneMedia can propagate.
26 posted on
03/15/2021 8:49:48 PM PDT by
Sgt_Schultze
(When your business model depends on slave labor, you're always going to need more slaves)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson