Thread replies: 7
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
Anonymous
WashPost Kushner Story Revealed Fake by Insider 2017-05-31 01:29:11 Post No. 145259
[Report] Image search: [Google]
WashPost Kushner Story Revealed Fake by Insider 2017-05-31 01:29:11 Post No. 145259
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: podesta.png (527KB, 948x495px) Image search:
[Google]
527KB, 948x495px
WashPost Kushner Story Revealed Fake by Insider
Anonymous
2017-05-31 01:29:11
Post No. 145259
[Report]
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/29/jared-kushner-didnt-suggest-russian-communications-channel-in-meeting-source-says.html
A December meeting between Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and one of the senior advisers in the Trump administration, and Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak at Trump Tower focused on Syria, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News Monday.
During the meeting the Russians broached the idea of using a secure line between the Trump administration and Russia, not Kushner, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News. That follows a recent report from The Washington Post alleging that Kushner wanted to develop a secure, private line with Russia.
The idea of a permanent back channel was never discussed, according to the source. Instead, only a one-off for a call about Syria was raised in the conversation.
In addition, the source told Fox News the December meeting focused on Russia’s contention the Obama administration’s policy on Syria was deeply flawed.
>>
>>145259
No surprise
>>
CNN:
>according to U.S. officials briefed on intelligence reports.
FOX:
>a source familiar with the matter
One fake story to counter another.
Neither one really reports the news, they just latch onto anything that supports the narrative that they're trying to push.
Playing both sides against the middle.
Does anyone still take anything from MSM seriously?
>>
>>145266
It's like annonymous source propoganda wars
>>
>>145266
The wording matters, because among journalists, editors, and their careers and reputations within the industry and the highest officials they cover they are held accountable to the facts of the information revealed about sources (their lay public audience tends to be less scrutinous, however). There is also some legal accountability.
So NYT, WP, and any reputable outlet will always use multiple sources that can provide editors with corroboration if any are anonymous.
Fox's story is worded to state clearly that it is entirely based on the word of one single source, "familiar with the matter," as opposed to maybe saying "an intelligence official" or "with high-level clearance" or even "in senior government" ffs.
>>
>>
>>145271
Lol you can't say the same for the WashPodesta
Thread posts: 7
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1