3 comments
The people who described the contacts to Reuters said they had seen no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion between the campaign and Russia in the communications reviewed so far.
> The people who described the contacts to Reuters said they had seen no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion between the campaign and Russia in the communications reviewed so far.
So, despite all the screaming and tears, there is exactly 0 evidence of any wrong-doing by Trumps team.
Nothing at all.
It's impressive how they can dominate my newsfeeds, drowning out real stories, yet have absolutely nothing.
What happened to standards in news? Are they not even pretending to be balanced, impartial, or informative anymore?
At least this article admitted there was nothing there. But they hid it in the center of the article, where the loudest screamers never read, and gave it a somewhat misleading title.
So, despite all the screaming and tears, there is exactly 0 evidence of any wrong-doing by Trumps team.
Nothing at all.
It's impressive how they can dominate my newsfeeds, drowning out real stories, yet have absolutely nothing.
What happened to standards in news? Are they not even pretending to be balanced, impartial, or informative anymore?
At least this article admitted there was nothing there. But they hid it in the center of the article, where the loudest screamers never read, and gave it a somewhat misleading title.
Another story that names absolutely no sources. This Russia nonsense is beyond crazy. I've watched liberal friends parrot it as if it's fact. I ask them to show me one news article with evidence and they can never find one that isn't speculation or "anonymous sources". Then they generally get pissed and rationalize it to themselves somehow. They've repeated this lie so often many believe it to be fact.
Many of these anonymous trump "scandals" are first published in WaPo or NYT. WaPo is owned by Jeff Bezos (amazon) and he has been going after Trump like crazy since he suggested there may be anti-trust issues with Amazon. WaPo also just recently hired Podesta. The NYT has ties that go back to the Clinton's way back. There was even talk at one point of either there editor or ceo (i forget exactly who) taking over Hillary's Senate seat when she became Secretary of State. That never ended up happening but their higher ups sure donated a ton of money to her campaign and their horse lost.
It's all just libel and propaganda hiding behind "journalism" at this point. Amazing how every other story these days involves "anonymous sources". They seem to be way more common than ten years ago. They were rare in the 80s when there were 80 something media companies. Now we just have six. The agenda is real and these corporations are invested in way more than just media. The reason you see the MSM back democrats so often is cheap labor (lax immigration enforcement) and H1B visas. Cheap labor is always in a mega corps interest.