ajvol01
GBO!
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2009
- Messages
- 25,405
- Likes
- 29,972
You see the lack of a story in the mainstream and work backwards to conclude that the story must not be important. Maybe you should consider re-framing your perspective. The story is absolutely huge. If the Democrats had this kind of evidence against Trump he wouldn't be president right now. But somehow, it isn't a big deal to you and every TDS imbecile out there. The fact that every mainstream news outlet is cooperating simultaneously to kill the story is just proof that the story isn't serious? Your partisan hackery is showing.
It's not proof of anything. It's an unverified story.
The sources have to be anonymous, and you need to throw in a few 'Trumps' and 'Russias'... and then it becomes worthy of investigation.How does it become verified? By ignoring it? By attacking the sources but not investigating the content?
It’s an amazing circular argument....it can’t be true because we don’t trust the sources, so we won’t report on it, and since it’s not reported on, it can’t be true.
Wait, I thought you were arguing that you agreed with the media’s stance that there is no story and that they should not investigate or cover this to determine whether a story exists or not.Show me the very worst and damning 10 or 12. I haven't seen anything that verifies criminality.
Not trusting a source is a good reason not to report on it. One is inspector Rudy Clouseau.How does it become verified? By ignoring it? By attacking the sources but not investigating the content?
It’s an amazing circular argument....it can’t be true because we don’t trust the sources, so we won’t report on it, and since it’s not reported on, it can’t be true.
Ask Hunter, Jim and Joe Biden if the emails / texts are authentic.Not trusting a source is a good reason not to report on it. One is one is inspector Rudy Clouseau.
Not trusting a source is a good reason not to report on it. One is inspector Rudy Clouseau.
