In a series of interviews over two weeks, the woman shared a dramatic story about an alleged sexual relationship with Moore in 1992 that led to an abortion when she was 15. During the interviews, she repeatedly pressed Post reporters to give their opinions on the effects that her claims could have on Moore’s candidacy if she went public.
November 27, 2017
Congratulations to The Washington Post for not falling for a Project Veritas sting.
"A woman approached The Post with dramatic — and false — tale about Roy Moore. She appears to be part of undercover sting operation."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
143 comments:
Because of our customary journalistic rigor, we weren’t fooled...
Heh.
At the Post, we make up OUR OWN STORIES.
Too little, too late. The Washington Post was a leading voice in the baby hunts conducted over the past four trimesters.
She must have been pretty inept for them to turn her down.
They probably thought there was too much verification and evidence. Seems fishy, right? I mean, they know their stories about Moore are all fake, so a real sounding story.... was probably a sting.
Now, if Project Veritas came in with stuff about, say, Mike Lee: They'd have that in 400 point font on the front page tomorrow with zero vetting.
--Vance
“The fallout: When the Post confronted Phillips about inconsistencies in her story, she "insisted that she was not working with any organization that targets journalists." But Post reporters saw her walking into the New York offices of Project Veritas — a group that goes after mainstream media by feeding reporters fake stories to expose, as the organization calls it, media bias.”
Hahahahaha! Oh lord.
It shows how careful they need to be. Even if stories like this are tempting and they'd love things that fit their narrative, the cost of getting caught is devastating.
Who knows how many stings PV attempts before it gets something worth running.
The WA Post has broken several of these stories -- Franken, Moore.
People who trust WA Post's reporting & fact checking = logical consistency
People who don't trust WA Post's reporting & fact checking = logical consistency
People who trust one story and not the other = ???
I'm just impressed they can learn. Good on them for checking first.
“Alice Crites, a Post researcher who was looking into Phillips's background, found the document that strongly reinforced the reporters' suspicions ... It was on the website GoFundMe.com under the name Jaime Phillips. 'I'm moving to New York!' the May 29 appeal said. 'I've accepted a job to work in the conservative media movement to combat the lies and deceipt of the liberal MSM...'"
Project Veritas, doin’ the Lords work! LMAO.
Was "her" name Christopher Steele?
I like how the post says they saw her walking in. Just be honest. They followed her because she was suspicious. I'll reset my journalism position about sexual assault from always believe the woman to skepticism allowed.
Does the Post routinely stalk people whose stories they doubt? It came up gold this time.
Yet there are those who still believe the WaPo stories of Roy Moore’s real victims are fake news. Trump got angry at his own daughter for believing it.
“Does the Post routinely stalk people whose stories they doubt?”
You mean verify?
This may not be the end of it.
Have you seen O'Keefe's video ?
... Uh... Undercover videos are common and not eschewed by journalists. WaPo does know about that entire genre of journalism of sting videos and the like?
You verify with research. Not following your source to see where they go.
Who knows how many stings PV attempts before it gets something worth running.
If you drag a hundred dollar bill through a newsroom you never know what you'll find.
Good on them. Almost as transparent as they were about Mark Felt.
... My God. The Post had videographers go undercover at one of their interviews. But they stated earlier that this was eschewed implying it was immoral and unethical.
Can't they be consistent in their own article? Or is it ok when they do i
“You verify with research. Not following your source to see where they go.”
That IS part of the research, lol. This is pathetic.
Yeah. No. No it is not.
In the video I saw the interviewer TOLD her upfront she was being videotaped.
Inga: "Yet there are those who still believe the WaPo stories of Roy Moore’s real victims are fake news."
The people that called and still call Bill Clintons victims "nuts and sluts" would, once again, like ti lecture everyone.
Eanwhile in other Inga "fail" news, Democrat sexual harassment ICONS Franken and Conyers are settling in for a long winters tenure.
And oddly enough, not a single "p****-hat" protest is even scheduled.
Unexpectedly!
2 weeks in and an entire dem meme collapses! A new record!
Kudos. But did they fall for the rest of the accusers?
Yeah. No. No it is not.
Yes, it is. Very pathetic. Laughable.
Read the article. They hid videographers there as well. There's nothing wrong with that in my mind. But the rules the WaPo just articulated is that that was unethical.
Not helpful to Moore campaign. Maybe they should have used Weinstein instead.
Inga and the dems, as with their very recent and short-lived Bill Clinton "conversions", are now against undercover videos and stings!
“...the rules the WaPo just articulated is that that was unethical.”
Oh please. You say WAPo is unethical in verifying her story and making sure she isn’t a fake and you don’t say a word about the underhanded and illegal methods employed by Project Vertas when they secretly tape those they’re trying to smear? Pathetic.
readering: "Not helpful to Moore campaign."
When I want to know whether or not something is helpful or not helpful to republicans I research what readering and LLR Chuck have to say.
They had plenty if tools to verify her story without stalking her and staking out her car. I don't think undercover recordings are unethical. The WaPo does.
“James O’Keefe, the founder of Project Veritas who was convicted of a misdemeanor in 2010 for using a fake identity to enter a federal building during a previous sting, declined to answer questions about the woman outside the Project Veritas office, a storefront in Mamaroneck, N.Y., on Monday morning shortly after the woman walked inside. …
In a follow-up interview, O’Keefe declined to answer repeated questions about whether the woman was employed at Project Veritas. He also did not respond when asked if he was working with Moore, former White House adviser and Moore supporter Stephen K. Bannon, or Republican strategists.”
Karma, lol.
Inga: "..Project Vertas when they secretly tape those they’re trying to smear?"
Inga thinks Project Veritas is the obambi admin re: spying on James Rosen and his parents.
"Accidentally", no doubt.
She didn't ask for the money upfront. They knew she wasn't a real Bammie commie cunt.
Oh Hahahaha!
James O'Keefe
@JamesOKeefeIII
Hitting export on hidden camera footage into Washington Post shortly. Project Veritas vs Bezos 100mm monopoly. Fasten your seatbelts.
3:59 PM - Nov 27, 2017
851 851 Replies 1,878 1,878 Retweets 4,035 4,035 likes
UnknownFakeInga slams somebody for using a fake identity.
Does that make up for the Washington Post and the rest of the MSM falling for the scam Gloria Allred was pushing? Haven't heard much about that one lately.
What a bumblefuck.
“But this larger conceptual problem with O’Keefe’s enterprise creates a secondary problem, which is that the people who are dumb enough to believe these conspiracy theories are not generally smart enough to carry out a competent entrapment scheme. O’Keefe attempted to impersonate a Detroit Free Press columnist at the polls, and failed, in part because the poll worker knew the Free Press writer personally. An elaborate effort to sting the League of Conservation Voters failed clumsily because the operatives left their recording devices sitting around. The “Canadians” who tried to entrap Hillary Clinton staffers into accepting “foreign” donations all gave the same phone number, which turned out to be from “Students for a Conservative Voice.” O’Keefe’s attempt to register the vote of a dead person accidentally used the identity of a voter who is completely alive. His attempt to impersonate a Hungarian donor to the Clinton campaign floundered when its catfisher forgot to hang up the phone and accidentally recorded a long message explaining the details of the operation:
Hey, Dana,” a voice began. The caller sounded to her like an older American male. “My name is, uh, Victor Kesh. I’m a Hungarian-American who represents a, uh, foundation … that would like to get involved with you and aid what you do in fighting for, um, European values.” He asked Geraghty for the name of someone he could talk to “about supporting you guys and coördinating with you on some of your efforts.” Requesting a callback, he left a phone number with a 914 area code—Westchester County. …
She heard a click, a pause, and then a second male voice. The person who had introduced himself as Kesh said, “Don’t say anything … before I hang up the phone.” …
She continued to listen, and the man’s voice suddenly took on a more commanding tone. The caller had failed to hang up, and Kesh, unaware that he was still being recorded, seemed to be conducting a meeting about how to perpetrate an elaborate sting on Soros. “What needs to happen,” he said, is for “someone other than me to make a hundred phone calls like that.”“
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/11/conservative-fails-to-prove-washington-post-is-fake-news.html
"Project Vertas when they secretly tape those they’re trying to smear? Pathetic."
Inga, do know what CBS is ? Have you ever heard of "60 minutes ?"
Come on. You can do better than this.
Inga: "...which is that the people who are dumb enough to believe these conspiracy theories ..."
Golden collusion-filled dossiers!
“UnknownFakeInga slams somebody for using a fake identity.”
LOL! Lordy, you are as dumb as O Keefe. Fake Inga? Are you very very very sure of that?
The DNC didn't contact the WaPo to tell them they were sending over another liar. They knew it had to be a fake. Even if real, they would prefer to use the vetted liars that the DNC sends.
Who is Inga?
“Inga, do know what CBS is ? Have you ever heard of "60 minutes ?"
Ask that question of Matthew Sablan. He’s got his undies in a twist because he thinks WaPo taped her secretly.
Well if you aren't fake, then you are a liar. You said that you stated using the Inga name because so many people were calling you that--even though you hadn't used the nic before. A few months ago-on a Saturday.
And Bumblefuck is what the Chinese called Obama. You were around when I shared that story. Now you use it.
If they suspected she was a fake, it makes sense to follow her as part of checking her out. Hard to see otherwise.
Especially after this:
“Alice Crites, a Post researcher who was looking into Phillips's background, found the document that strongly reinforced the reporters' suspicions ... It was on the website GoFundMe.com under the name Jaime Phillips. 'I'm moving to New York!' the May 29 appeal said. 'I've accepted a job to work in the conservative media movement to combat the lies and deceipt of the liberal MSM...'"
PV didn't do a good enough job, this time.
So, here's a question. The WaPo thinks it is OK to break "off-the-record" for an unpublished story that was done in bad faith. That's fine, I guess.
But... why when things do get published are wrong, we don't have the WaPo get out the long knives? For example, Comey admitted lots of the stuff the press was leaking wasn't true before he was fired. We never saw any of those people strung up for bad faith, or even just to show that the WaPo or NYT had believed a credible person. For example, here's Politico writing about how bad WaPo got something wrong.
Why don't we get a thorough vetting of how they got this wrong, including stringing up their bad sources?
I'm glad the WaPo got something right by not rushing to print, for once. But... I can't help but suspect that if this had turned out to be a left-leaning agitator trying to harm Moore, we'd never have heard of it.
"Ask that question of Matthew Sablan."
No, you are the one that needed the fainting couch.
“No, you are the one that needed the fainting couch.”
Maybe from laughing so hard.
Also, the WaPo says meeting using false cover stories is also bad. Yet... by the time they are having the last meeting, it isn't as they tell the source, to verify things. It is a sting video. They already know she's not what she says she is.
Again: I, Matt Sablan, think this is fine journalism. It is the WaPo who has made it clear they DON'T think this is ethical journalism, to get people to agree to an interview with a cover story is bad according to them.
The Lefties are now super-duper against sexual harassment, undercover reporters and conspiracies......(wink wink)
Again, Unknown: I think secret recordings have a valid use in journalism. It is the WaPo that selectively decides when it is and isn't allowed. Conveniently, it always seems to be, "when it helps them or causes they care about" not when "it hurts them or causes they care about."
That's not an ethical consistency.
"But Post reporters saw her walking into the New York offices of Project Veritas — a group that goes after mainstream media by feeding reporters fake stories to expose, as the organization calls it, media bias."
WaPo is absolute without ethics. The proof is in their own words above, which totally mischaracterizes (deliberately, one might add) what Project Veritas does. In journalism, there is a technical word for such purposeful dissembly. I looked it up. They call it a lie.
Unknown said...
What a bumblefuck.
“But this larger conceptual problem with O’Keefe’s enterprise creates a secondary problem, which is that the people who are dumb enough to believe these conspiracy theories are not generally smart enough to carry out a competent entrapment scheme
Have to agree about this incident. Not as good as the people who got Planned Parenthood on tape selling baby body parts. That tape must have got a lot of women wondering what happened to their aborted babies.
I mean, did we ever find out which sources burned the WaPo about this giant mistake? This one they actually published, by the way. Actual people were harmed by this.
Again, I want to stress: I think the WaPo reporters were pretty much in bounds, except for stalking the woman. Even then, PIs and cops do that all the time, so that may be my personal "You shouldn't stalk people" and less journalist ethics.
I'm judging the WaPo by the rules they set up -- in the exact same article.
If you set out a rat trap baited with a pebble and catch no rats, it doesn't mean there are no rats, especially if you catch them all the time when you do it right.
I challenge a left wing version of Project Veritas to find the kind of corruptions among the Right, as PV has found among the left. Of course, the left has thousands of such operators among the press and others who attempt to do just that, but what we end up with is PecanPie-gate, and endless unfounded claims of collusion with Russia, Russia, Russia. I heard that Trump was seen eating Russian dressing on a salad in 1997. What more do you need people?
So unethical WaPo!
“Phillips asked Washington Post reporter Beth Reinhard, who co-wrote the first report on Moore’s alleged misconduct, to meet her in person and alone, and asked Reinhard to guarantee that Moore would lose his Senate race if she aired her claims.
According to the report, Reinhard told Phillips that she could not “guarantee what will happen as a result of another story” and informed her of the Washington Post’s “fact-checking process.””
Also, while I agree that PV is a bit over the top with this bit: "A posting for the “journalist” job on the Project Veritas website that month warned that the job “is not a role for the faint of heart.”"
Coming from the place that changed its motto after the side it supported lost the Presidency to: "Democracy Dies in Darkness," I find it weird that they'd quote that in a mocking way.
"I challenge a left wing version of Project Veritas to find the kind of corruptions among the Right, as PV has found among the left."
-- I'd welcome that. There's a lot of cleaning both parties could do.
Here, for example is a bit of journalism I think is actually really interesting. Too bad the WaPo, if we're following the rules they laid out here, thinks this is unethical.
... And apparently, the WaPo thought like me in this case too.
“I challenge a left wing version of Project Veritas to find the kind of corruptions among the Right, as PV has found among the left.”
Here you go.
Unknown: Has that video done what O'Keefe's team has done, for example, taking down Acorn? Just looking at the front page it looks like a gaudy version of the Daily Kos (unless that website has gotten uglier since the last time I was there years ago.)
If the WaPo was about honest journalism, they wouldn't have held the story until the day Moore could not be replaced on the ballot.
Here's an oldie but a goodie: Where the WaPo slammed McCain and Iseman with innuendo. Which we later found out was not true.
What anonymous sources were strung up?
Drago,
You are thinking about David Brock on Anita Hill. "A little bit nutty, a little bit slutty." Brock has changed sides entirely, long ago, but my point is that this has absolutely nothing to do with the present. (Well, except that Anita Hill was trotted out on one of the Sunday morning talk shows yesterday to reiterate, "See, the bad guys aren't all Democrats." What with Weinstein and Franken and Rose and Stallone and the like -- to say nothing of Steven Seagal, who apparently assaulted a 13-year-old girl and left her seriously injured ... but, hey, that's all right, because it happened on a movie set in a country where the age of consent is actually that low. The age of consent in Alabama is 16, which means that Moore isn't a "serial child molester"; assuming that the 14-year-old actually told him her age, it happened exactly once.)
Unknown, your link proves my point. Nothing there of any real substance. How do you compare that stuff to openly selling baby parts, admitting systematic voter fraud on tape, and helping set up an underage human trafficking ring.
She wasn't dubious enough for bezos to buy it
www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/11/26/court-documents-roy-moore-accuser-violent-nature-history-criminal-fraud-family
Interestingly enough, Romney's 47% remark, recorded illegally by someone pretending to be in attendance as a member of the staff, was reported and praised by the WaPo. Or maybe they really were the staff but ALSO there to dig up dirt on the Republican.
The WaPo's stance is... misty at best.
Actually Keefe turned up this was actually an exercise by Robert creamer, the activist turned embezzler.
Unknown/Inga: 914 isn't "Westchester County." It's several counties north and west of NYC. I lived in Orange County growing up, and we were in 914. But I suppose Westchester makes for a sexier story, yes?
Also, very glad that no one is claiming the WaPo's video has been edited or taken out of context, even tongue in cheek.
FIFY: "Because of our customary journalistic rigor and the failure of the Project Veritas troll to mention Russians, we weren’t fooled."
Veritas intentionally sucked WaPo into this story. Knowing WaPO would mention Veritas and make their name known to WaPo readers. Veritas has a dramatic expose coming now that they have the attention of WaPo readers.
Winning !
Eh, I don't think it is some nth dimensional chess. I think Veritas has just gotten so big it is finally also getting sloppy.
“Unknown/Inga: 914 isn't "Westchester County." It's several counties north and west of NYC. I lived in Orange County growing up, and we were in 914. But I suppose Westchester makes for a sexier story, yes?”
What comment of mine are you responding to?? Are you on the correct thread?
The pigeon didn't have a disciplinary record or history of fraud like some of the damsels that bezos has preferred.
tim in vermont,
If the WaPo was about honest journalism, they wouldn't have held the story until the day Moore could not be replaced on the ballot.
Yeah, funny coincidence, that. Let's remember what the NJ Supremes did with Bob Torricelli in 2002, after his name was unfortunately tainted: They let him be replaced on the ballot with Frank Lautenberg, after the deadline. No write-ins necessary.
I think that Alabamans are going to elect Moore, in large part because the more "refined" parts of the country are urging them not to. That would certainly be my own instinct.
Unknown,
5:56 p.m.:
Requesting a callback, he left a phone number with a 914 area code—Westchester County. …
Hoping that helps.
“Unknown,
5:56 p.m.:
Requesting a callback, he left a phone number with a 914 area code—Westchester County. …
Hoping that helps.”
Michelle, that was a quote. I’m not at all familiar with New York, the location means nothing to me. I have no idea why one place would be “sexier” than the other.
Hari
Inga is the commenter known as Unknown. Serial identity changes.
I wonder if the Washington Post's embellishment of the Moore allegations was designed to remove heat from the Democratic sting targeting the Clinton faction. It must require an exquisite balance of journalism and journolism to excise a heavily integrated faction in their preferred party and leave it viable (i.e. an unPlanned Party).
The suspicion runs strong, but in fact there is no proof cited that the young lady was employed by Project Veritas. She might have been freelancing and hoping to sell the story to PV, and O'Keefe might have been caught unawares of exactly what he was being asked aboutand chose to be cautious.
Unlikely, perhaps, but we have been complaining about the use of strong words not backed up bu proof.
Word:
https://mobile.twitter.com/MZHemingway/status/935259811129806849?p=v
Come to think of it, there is also a possibility that her story was more or less true, and WaPo missed out on real bombshell story there!
This multiple "unknown" shit is..shit.
Pick a name that lifts and separates.
Moderaters..sort this shit out.
I promise to buy through the MeadHouse portal.
In news of consequence:https://mobile.twitter.com/SaraCarterDC/status/935330977446092801?p=v
Next up in Dem convenient conversions: reporters disparaging undercover reporting and video stings, denouncing 60 Minutes decades later--the culture was different then! we have seen the light now! no fair when cons play our game to expose our foibles!
Heya,
Try http://www.easyhyperlinks.com/
Unknown/Inga shpuld just go back to Inga with the colorized Matahari avatar. She knows she was better loved then.
...or switch to "Unbekannt"...
...just a helpful suggestion.
Inga said..."Here you go."
LOL
The left have "Right wing watch!" - LOL
The left have actual global catastrophes. Named Hillary.
Thanks for the bat signal, Inga.
You’re welcome Chickie.
Inga said...You’re welcome Chickie.
Now watch the compliments roll in.
As for the story, it seems like there's moore to play out. O'Keefe is detested by the left, and it's important to destroy his credibility. Plus the WaPo needs to lead the narrative on this one. It's existential for all tree players.
On a tangential matter, Carly Fiorina was back in the news again today for saying something sensible. She relied quite a bit on O'Keefe's work during her campaign.
“Now watch the compliments roll in.”
I kind of doubt that, but I do love my Mata Hari.
“....and it's important to destroy his credibility.”
What credibility? Not much to destroy.
O Keefe has been ickibg butt and taking sin major player for nearly 10 years down.
“O Keefe has been ickibg butt...”
I agree!
Wut kidn of devise are u righting on narcissus?
I was ahorthanding Michael Moore greatrd his own gravity well, staring with roger and me which was tendentiously edited the same for his columbine film and Fahrenheit 9/11
"What credibility? Not much to destroy."
What's great about O'Keefe's work is it's on video for all to see.
Very funny, sometimes the keyboard cover part of the text box on my tablet.
“Very funny, sometimes the keyboard cover part of the text box on my tablet.”
Scroll up.
"Very funny, sometimes the keyboard cover part of the text box on my tablet."
Wow, an almost grammatical sentance.
Inga: "What credibility? Not much to destroy"
The Golden Dossier crew chimes in.
Can't help but notice that "Super Angry About Harassment" Inga is studiously avoiding the Franken thread.
Studiously avoiding.
I wonder why that might be?
I guess they are covering the story with a pillow
https://libertyunyielding.com/2017/11/27/cfpbs-leandra-english-disciple-elizabeth-warren/
“Studiously avoiding.
I wonder why that might be?”
What? You miss me over there? So you gotta come here and get me? LOL. How much more can I say about ass grabbing? You’ve been talking about it all day. It’s sort of boring already.
I can imagine Drago going from thread to thread trying to find me.
Drago grumbles to himself...”Where the hell is she? She should be here on the ass grabbing thread so I can blabber at her in rapid fire non stop fake quotes!”
Inga: "You’ve been talking about it all day. It’s sort of boring already."
LOL
Of course I have...except for the fact that I haven't.
But your refusal to address this issue, which just a week or so ago was the single most important thing in the world to you, tells us all we need to know.
BTW, how does one go about gaining ICON status in order to sexually harass women?
I mean, besides being a democrat of course.
It appears that if a single face were put on the Democrat party, it would have to be that of Al Franken.
Quite frankly, as long as Franken and Conyers remain in office no lefty anywhere has any credibility on any sexual harassment issue.
You'd think Weinstein would have been smart enough to know that if he wanted to get away with being a serial sexual harasser and support convicted pedophiles, he would need to do it from elected office as a democrat!
A few hundred million here and few more hundred million there and he could have become an ICON!
“But your refusal to address this issue, which just a week or so ago was the single most important thing in the world to you, tells us all we need to know.”
What would you like me to say Drago? I already said that he should resign last week. Do you want I should call for him to be dipped in honey and tied down over an ant hill? What do you want from me?
I still think it’s hilarious that you came over here to blabber at me, hahahahaha!
Carry on.
Oh yes, I also said Conyers should resign, but you already heard me say that two days ago.
I am 100 percent ok with the WaPo putting a tail on this little shit.
And I say that as a fan of Project Veritas.
Democrat operatives on tape admitting they hire people to incite violence at Trump rallies.
Inga said...
Oh yes, I also said Conyers should resign, but you already heard me say that two days ago.
You voted for Clinton twice knowing he was a rapist. You voted for Hillary knowing she intimidated and slimed his victims.
Inga said...
“....and it's important to destroy his credibility.”
What credibility? Not much to destroy.
You have video evidence of the DNC paying for and inciting violence against Trump supporters.
You choose to ignore it.
That means you support that violence. You can blabber and mewl about credibility. The video is right there. There is nothing to discuss.
What credibility? Not much to destroy.
ACORN is gone. Project Veritas is still here.
¿Claro?
George Soros, Inga. Project Veritas is battling your billionaire friend George Soros.
And he's winning.
What you're laughing at is your own inability to grasp your sides own weakness. And the rest of us are laughing at you.
Keep posting.
have to wonder if O'Keefe purposefully set up the WaPo to find out about the sting. he has already posted a video of PV interviewing WaPo people.
suspect that O'Keefe has more videos coming out.
Acorn is not gone; they just changed letterheads.
Particularly poorly received--if the Post had taken the bait, sure the Post would be humiliated, but there would be blow back on Project Veritas too. It would have deepened the pool of mistrust and disgust around Roy Moore in a way that would not have helped him.
Someone, a widely read blogger (Hint Hint), should maintain and list kill shots by player, in their opinion. Where a kill shot grabs the uninformed, uninterested, hardworking salt of the earth. The majority’s attention and agreement who thinks “this must be so, or it’s so funny I’ll agree just for kicks" Which is why none of the fact checking sites work, they are the pipe dreams of their Canute like opponents in sea of the wisdom of the crowds, who laugh at them as well. What was Canute doing a thousand years ago, almost to the month? All of which is why PV has already won, once he showed his cards, win Bigly indeed.
Prof. Althouse,
You have a lot of unstable people commenting on this topic here today.
MPH said...
"Prof. Althouse,
You have a lot of unstable people commenting on this topic here today. "
it's called entertainment.
Are you not amused?
I had to roll this around a bit to grasp why this "sting" bugs me so much. It's because it has as its purpose undermining Roy Moore's accusers without addressing them or their claims--they sought to undermine these women by undermining a news organization that published their claims.
It was designed to further muddy the water instead of bringing clarity. That's not investigative journalism, it's dirty politics.
Funny how real news organization try to fact check information ---you know like is there even a basement in that pizza parlor-- must be hard to fathom for many the cost and time to do this kind of reporting.
Inga, do know what CBS is ? Have you ever heard of "60 minutes ?"
Come on. You can do better than this.
11/27/17, 5:58 PM
Now, Michael K., where did you get that idea from?
Inga said...
I kind of doubt that, but I do love my Mata Hari.
11/27/17, 10:00 PM
Of course you do. She was a whore and a traitor; thus exactly the sort of person leftists most admire.
Her story had a happy ending though!
roesch/voltaire said...
Funny how real news organization try to fact check information ---you know like is there even a basement in that pizza parlor-- must be hard to fathom for many the cost and time to do this kind of reporting.
11/28/17, 11:28 AM
True, the guy was an idiot. The floor that he shot never did anything to anybody. Plus, floors can't talk. What you do, is you scoop up the principals and make them talk.
Achilles, if that video from over a year ago is such clear proof, why has it only been viewed 236 times in 14 months?
Not even people on the right believe it (even bother to view it). What a fucking joke
The unasked and therefore unanswered question is: Did the Wapo reporters exercise the same care in accepting, without question, the stories from the other Moore women? We know that the ex-cop lied about assignments to keep him away from female cheerleaders at the high school football games and we know that the Gloria Allred's client had questionable documentation, but I must have missed the WaPo feature stories questioning their veracity.
I really don't think that James O'Keefe will lose any credibility until Matt Drudge says so.
By the way, I'm curious as to why the left hasn't gone after Drudge in a big way. There have been a number of instances over the years where Drudge has not bitten on a few links. I have long thought that that is how the old news oligopoly would bring down Drudge. You know that they want to, despite hanging on his every update.
gadfly @ 4:36
Which makes me wonder if the whole thing wasn't just a setup by Veritas. You know. Pick someone who can easily be traced and back tracked and the4n show everyone the hypocrisy of the WaPo. Which is, as you know, the greatest high school newspaper in America.
Post a Comment