Evidence Found of Seeding of Fake Leaks

[LaserSharkDFB]

Apparently they don't double check. Otherwise, they wouldn't have had the errors they have had in the past. You seem to be turning this into a personal issue.

I am not going to answer you anymore unless you talk about the OP. I grow weary of steering it back to topic.
Enjoy the rest of the evening.

Nobody's making this personal except you.

Okay. 'Apparently they don't double check' is your position. As the OP noted, they did double-check in this instance. Would you say that this changes your position?

[Brubear]

I simply asked where I was "wrong". And the person has yet to point it out to me.
I feel bad for you if you think you are a "special snowflake' and have difficulties meeting people though. Maybe you should try broadening your horizons a bit.

- - - Updated - - -



You could interchange "doesn't" with many words. But, that "doesn't" necessarily mean you should, now does it?

If you replace "doesn't" with "never" would that have changed the meaning of what you typed grammatically? Not at all, as "doesn't" without a qualifier is an absolute statement.

If you replaced "doesn't" with "rarely" it would change the meaning of what you typed grammatically because you have now added a qualifier. Instead of saying they do not fact check, you are saying that, while they may fact check, it is a rather uncommon occurrence.

If you meant it as rarely, you should have just admitted afterwards that you meant to say almost never and moved on, instead of doubling down and saying "that isn't an absolute statement!".

[Cthulhu 2020]

It's a pretty cool report. I'm not sure about the whole document creation date though. For all they know someone simply copied pasted it on a document that was a few days old; not really the earthshattering evidence that they make it sound to be. Still it is interesting to know that people are going to great lengths to forge such documents to confuse journalists, for whatever reason. Maybe it's a bored teenager, maybe it's Kelyanne herself.

Yeah, it's really really easy to spoof a fake date and time. Even as simple as typing text onto a document made a few days ago. When my professors would say that they'd be checking the dates on our projects/homework to see if any were the same, or if we hadn't given the project enough time, I had a chuckle under my breath.

[Felya]

I simply asked where I was "wrong". And the person has yet to point it out to me.

No, you asked the difference between never and didn't.

I feel bad for you if you think you are a "special snowflake' and have difficulties meeting people though. Maybe you should try broadening your horizons a bit.

I know, but part of getting over it is self awareness. I got that part down. But, now I need you to tell me how I can come to the same conclusion as you did, while not being the snow flake I am. I asked you how you do it, but you don't seem to want to reveal the secret. So, please, for my sake, explain how you tell the difference between CNN stories worthy of attention and them not doubling. Think of the children...

You could interchange "doesn't" with many words. But, that "doesn't" necessarily mean you should, now does it?

How is it different? In what way is doesn't, in the way you used it, mean anything other than never?

- - - Updated - - -

This is dubious logic. You can have processes and fail safes that do not reach 100%.

Let's say you catch 90% of your mistakes and 10% slide through. Adding a second pass will remove a big chunk of your errors but at best you'll still only catch 99% and 1% will fall through the second pass. That doesn't mean you didn't check it just means your process isn't perfect. We also have to keep in mind that people are purposefully trying to sabotage the MSM here so putting the blame on them means you're missing the entire point of the OP.

Stay woke, buddy

See DNC and liberals should be learning. They had an opportunity with ACORN to show how evil the media is, after they got vindicated in court. They could have pulled a Trump over swiftboat for Kerry, since that actually was a lie.

There is your standard... your answer DNC... I think that's one of three things missing from current 'what can DNC do rhetoric'. The second, is don't state policy, just say everything will be perfect. The goal is not to appeal to the people, but people's perception of them selfs. So the third is to win over people by appealing to the common man, when the common man sees him self in Trump.

You want a first woman president? Run Paris Hilton as your nerdy girl next door... the media attacks her, that's a big plus. She is wealthy, not as wealthy as a blue collar billionaire, but still. She needs to post conspiracy theories on twitter ASAP and you got all you need.

[Slant]

I think you misread the tone of my post, I was agreeing with you.

I responded to the post of the article you linked rather than your post. Apologies.

[Mormolyce]

Wherever there is intelligence, there is counter-intelligence.

Which I guess explains why the Trump Administration has completely failed at counter-intelligence.

[BrerBear]

This reminds me of back in late May when the leak stories were flying fast and furious.
Mentally-challenged talk show host Bill Mitchell proposed:

You know what we should do? Start flooding the NYTimes and WAPO tip lines with all kinds of crazy "leaks." Then laugh when they print them! - 10:48 AM - 21 May 2017

to which New York Times White House correspondant Maggie Haberman responded:

The Trump administration has tried this a few times, sir. We actually vet these things. - 12:23 PM - 21 May 2017