Well it is surprising that people are dumb enough to believe this, right.there is nothing terribly surprising here
Well it is surprising that people are dumb enough to believe this, right.there is nothing terribly surprising here
What is amazing about this is not that the fake news mass media make up these stories, but that suckers still fall for it.
The journalist in question, Lawrence O'Donnell, did not lie. He reported, without confirmation, something he had been told. He made it clear, at the time, that he was reporting something unconfirmed. Reporting unconfirmed information of this type apparently violated the standards of his employer. The source of the information O'Donnell reported, if it turns out to be wrong, should be of great interest. It's seems unlikely to be true that Trump had a Russian Co-signer, as loans of the types given Trump by Deutsche Bank would normally not have a co-signer. That is why i was so circumspect in my post above. I have posted many times that when something is said or claimed that seems preposterous or unlikely to be true, it probably isn't. Well, in this situation, and considering all we know for sure about Trump, I wouldn't say the claim that Trump had a Russian cosigner is not preposterous, but it does seem unlikely. We will probably know the truth soon enough.This is the journalistic equivalent of a lawyer approaching the bench and saying "excuse me your honor, I mispoke and would like to correct the record."
Meaning he just got caught lying through his arse.
The journalist in question, Lawrence O'Donnell, did not lie.
You were saying?Congratulations. You passed Trump's loyalty test.
Mueller found multiple Russian links to Trump's campaign. He abstained from investigating business ties. O'Donnell did not say his story is false, simply remains unverified.You were saying?
So Journalism now has devolved into saying whatever comes out your ass is potentially true just unverified..... guess if you just leave it at that one can continue to “flung dung” and all is fine.Mueller found multiple Russian links to Trump's campaign. He abstained from investigating business ties. O'Donnell did not say his story is false, simply remains unverified.
So Journalism now has devolved into saying whatever comes out your ass is potentially true just unverified..... guess if you just leave it at that one can continue to “flung dung” and all is fine.
If Mueller had found “anything” it would have come out. You’re assumptions stink of crap just like O’Donnell’s reporting.
Deutsche Bank could've blown this reporting out of the water, they decided not to comment instead. Mueller found multiple links to Russians, he decided not to pursue business ties. In other words, don't blame the man for not doing what y'all feared him of doing, looking for any crime.
If he found multiple links and decided not to persue them, it was because he knew they led NOWHERE. Your insinuations are the same as O’Donnell - Making facts out of crap.
If Mueller though for one second he had the goods he would have pounced on Trump. Isn’t that what y’all wanted him to do, looking for any crime?