Should we review the amount of times those unnamed sources have been right? I mean come on things change, situations change. Trump certainly is one to not move ahead on something just to claim "fake news"....said a person familiar with the matter. lol
Do you honestly think you're making a strong argument here? Seriously, feel stupid. You've clearly stated that it's your lot in life, you needn't bother showing it off. Show and tell is meant for elementary school kids. We get it! Your stupid is better than anyone else's (but Taj's of course. Face it, he's a competitive guy. No need to step up your game, you can't win).Just pointing out the inherent unreliability of unnamed sources. Tillerson was originally supposed to resign last Summer as well....per unnamed sources.
Wonder if this will influence voting in PA today?
...said a person familiar with the matter. lol
I may be an asshat in your opinion, but being skeptical of unnamed sourcing is not being "pedandtic" [sic]...especially considering some fairly significant stories the last couple of years that have been flat out wrong....e.g. ABC News Brian Ross and his "fake news" regarding Trump that immediately caused the stock market to drop. I believe unnamed sources are fine to use in journalism, but these sources need to be corroborated and verified as having high credibility before publishing any articles based solely on this kind of sourcing imo. I believe they have a name for it...it's called 'responsible journalism'.Doc, you are the most pedandtic asshat in this forum.
Yet you chose this Tillerson story to make your point. Bryce is right, wrong hill to die on.I may be an asshat in your opinion, but being skeptical of unnamed sourcing is not being "pedandtic" [sic]...especially considering some fairly significant stories the last couple of years that have been flat out wrong....e.g. ABC News Brian Ross and his "fake news" regarding Trump that immediately caused the stock market to drop. I believe unnamed sources are fine to use in journalism, but these sources need to be corroborated and verified as having high credibility before publishing any articles based solely on this kind of sourcing imo.
I wonder if you had the same standards during Hillary's numerous investigations over the past few years.I may be an asshat in your opinion, but being skeptical of unnamed sourcing is not being "pedandtic" [sic]...especially considering some fairly significant stories the last couple of years that have been flat out wrong....e.g. ABC News Brian Ross and his "fake news" regarding Trump that immediately caused the stock market to drop. I believe unnamed sources are fine to use in journalism, but these sources need to be corroborated and verified as having high credibility before publishing any articles based solely on this kind of sourcing imo. I believe they have a name for it...it's called 'responsible journalism'.
If he called from AF1 that would have to be well after the tweet came out.Tillerson designating deputies to handle all duties, last day will be 3/31. Trump called him from AF1.
If he called from AF1 that would have to be well after the tweet came out.
The Secretary of State is there to carry out policy, not make it.
I like this new move by Trump. To my way of viewing history and looking at his actions, I see a President building a war cabinet.
There were some major reporting errors regarding that as well.I wonder if you had the same standards during Hillary's numerous investigations over the past few years.
He gave a classy speech. He touched upon state department achievements over the past year, thanked his staff, urged them to keep doing good work, said he'll work to ensure smooth transition, and briefly called Russia out at the end of the speech. Did not mention Trump at all.OK so hes speaking right now at the State Department. Anyone watching that can summarize?
Yeah I see now where he said he spoke to Trump this afternoon. Man what a dick move. Entirely unsurprising but why is this idiot so afraid to handle staffing issues face to face.Several hours.