America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Doesn't look like there will be much of a relationship between the incoming Whitehouse and CNN.

That was INTENSE!!!

Victor809....>>> after TRUMP's EL DUCHE'
HAND SIGNAL for...
"Get me more PASTA"...
Which you mis-interpreted....

He gave the ...
THUMB TOUCHES MIDDLE FINGER WHILE THE
INDEX FINGER POINTS DIRECTLY UP ^^^
After that CNN REPORTER YELLED AT HIM...
TRUMP WAS "GREENLIGHTING" the
CNN REPORTER...
Not me...by ft

LMAO

So CNN has a report of dubious authenticity, and they want the incoming White House team to corroborate it?

It would have been brilliant if they had succeeded.

So Jakes Tapper, another POS reporter, has tweeted that Mark Coen (a Trump Lawyer) was in fact not in Prague as they alleged talking to agents. This after Coen produced evidence of his whereabouts and said he'd in fact never been to Prague. They nevery even bothered trying to call him.......this is how hard they tried to verify their info.

Keep swinging boys.

Tail and abrig my understanding is CNN was reporting on the intel agency briefing obama and trump on Russia floating the dossier story, not the content or merit of. I think this is actually accurate and not of dubious accuracy. Buzz feed did something completely different and sloppy (much like wikileaks)

Lumping them in with buzz feed et al is disingenuous at best, but it is what Trump wants. I think some are being mentally lazy or selective. IDGAF about CNN, and know some don't care about the truth, but it seems to me we are on a slippery slope.

.......Damn I finally figured it out TW must stand for Truth Warrior!!!! Got it

You can't handle the TRUTH..!!

We can all agree that both sides lie...but one who is honest must accept facts when confronted with them. If we can't agree that 1+1 = 2, then we'll never accomplish anything. I don't believe that the process of politics is a zero sum game. It is possible to find win-win solutions to our problems but only if both sides honestly want to do that. I am afraid that politics has become an "I win - you lose" and "If you win - I lose" way of life.

I think the pres-elect succesfully trolled cnn... it'd be like me insisting that hank is a pot smoking athiest... of course he's not a pot smoking athiest... the accusation is so outlandish, it should obviously be ignored... and hank would probably ignore it... but cnn just couldn't,,,

HEY
Blowhards..

Please
Shorten
Your
Falseto
Cerebral
Responses

I thought you swallowed the sword.

TW, I was referencing the CNN article that you posted.
CNN admits to not corroborating the 35 page report. They wanted Trump to do that for them by detailing the specific items that were not true.
CNN.
Not Buzzfeed or momsbasementblog.com
CNN.

Using their logic, they could simply send a fabricated story to the white house and demand the president tell them how it's not true. This could be done time and again, until the white house refuses to respond. At which point the story would be deemed true because it wasn't denied. In detail. As per the request of CNN.

It's completely bogus and they are showing their contempt and bias and lack of journalistic ethics.

The truth is dead TW.

Sensational headlines with little in common with the actual text of the article started killing it.... tiny "news" outlets with little to no oversight on their journalistic integrity but the ability to be passed along your creepy uncles Facebook feed put the final stake in it.

Now idiots believe blogs over corroborated news and are proud of it...

... but I thought you believed fox news? They say the opposite.

Using their logic, they could simply send a fabricated story to the white house and demand the president tell them how it's not true. This could be done time and again, until the white house refuses to respond. At which point the story would be deemed true because it wasn't denied. In detail. As per the request of CNN.

why did this make me think of birth certificates and college degrees? Gay bath houses etc.

point being, neither side owns the high road, but continuing this behavior (no matter left or right) keeps problems from being solved.

I agree. Except in this one instance they are not asking Trump to confirm or deny what is in the file. Just the fact that the intel community briefed him on the existence of a file. And their reason for doing so is what they reported was already verified and proven and Trump denied it, called them false news as a result and tried to make it look like they did what buzz feed did.



But I get what you are saying. We are at a time where truth and decency are not relevant.

Got it

Don't quote me, bro.

then don't let them make you think that.

Here is my take. I reserve the right to be just as wrong as anyone else.

They reported it straight. The IC did have that breifing. The Trump team flat out lied multiple times and said it didn't happen. That is why all outlets are now verifying it did happen and why it is relevant news. That is also why even FOX is backing CNN. Strange bedfellows.

If you take a close look at it they were careful to also report that the IC indicated the specific content of the file that the briefing was on was not verified as accurate or inaccurate (the IC have not made any judgement on accuracy) and they specifically would not report on the content as a result. They still are not. They merely reported the breifing happened.

The legitimate story, and it is still a legitimate story that multiple legitimate outlets are reporting, is that the IC felt compelled to brief Trump, Obama etc on the Russians counter intel claims of having something on trump. To have that information (which is pure fact) and not report it would be bizarre.

If you look at the public written language coming out the IC they are neither calling the actual file accurate or inaccurate. Trump is saying they are calling or confirming it is inaccurate. Their written words don't seem to line up with that, which is arguable, but I actually beleive the file is likely inaccurate and maybe even amateur hour.

CNN has not commented on the content of the file and has been careful to state repeatedly the veracity of the file itself is not established. Their reporting was straight, simple and stopped there.

It's the equivalent of saying Wikileaks did a data dump but the contents can't be authenticated. The straight report is the dump happened. To not report it would be silly. They just need to be clear and report what happened. That's exactly what they did. The IC and particularly Comey felt compelled to add an addendum to their report and brief trump on the existence of the file. That's news.

I have no doubt any reporter worth their salt would want to get their hands on the file and determine veracity if possible. Just like pouring through the Wikileaks stuff.

Buzzfeed apparantly dumped the documents which no one really knows if they really are the documents and if so if there is any merit to them or not. CNN has not and is not reporting on the content at all.

Trump lumped CNN in with buzz feed and treated them as such. In CNNs written response to Trump asking them to show what they reported wrong or corroborate or refute they are specifically referring to their reporting (not buzz feeds) and in that instance that means the fact that trump was briefed on the existence of such a file. Which he was.

IDGAF about CNN but theirs was straight reporting on an event that happened and did not veer in to the veracity or content of the file itself. I could tick off the top if my head many similar instances including hey wiki just dumped again. That reporting does and should happen every day.

I don't expect most in here to agree. The devil is in the detail and Trump is pretty good at blurring to his benefit.

Meh I guess we all beleive what we want to.

By the way I understand why you view it like you do and respect that. I'm just explaining why I view it the way I do. I also recognize neither of us has all the facts or is all that lol.

that evidence I asked you for is finally available? great, let's see it... if it's become clearer, then clearly more evidence has come to light... otherwise, it's not more clear, you've just become more entrenched...

All the more to not report it. Doing so served absolutely no legitimate purpose. Think about it. Why does saying that someone was briefed on a completely unsubstantiated report. That would have been the same as if in 2009 CNN reported that they were in possession a report that claims that Obama phuked a goat.

Maybe they shoulda just said, "If we tell ya, we gotta kill ya"