or you have the genuine reputation to be taken for your word (good luck with that) I agree with the sentiment to a large extent, but it's also a question of

or you have the genuine reputation to be taken for your word (good luck with that) I agree with the sentiment to a large extent, but it's also a question of probability. The original source is the Wall Street Journal, which means there's at least a non-zero probability that stories with 'alleged' and 'anonymous' in them are true :) Traditionally, a big publication would vet stories like this. Maybe someone who knows more about journalism than I do could weigh in re: the state of editors and fact-checking in 2021. Given that publications today expect their writers to churn out story after story, the vetting process has probably gone downhill.