3 ms·
"There sure was disinfo being peddled during that saga, but not from the Democrats." Good one. Please pull my other leg. Update: if it's sincerely not clear w
by trelane 3y ago
"There sure was disinfo being peddled during that saga, but not from the Democrats."
Good one. Please pull my other leg.
Update: if it's sincerely not clear why the precious comment about "not from the Democrats" was a farce, read the "Reactions" section. The efforts to quash the Post story and characterize it as misinformation are what I'm talking about.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- wumeow 3y agoGiven the extremely sketchy provenance of the story’s data, the timing of the story’s publishing, the fact it was published by a tabloid and that even the reporters who wrote it questioned its validity, and that two subsequent investigations found no evidence of corruption by Joe Biden, I would say the media was right to treat the Post story as misinformation.
- trelane 3y agoLooking at new stories with skepticism is always warranted. As you point out, the original sources provided just that. Immediately quashing them as "misinformation" is not legitimate in a free society. That the report was true makes calling it "misinformation" exceedingly naive, at best.
- wumeow 3y ago> That the report was true … And now you’re pulling my leg