If this story is corroborated, it is the end

[DKW 86 7,419]

23 minutes ago, AUDub said:

 

Buzzfeed was founded as an entertainment site that, around 2011, birthed a legit news division. Buzzfeed News is actually a serious publication. They have several Pulitzer finalists on staff, at least one Pulitzer winner and have been finalists or winners of several other journalism awards

The last two Pulitzer winners at CNN got fired for releasing a one sourced news article that blew up in their faces. CNN Retracted it. 
Buzzfeed is Buzzfeed. It is infotainment on a good day. Buzzfeed is not a serious news org.

[AUDub 11,147]

6 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

The last two Pulitzer winners at CNN got fired for releasing a one sourced news article that blew up in their faces. CNN Retracted it. 
Buzzfeed is Buzzfeed. It is infotainment on a good day. Buzzfeed is not a serious news org. 

Whatever, David. Buzzfeed News is editorially separate from Buzzfeed, end of story. And they have their own URL now in order to try to overcome these perception problems. 

[DKW 86 7,419]

Dub, they published the Steele Dossier because they were the only half assed news outlet that would print it. At the time, no one thought that pile of crap was real. No one.

[AUDub 11,147]

10 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

Dub, they published the Steele Dossier because they were the only half assed news outlet that would print it. At the time, no one thought that pile of crap was real. No one. 

 

That "pile of crap" was absolutely newsworthy. It warranted releasing it to the public, regardless of its contents It had been widely circulated among both policy-makers and journalists. Senator Harry Reid read all 35 pages before asking the FBI to investigate Russian interference in U.S. elections. John McCain sent a copy to the FBI, only to discover that they already had several copies of their own. Finally, both Obama and Trump were briefed on the existence of the document and its contents.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

3 hours ago, channonc said:

Can you link to the MSNBC interview? I didn't see it.

My mistake. It was on CNN. Here is an article referring to it.

https://www.lifezette.com/2019/01/on-trump-cohen-bombshell-reporter-admits-he-didnt-personally-see-any-evidence/

[channonc 466]

Yes. That was during the interview I posted. Please watch the video in its entirety. 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

2 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

 

Buzzfeed is not a news source. If you want to Read Clickbait like "100 Ways Your GF is Hotter than Ariana Grande" then you read Buzzfeed. 
I would actually refer to Buzzfeed as "ClickBait" more than anything. 

Questions this, but takes the Washington Examiner as a beacon of light in another thread.  You don't know a damn thing about journalism.  Quit acting like you do.

[AUDub 11,147]

1 hour ago, Brad_ATX said:

Questions this, but takes the Washington Examiner as a beacon of light in another thread.  You don't know a damn thing about journalism.  Quit acting like you do.

LOL the whole “prayer rugs” thing is a trip. 

[Auburnfan91 1,407]

2 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

Questions this, but takes the Washington Examiner as a beacon of light in another thread.  You don't know a damn thing about journalism.  Quit acting like you do.

Yeah and where did I post it? Smack Talk. I'm not intellectually dishonest enough to expect 'serious' discussion when certain links/sources are posted. 

Yet where is this posted?  The 'Serious' discussion side. 

 

 

[AUDub 11,147]

20 minutes ago, Auburnfan91 said:

Yeah and where did I post it? Smack Talk. I'm not intellectually dishonest enough to expect 'serious' discussion when certain links/sources are posted. 

Yet where is this posted?  The 'Serious' discussion side. 

 

 

That's not really a denial. There are, IMO, three ways to interpret that statement:

1.  The story accurately reflects what Cohen told federal prosecutors in another office (e.g. SDNY) but not Mueller.

2. My, admittedly, charitable thought, the story has minor inconsistencies with what Cohen told Mueller.

3. And this is the one that would destroy some careers, the story’s central claims are substantively wrong.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

51 minutes ago, Auburnfan91 said:

Yeah and where did I post it? Smack Talk. I'm not intellectually dishonest enough to expect 'serious' discussion when certain links/sources are posted. 

Yet where is this posted?  The 'Serious' discussion side. 

 

 

Wasn't talking about where something was or wasn't posted and it wasn't directed at you.  If I wanted to interact with a post of yours, I will quote you directly.  The point was to point out his own hypocrisy when calling people out about news.

As for Buzzfeed, they do have a legitimate news side of their business.  Are they slanted left?  Yes.  But it isn't all clickbait stuff like DKW was claiming.  It's like saying Yahoo doesn't have legit news people because they are a search engine, when in actuality, Yahoo News is a very real thing.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

29 minutes ago, AUDub said:

That's not really a denial. There are, IMO, three ways to interpret that statement:

1.  The story accurately reflects what Cohen told federal prosecutors in another office (e.g. SDNY) but not Mueller.

2. My, admittedly, charitable thought, the story has minor inconsistencies with what Cohen told Mueller.

3. And this is the one that would destroy some careers, the story’s central claims are substantively wrong.

1)  People are forgetting about the SDNY part of this.  Great point.

2)  Last part is accurate.  If they got it completely wrong, then I would expect heads to roll at Buzzfeed.

[AUDub 11,147]

Just now, Brad_ATX said:

1)  People are forgetting about the SDNY part of this.  Great point.

Marcy Wheeler had a good write up on this earlier today. Lemme track it down. 

Just now, Brad_ATX said:

2)  Last part is accurate.  If they got it completely wrong, then I would expect heads to roll at Buzzfeed.

As I said earlier, they’re taking a huge shot here. If they have missed, if there are tremendous holes in their reporting here, then whatever credibility they’ve built evaporates immediately.

If they have receipts, now would be a good time to spill them. 

[AUDub 11,147]

6 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Marcy Wheeler had a good write up on this earlier today. Lemme track it down.

Marcy has posted a thread. It includes the write up. Here we go. 

 

[homersapien 11,371]

Well, we know that Cohen lied to Congress about the Trump Russian project.  If there's evidence of Trump telling him to do so, we'll eventually see it (as if there's any doubt he did. )

This (the Mueller investigation statement) sounds a lot to me like Mueller reacting to the leak in a way to squelch future leaks and publication thereof.

[AUDub 11,147]

Just now, homersapien said:

Well, we know that Cohen lied to Congress about the Trump Russian project.  If there's evidence of Trump telling him to do so, we'll eventually see it (as if there's any doubt he did.)

This (the Mueller investigation statement) sounds a lot to me like Mueller reacting to the leak in a way to squelch future leaks and publication thereof.

Mueller might be pissed at the SDNY if they’re leaking.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

This should have put an end to all this stuff but it won'. It's just laughable to see the left defending the credibility of Buzzfeed vs. that of the Mueller team when it suits them. A little research shows that Jason Leopold of Buzzfeed has a history of shoddy journalism.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mueller-team-disputes-buzzfeed-report-claiming-trump-told-cohen-to-lie

[AUDub 11,147]

3 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

This should put an end to all this stuff.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mueller-team-disputes-buzzfeed-report-claiming-trump-told-cohen-to-lie

We’ve quite literally been discussing this for two hours. Sure you can’t make it where he can’t ignore people, Titan? 

[DKW 86 7,419]

6 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

Questions this, but takes the Washington Examiner as a beacon of light in another thread.  You don't know a damn thing about journalism.  Quit acting like you do.

When did i say anything about the WE?

[DKW 86 7,419]

2 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

1)  People are forgetting about the SDNY part of this.  Great point.

2)  Last part is accurate.  If they got it completely wrong, then I would expect heads to roll at Buzzfeed.

 

<smdh> Why would heads roll at buzzfeed? They got the clicks...

[AUDub 11,147]

Just now, DKW 86 said:

<smdh>

Go start a thread on the smack forum if all you want to do is troll about sources, 

[AUDub 11,147]

5 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

When did i say anything about the WE?

He’s referring to your off the wall tangent in the Tlaib thread, which was started when 91 linked an Examiner article. 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

35 minutes ago, AUDub said:

He’s referring to your off the wall tangent in the Tlaib thread, which was started when 91 linked an Examiner article. 

This DKW

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

39 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

<smdh> Why would heads roll at buzzfeed? They got the clicks...

Because their journalism side is different from the clickbait list side of the house.  Happens all the time.

[DKW 86 7,419]

13 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

Because their journalism side is different from the clickbait list side of the house.  Happens all the time.

Not when it is the same side.

Look, the Steele Dossier got poo-pooed by every legitimate news source in the nation. It went downhill until they finally found BuzzFeed to publish it. No one else would touch it even though they had it for months. 

https://www.courthousenews.com/buzzfeed-court-filing-reveals-rationale-behind-use-of-russia-dossier/

Read it for yourselves. Buzzfeed published not because they had verified anything, they never verified anything, and in truth sued the DNC over info on the hacking. 

After CNN reported the Federal Bureau of Investigation shared the dossier with then-President Barack Obama and President-elect Donald Trump, BuzzFeed decided to publish the document in its entirety.

“When they made that decision, none of the BuzzFeed journalists involved knew or had any degree of awareness – let alone a ‘high degree’ of awareness – that the allegations about plaintiffs on the dossier’s last page were false, or harbored ‘serious doubts’ about that,” the filing states. Because they never even tried to fact check anything.

Considering Russian cyber-attacks on the Democratic Party was already public knowledge, BuzzFeed claims they “simply filled in a few details about the hacking operation.”

BuzzFeed argues the article falls under the “fair reporting privilege,” which shields journalists from liability for repeating potentially defamatory allegations if they stem from public records or a prominent, responsible organization.