Here might be one reason that the stories were never published … I don’t see a single verifiable reference/source/interviewee in any of them.
I love the internet, people actually believe they get “information” in cyberspace.
On the other side, who cares? How many times have I said that both sides do exactly the same thing? There is no difference between the “parties”, other than who they go to, under what guise/agenda, to get their wealth.
Credibility goes a long way; bad media hype doesn’t. If you’re going to say you’ve researched the facts, you better have references that OTHERS can verify. Yea MSM!!!
Most stories published these days by the Washington Post or New York Times, especially those in favor of attacking Iran, increasing troops in Afghanistan or excusing illegal government activities, are published without any credible evidence other than unnamed government sources.
These are all researched stories ignored by the corporate media.
RT @jaketapper: Imagine working in a place where colleagues refused to wear masks indoors in close quarters during a pandemic, who spread l… 1 day ago
RT @HeerJeet: You can't wage wars all over the world for a generation and not have it come home. It's ridiculous to even think that. 1 day ago
RT @jimsciutto: For the inauguration, there will be at least four times as many National Guardsmen in the US capital as troops in all of Af… 1 day ago
RT @emptywheel: Just one person has made a point I would make: that you gotta impeach the President bc he has a history of pardoning his cr… 1 day ago
RT @rezaaslan: As someone who has received four years of death threats from Trumpists detailing precisely how they’re going to murder my ch… 1 day ago
RT @jaketapper: Leaders of this movement are defined by having great privilege while feigning martyrdom and one couldn't sum it up with a m… 1 day ago
RT @emptywheel: Shorter most of the GOP: we can’t impeach the President bc if we do the terrorists he incited might assassinate us. 1 day ago
Btw, Trump doesn’t need twitter. He’s POTUS. He can hold press conferences whenever he wants, but he’s always prefe… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…1 day ago
Amazing that 20 years after 911, the biggest terrorist threat to the nation comes from supporters of a Republican p… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…1 day ago
LOLOLOLOLOLOL …
Here might be one reason that the stories were never published … I don’t see a single verifiable reference/source/interviewee in any of them.
I love the internet, people actually believe they get “information” in cyberspace.
On the other side, who cares? How many times have I said that both sides do exactly the same thing? There is no difference between the “parties”, other than who they go to, under what guise/agenda, to get their wealth.
Credibility goes a long way; bad media hype doesn’t. If you’re going to say you’ve researched the facts, you better have references that OTHERS can verify. Yea MSM!!!
Most stories published these days by the Washington Post or New York Times, especially those in favor of attacking Iran, increasing troops in Afghanistan or excusing illegal government activities, are published without any credible evidence other than unnamed government sources.
These are all researched stories ignored by the corporate media.
Ummmmmm … then where is their research, because I found no sources … ????
I didn’t see any citations, links to government documents, sources, references, etc.
Who says they are researched stories? Whose authority? Where is the credibility? Validity? Verification? Any quantitative/qualitative analysis? Where?