They NEVER give a name for their sources. Why? Because it’s all make-believe.
In school, we learned that you must cite your sources for everything. Maggie Haberman earned a Pulitzer Prize for her lies about Russiagate, yet she doesn’t know the basics of journalism?
my cousin's brothers grirlfriend herd from the guy who knows her best friends sisters brother in law that someone was telling this story at 31 flavors last night...
They are incapable of learning from their mistakes. They are mindless, heartless minions who repeat what they are told and wash, rinse and repeat. That is what they want to turn all of us in to.
“Per people told of the practice…”
“According to a source…”
“A former Trump aide says…”
They NEVER give a name for their sources. Why? Because it’s all make-believe.
In school, we learned that you must cite your sources for everything. Maggie Haberman earned a Pulitzer Prize for her lies about Russiagate, yet she doesn’t know the basics of journalism?
Enemy of the people.
You can also add, "according to US officials....."! They never have a name.
my cousin's brothers grirlfriend herd from the guy who knows her best friends sisters brother in law that someone was telling this story at 31 flavors last night...
Internet comment of the day.
Not THAT impossible that someone entertains Trump by reading tweets to him while he's otherwise occupied. Sort of multi-tasking isn't it?
The only people they convince is themselves -- over and over.
Nope. Criticism made Trump THRIVE.
They are incapable of learning from their mistakes. They are mindless, heartless minions who repeat what they are told and wash, rinse and repeat. That is what they want to turn all of us in to.
That would be so funny if there really are weasely little moles following around a golf-playing Trump.
I’ve now been told of the practice. Does that make me a credible source?