[Buzzfeed] President Trump Directed His Attorney Michael Cohen To Lie To Congress

Which part? The Jason Leopold part? I was talking specifically about a 2002 article he wrote for Salon where he claimed to have an e-mail related to the Enron scandal and not only did he get caught plagiarizing another article, his alleged source denied it all.

In 2006 he wrote an article for Truthout where he claimed to have 2 or 3 sources confirming that Karl Rove had been indicted by a grand jury....and that never happened.

The guy has no credibility, he even wrote a book where he admitted that he engaged in "lying, cheating, and backstabbing"

As to the Anthony Cormier part, he admitted on CNN that he never saw any of the evidence.

 

All of the people crowing about fake news and buzzfeed were oddly quiet several hours ago.

To me, it makes the smug self confidence you are attempting to project appear a little bit like false bravado.

If Muller had just decided it wasn't quite worthy of issuing a response, you guys would all still be radio silent.

 

I didn't really hear about it till fairly recently and that's right before it was debunked. I would have said the same thing then that I say now. If Cohen had anything serious on Trump, he'd have immunity. We all know this to be true even if some want to keep hope alive.

 

For those who want to know more:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/18/media/buzzfeed-reporter-jason-leopold/index.html

I tend to be a bit more forgiving about instances of fabrication or plagiarism when they're 15+ years old from early in someone's career. But that's just me.

As for Rove, sometimes sources can be wrong.

The fun part of this is that our opinions on it don't really matter, because the truth is ultimately going to be revealed in this case.

If I were a betting man I would not feel confident that this will turn out to be a false story. They're rare and even rarer when the circumstances are this dire.

 

Point of order. Nothing was debunked. Mueller claims there are unspecified inaccuracies in the story. That could mean literally anything.

 

The story simply makes no sense. Again, if Cohen had this kind of evidence he wouldn't be going to prison, he'd have used it to get immunity. I don't see a scenario where this story is accurate. Now we might have a situation where Cohen makes the claims, but if he does it won't be with proof or that would have been sufficient to get him out of prison.

I guess you can keep hope alive if you just really want to hope against hope though.

 

Buzzfeed is not news. It is literally a website devoted to misleading clickbait.

 

Thank you.

 

Is Newt talking about those tabloids that Trump pays lavish sums of money to to bury his dirty laundry?

 

Buzzfeed actually does have a legitimate news operation in addition to its r****ded clickbait. Welcome to 2019. Nothing makes sense.

 

Yeah I disagree. They are very unproven and have not always been forward and honest. Also their insane far left bias is no better than Breitbart on the right.

 

I'm not qualified to make guesses about how Cohen and Mueller's tango would or should play out.

 

Buzzfeed? Seriously? Our rightwing friends are getting all up in knots over Buzzfeed????

I mean, what happened to CNN?

 

Fair enough, but I think despite qualifications, you know deep down that if he had anything solid on Trump, Mueller would have given him immunity for it....even if you don't want to admit it.

 

Please defend Buzzfeed. Choose that hill to die on.

 

Buzzfeed's viral sjw stink pieces and vignettes are not part of their news org.

While we're on the subject of weird organizations that have legitimate journalism, TeenVogue is also apparently a hard hitting operation now.

 

I have absolutely no idea if that is true or not. Like, not even worth my time to venture a guess.

 

So that means you probably shouldn't be using it. But hey Buzzfeed. That there is a shining example of good journalism. Nay I say... Journalism with a capital J.

 

Mueller won't name specifics, so it means pretty much whatever you want it to mean at this point.

IMO what it means is that Mueller is concerned enough about the contents and conclusions therein, and their consequences, that he felt it necessary to throw his shoulder against the wheel of impeachment.

The reasons he is doing that could vary wildly. All the way from "the story is BS" to "the fact it leaked is compromising my investigation".

 

Let me see if I have this straight...

The people who were cautious to comment on a report by a report from a known sensationalist source, reported by a known plagiarist are the "smug self confident" folks while those who were once again fooled by apparent "fake news" are the brave ones?