A preference for anonymous sources

The Washington Post, the well known purveyor of Washington groupthink, has published a story claiming that President Trump revealed highly classified material to Russian Foreign Minister, Lavrov. The story is based on anonymous sources.

 

The allegation has been strongly denied by the White House. National Security Advisor, McMaster said: "I was in the room. It didn't happen." Rex Tillerson, who was also present, similarly denied the claim, as did Deputy National Security Advisor Powell.

 

The Russian Foreign Ministry has also denied the claim. Indeed, the Russian spokesperson, in an obvous allusion to the fake news meme, said: "Yet another fake."

 

Yet it seems the corporate media prefer the claims of anonymous sources to unanimous, on the record, statements made by the participants. This in itself is on its face strange. However, the anonymous sources cited by the Washington Post included former, as well as current, officials - how could former officials know what was said in a private meeting in the White House? They couldn't. It is impossible for them to be witnesses.

 

President Trump took to Twitter to point out that he has been asking for the leakers in the intelligence community to be identified. The fact that no progress has been made on this problem clearly suggests that highly placed personnel in the state are part of the opposition. Trump's earlier tweets had clearly implied that he had not shared classified material, whilst explicitly stating the nature of the information he had shared and why.

 

The New York Times has chosen to interpret Trump's tweets, not as a denial, but as a tacit admission of the veracity of the Washington Post allegation.

 

The fact that the Washington Post published the story, and that the corporate media prefer the Post's story to the denials by the participants, can hardly come as a surprise to anyone who has been watching the corporate media's treatment of Trump. The coverage has been a case study in demonisation and character assassination.

 

The corporate media are clearly pushing the current story as an integral part of their campaign, in association with the Democrats, to paint Trump as a Russian puppet. In this political campaign evidence and journalist ethics have been consigned to the rubbish heap. When Trump accuses the corporate media of fake news, he is almost right. The corporate media are propagandists, who are prepared to use disinformation.

 

 

To leave a comment, please sign in with
or or

Comments (12)

  1. EZWAYZ

    In the undeclared civil war truth died long ago on the left.

    May 16, 2017
    1. stevehayes13

      The New York Times claims to be defending the truth (which is ironic) and the Washington Post claims to be defending democracy (which is even more ironic).

      May 16, 2017
      1. wirelessguru1

        ..and you are even more ironic than them both combined!

        May 16, 2017
      2. EZWAYZ

        They can, if they chose, post the evidence of said allegations. They won’t. Surprise. It’s not about truth. It’s about forcing the Trump to waste time and energy on nonsense.

        May 16, 2017
        1. wirelessguru1

          Of course it is not about the real truth.

          May 16, 2017
  2. wirelessguru1

    Of course they prefer the anonymous sources. That’s how they can keep printing their propaganda lies and have fools like you still believe them!

    May 16, 2017
    1. stevehayes13

      So you read this post and conclude that I believe the the Washington Post and the New York Times – and you call me a fool.

      May 16, 2017
      1. wirelessguru1

        Yup.
        Otherwise why would you write the way that you write?
        Look, you continue to “subconsciously” give credibility to the lousy PC mass media (MSM)…
        WAKE UP!

        May 16, 2017
        1. stevehayes13

          I am being forced to the conclusion that you do not actually read my posts.

          May 16, 2017
          1. wirelessguru1

            Well, that does not surprise Me (God) at all since fools like you are usually forced to many other stupid conclusions. LOL!!!

            May 16, 2017
            1. croker

              Wireless you would do well to remember the words of Carl Jung “If one doesn’t understand a person, one tends to regard him as a fool”

              May 16, 2017
            2. wirelessguru1

              Well, Steve is clearly a fool.

              May 16, 2017