Why do you believe they are real if I may ask?
Because Sean Spicer confirmed a leak in February?
http://nypost.com/2017/02/04/white-house-to-investigate-leaks-of-trumps-calls-to-mexico-australia/
Why do you believe they are real if I may ask?
Because Sean Spicer confirmed a leak in February?
http://nypost.com/2017/02/04/white-house-to-investigate-leaks-of-trumps-calls-to-mexico-australia/
Why do you believe they are real if I may ask?
You think a paper would print all of that if it wasn't verified?
That's not actual proof that what the WP printed is actually what was said.
Well if it is fake then someone on either call will soon come out and say so.That's not actual proof that what the WP printed is actually what was said.
Well if it is fake then someone on either call will soon come out and say so.
And then if someone does come out and say it's fake then we'll see whether the other parties on the call confirm the 'fakeness'.
Nobody said it's fake. It's about asking for the proof/evidence to back up the story.
If they aren't going to divulge their sources then i'm not believing shit from any side of the debate. Such is today's bog average and often biased media skepticism is a very healthy thing to hold.
Sorry, is it made up or not? Who wrote it? Aaron Sorkin?
Who knows. I'm not taking it as an unequivocal truth.
Why would I?
Sorry. I really can't see the distinction you are making. It's either true or it's not ?Nobody said it's fake. It's about asking for the proof/evidence to back up the story.
If they aren't going to divulge their sources then i'm not believing shit from any side of the debate. Such is today's bog average and often biased media skepticism is a very healthy thing to hold.
So what media do you believe. Does it start with a "B" and end in "bart"?
Who knows. I'm not taking it as an unequivocal truth.
Why would I?
Sorry. I really can't see the distinction you are making. It's either true or it's not ?
If it's not, won't someone say it's false ?
I bet you would believe a true transcript that exonerated Trump.
How about the pathetic attempts by Eric Trump to explain why $1.2m of money raised by The Eric Trump Foundation intended for childhood cancer research was apparently paid to his Father's company to stage a golf tournament? Is that all fake news?
How about Eric's wife, Lara who now hosts what is essentially a propogands channel on Facebook that deals exclusively with good news stories about Donald Trump or as they tag it "the REAL news about the Trump administration"
That kind of shit genuinely concerns me. That these kind of tactics can be tolerated given all we are supposed to have learned from History and given they are supposed to be a Flagship for democracy is abhorrent.
How anyone can attempt to defend him is equally abhorrent. To do so, as you are doing, under the guise of positive scepticism is beyond abhorrent and a bit silly really.
OK. I'll believe it though until it's at least denied by someone involved - and then we'll see if any denial is then challenged, and whether that leads to further evidence emerging.I have no idea if it's true. Simply not going to claim it is until irrefutable evidence is provided.
OK. I'll believe it though until it's at least denied by someone involved - and then we'll see if any denial is then challenged, and whether that leads to further evidence emerging.
Bet I wouldn't because I wouldn't bloody well care.
See your folly is thinking I was a Trump person, fail on your behalf again.
How about all the dodgy crap the Democrats got up to in the previous eight years and you've probably never said squat about that. Don't expect anyone to take all these cry babies who are losing their shit over Trump etc to be taken serious when their bias and lack of caring when this kind of rubbish was always going on was raised as an issue.
I find that mentality abhorrent.