[presently no screen name]

Totally unsourced. Not much value.

WOW! You mean only when a 'named person' tells you this, you will believe it? What does 'your own eyes, ears, common sense' tell you?

[Southack]

First, the “article” isn’t believable.
Second, this is a re-post.

Keep in mind that back when Bill Clinton was President that his Machine would float ridiculously false stories (one was that he practiced voodoo, another that he participated in ritual child sacrifices)...

...the goal was to use the anonymous smears to trick conservatives into repeating them by name...thereby attaching a conservative name to the smear and discrediting conservatives.

Don’t be a sucker for such tricks again.

[DB]

It might be true. It might not be true.

Fake but accurate is the Dan Rather standard of journalism.

I don’t care to play.