Posted on 12/19/2017 10:07:42 AM PST by Oshkalaboomboom
President Donald Trump took to Twitter on Tuesday and ripped a Washington Post story that alleged he was close to yanking his nomination of Justice Neil Gorsuch before he could be confirmed. WaPo reported earlier in the day that Trump felt as though Gorsuch would not be loyal to him, and that he considered replacing him with another justice.
Trump, according to several people with knowledge of the discussions, was upset that Gorsuch had pointedly distanced himself from the president in a private February meeting with Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), telling the senator he found Trump’s repeated attacks on the federal judiciary “disheartening” and “demoralizing.”
The president worried that Gorsuch would not be “loyal,” one of the people said, and told aides that he was tempted to pull Gorsuch’s nomination — and that he knew plenty of other judges who would want the job.
The president did not take kindly to this, and called the newspaper "FAKE NEWS." Trump denied that he ever reconsidered Gorsuch, and said he was "very proud of him and the job he is doing as a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court."
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump A story in the @washingtonpost that I was close to “rescinding” the nomination of Justice Gorsuch prior to confirmation is FAKE NEWS. I never even wavered and am very proud of him and the job he is doing as a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. The unnamed sources don’t exist! 4:07 PM - Dec 19, 2017
Further, he accused the Washington Post of inventing the "unnamed sources." Trump claimed that they simply do not exist.
First the abortionist, then the ruling political class, then the donor class and then the press.
At that’s the way it will be in Maine, but simultaneously.
Well, you have more faith in our media returning to sanity than I do.
IMO, it will never return to the place where it could be seen as doing the sorts of stuff it was intended to do.
President Trump didn’t bring that about.
The MSM destroyed itself.
So you are DoughtyOne media company and you’re getting largely negative information about the newly elected Chelsea Clinton administration from people inside her White House. You’ve verified it through more than one source, although they all are in or connected to Chelsea’s WH. All have asked that they not be identified or be cited as a source of the information. The information is plausible. There’s a chance competing media may also have been given the information and it’s a dog eat dog media world. It’s not the first time Chelsea or a key person in her administration has done something stupid, potentially illegal or just news worthy in general. Do you go with the information or do you sit on it.
Let’s look at a real world situation.
Obama had terrorists into the White House to consult with him.
He never provided a legitimate birth certificate.
He never provided other information to reveal how he obtained loans or admission to colleges.
Lets face it, they folks aren’t looking to reveal anything about Leftists they support in the Oval Office.
A simpler explanation is that they are just pulling it out of their arses, which is more likely given the massive number of retractions so far this year, troll boy.
Nice try!
So would you have gone forward with any of those with only unnamed sources? Especially if you had been burned by the Obama WH before?
Could be but I doubt it. Thanks for the new nickname btw.
I would try to verify the information in some other way.
A good journalist worth his salt doesn’t accept just one source.
If it’s internal to the WH, you likely wouldn’t get anyone to go on record. If it’s external to the WH you likely wouldn’t find anyone who would know, have personally seen or heard or wouldn’t have it beyond being 3rd, 4th or even deeper removed from the source.
well, we go back to Watergate and John Dean don’t we.
I think a reporter is setting him/herself up when they use only one source, particularly an unnamed one.
Unnamed sources don’t have to worry about blow-back if they lie.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.