Message from @Troye
Discord ID: 657108094123245571
I'll believe it when I see sauce that doesn't list their source as "an unnamed individual"
Or at least have 3 informants
Which isnt a standard anymore
While I'm all about freedom of press, it should be considered journalistic malpractice to spit out an op-ed as factual reporting with "unnamed sources"
I watched a movie recently that had that
And it was a big deal that the person didnt have 3 informants
Ahh the good days
one means no story. two means no story. 3 vetted informants run the story
So not just a random person like today
It had to be vetted
and three different people
@Cobra Commander - If anyone tries to refute Biden's sons implication, just ask if they've bothered to read the Horowitz report
Ask if they have read any report \
i'll keep that in mind should it ever come up
If the roles were reversed Biden would be way more guilty than Trump. Roles as in who was president. Its a shame how focused the country has been on impeachment when there are actual real world problems that need to be dealt with. Its a depressing waste of time
they'll probably just reply with a derisive ad hominem tangent though lmao
Exactly. If you had a Republican House and Biden as President, the withholding of military aid to Ukraine to fire a "corrupt prosecutor" investigating a company within *his own country* where Biden's son was collecting 82k a month would be immediate grounds for investigation and impeachment.
@Mersenne Thanks for providing a source to go off of btw. Will try to give it a read
Note - The Horowitz report is more eye-opening on the illigitimate origins of the Steele Dossier, prompting FISA warrants from overhearing bar conversations, which prompted the Russia investigation.
No, it's pretty damn concise
Oh nice
*Correction - the unabridged report is a grueling 416 pages. It's worth reading the summary of findings.
Also, just read up. Most "journalism" today is journalistic malpractice
summary of the Horowitz report?
Yeah, I'd probably drive off a cliff before I finished the 400 pages
Rolling Stone gives the best TLDR
Basically, highlights the baseless claims used for issuing FISA warrants to monitor Trump and US citizens
That's really useful. Saving it to my news folder
Btw does anyone have a link to something showing where Trump can still run in 2020 once he's acquitted. Either a news article or something referencing laws. Can't find a good source
If not that's fine
he can still run
clinton ran again after being acquitted
and won
if i remember correctly
Yeah, dizzy and Louis updated me earlier. Just trying to find a link that I can reference
I learned it in high school tbh