Toggle sidebar

After being caught by the Washington Free Beacon, Wash Post issues a correction

W

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
WVex-pat in GA said:
Here's the WaPost article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...91252&tid=ss_tw-bottom&utm_term=.d6ecfdc751c1

I understand the issue surrounding the non-disclosure but the person's opinion, now clarified for its intent, still stands; though I think he is politically motivated. You can't discount his opinion, especially after the disclosure, because of the error of the WaPost.

So the editor for that page is to blame.
Click to expand...

The Wash Post had an obligation to inform the readers of this guys political leanings and his donations to Hillary. They didn't and didn't fix it until called out by another paper.

Yes, it is his opinion, but his partisan opinion. This is fake news, misleading the reader into thinking this guy had no agenda. I can certainly discount his opinion since it is tainted. Just as you can discount the opinion of a conservative.
 
WVex-pat in GA

WVex-pat in GA

Junior
Dec 17, 2007
14,539
361
83
WVPATX said:
The Wash Post had an obligation to inform the readers of this guys political leanings and his donations to Hillary. They didn't and didn't fix it until called out by another paper.

Yes, it is his opinion, but his partisan opinion. This is fake news, misleading the reader into thinking this guy had no agenda. I can certainly discount his opinion since it is tainted. Just as you can discount the opinion of a conservative.
Click to expand...
I don't discount opinions of conservatives. I use them to learn and decide for myself. I use liberal opinions for the same purpose.

Per the column in the WaPost; agreed that there should have been full disclosure and it was unfortunate that it did not happen at the time of original publication.

I'm more interested in what we can learn from the column. Sounds like a disillusioned member of the intelligence community, and he may not be the only one. Also, despite reports from the WH to the contrary, Trump's rant in front of the CIA Memorial did not sit well with all persons that attended.

What I learned from the column is that the Trump administration needs to work overtime to mend fences in the intelligence community.
 
W

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
WVex-pat in GA said:
I don't discount opinions of conservatives. I use them to learn and decide for myself. I use liberal opinions for the same purpose.

Per the column in the WaPost; agreed that there should have been full disclosure and it was unfortunate that it did not happen at the time of original publication.

I'm more interested in what we can learn from the column. Sounds like a disillusioned member of the intelligence community, and he may not be the only one. Also, despite reports from the WH to the contrary, Trump's rant in front of the CIA Memorial did not sit well with all persons that attended.

What I learned from the column is that the Trump administration needs to work overtime to mend fences in the intelligence community.
Click to expand...

Well I assume this means that you trust all opinion columns to tell you the truth. So you equally believe a liberal opinion journalist as well as a conservative opinion journalist.

Personally this guys partisanship makes his facts suspect at best. I am certain there are CIA agents that do not like trump just as I am certain there were CIA agents that hated Obama. That is the nature of the game.

After all, I seem to remember Obama throwing the CIA under the bus telling The public they missed lead him on ISIS.

A far bigger point is that the Washington Post attempted to mislead the public by not disclosing the writers partisanship. Fake news.
 
Last edited:
WVex-pat in GA

WVex-pat in GA

Junior
Dec 17, 2007
14,539
361
83
WVPATX said:
Well I assume this means that you trust all opinion columns to tell you the truth. So you equally believe a liberal opinion journalist as well as a conservative opinion journalist.
Click to expand...

No, they are OPINION, just like the stuff you post here. I read it, take it with a grain of salt and consider the source and use the information accordingly. Just like some of the things you post on here I challenge and some of the things on here we agree. [thumb2]

WVPATX said:
A far bigger point is that the Washington Post attempted to mislead the public by not disclosing the writers partisanship. Fake news.
Click to expand...

I wonder about this since Wolf Blitzer and CNN were able to uncover this information readily. Makes me want to ask under what circumstances did the WaPost receive or accept this column? I've written "guest columns" like this before for our local newspapers, and the editor and I had a discussion about content and asked questions about my background before publishing. You'd think if a small town weekly could vet their columnist the WaPost could easily do it.[winking]
 
W

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
WVex-pat in GA said:
No, they are OPINION, just like the stuff you post here. I read it, take it with a grain of salt and consider the source and use the information accordingly. Just like some of the things you post on here I challenge and some of the things on here we agree. [thumb2]



I wonder about this since Wolf Blitzer and CNN were able to uncover this information readily. Makes me want to ask under what circumstances did the WaPost receive or accept this column? I've written "guest columns" like this before for our local newspapers, and the editor and I had a discussion about content and asked questions about my background before publishing. You'd think if a small town weekly could vet their columnist the WaPost could easily do it.[winking]
Click to expand...

That is the strange part, this was easily uncoverable. You would think that the media at times like this would be extraordinarily careful in what is presented on their pages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom