President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Why would The Post correct or update USA Today's reporting?

 

To distance itself from fake news?

 

Except they're not immigrants, nor are they breaking immigration laws.

Other than that, spot on!

 

Fuck, it's the 21st Century and the dawn of Orange Duce. Accuracy and facts are not important. Propaganda and mind control sells!

 

Oh, please. The WaPo had their own story up, based on their own reporting, and conversations with the (same) anonymous sources.

Then they "updated" the story online, without noting it.

The stealth editing of online stories, as a way of not admitting errors, is becoming rampant, and is not something credible news organizations should be practicing.

 

Another fucking idiot melting down in public:

U.S. Office of Government Ethics Director Walter M. Shaub personally ordered an OGE official to post a series of controversial tweets praising President-elect Donald Trump for his claimed efforts to reduce conflicts of interest, the Daily Dot has learned.

Emails obtained by the Daily Dot through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request show Shaub approved the exact wording of the tweets and asked for them to be posted to the official OGE Twitter account.

The out-of-character wording of the tweets, which included words like “Bravo!” and “Brilliant!” sparked an uproar in the political press for an enthusiasm that some interpreted as mocking Trump’s signature bravado and, in particular, his use of “Sad!” in his own tweets.

Reporters from NBC News, USA Today, and up to 32 other media outlets immediately requested information from OGE about whether its account had been hacked. Twitter also reached out to OGE a few hours after the tweets were posted out of concern that the account might've been breached by hackers.

“Hello can you explain the tweets on your account praising President-Elect Donald Trump for divesting his business interests?” an evening news producer at CBS News wrote in an email to OGE. “Was your account hacked?”

In a statement to the Daily Dot and other media outlets, Seth Jaffe, who heads the agency’s ethics law and policy department, assured that the tweets were intentional.

“Like everyone else, we were excited this morning to read the President-elect's Twitter feed indicating that he wants to be free of conflicts of interest. OGE applauds that goal, which is consistent with an opinion OGE issued in 1983,” Jaffe said. “Divestiture resolves conflicts of interest in a way that transferring control does not. We don't know the details of their plan, but we are willing and eager to help them with it.”

 

The most recent fucking idiot who kept doing that was elected president. It's not a bad play.

 

That's . . . just . . . staggering.

9 percent of Trump voters have a favorable opinion of Obama? Guess I keep encountering the other 91 percent.

 

I didn't see the original, erroneous story from The Post.

Are we sure the "error" wasn't introduced by the source? Because if it was, "update" or "writethru" are perfectly acceptable.

 

Greenwald takes a look at the Post's reporting:

 

It actually reminds me of the way the press reported on the Clinton email server story. Doesn't matter whether it is substantial, it just about making sure "Russian hacking" and "election" appear near each other as often as possible