Are WaPo ‘Sources’ and ‘Officials’ Real or Fake Trump Impeachment Fuel?

As said here on many instances, no reputable news editor (back in the day) would ever allow a story to be published that contained quotes from people who would not go on-the-record, in fact to even present such a piece would be tantamount to issuing a resignation letter. Again, this was to protect the credibility of that publication, both with the public and financially. That was then.

Now that the left is in full resist mode because President Trump is systematically dismantling all they’ve imposed on the American people for a decade-plus, impeachment is the only real way they can stop him. It’s just trying to find one of those “high crimes and misdemeanors” they can make stick.

President Trump revealed highly classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in a White House meeting last week, according to current and former U.S. officials, who said Trump’s disclosures jeopardized a critical source of intelligence on the Islamic State.

“This is code-word information,” said a U.S. official familiar with the matter, using terminology that refers to one of the highest classification levels used by American spy agencies. Trump “revealed more information to the Russian ambassador than we have shared with our own allies.”
Washington Post, 5/15/17

The Post’s piece is peppered with attribution by “sources” or “officials”. In fact, the only names mentioned are ones that refute the premise all news outlets are gleefully repeating.

“The president and the foreign minister reviewed common threats from terrorist organizations to include threats to aviation,” said H.R. McMaster, the national security adviser, who participated in the meeting. “At no time were any intelligence sources or methods discussed, and no military operations were disclosed that were not already known publicly.”

McMaster reiterated his statement in a subsequent appearance at the White House on Monday and described the Washington Post story as “false,” but did not take any questions.

White House officials defended Trump. “This story is false,” said Dina Powell, deputy national security adviser for strategy. “The president only discussed the common threats that both countries faced.”

We don’t know who the current and former U.S. officials, officials, officials, senior White House officials, U.S. official, officials, White House officials, White House officials, officials, a former senior U.S. official, official, officials, officials, former senior U.S. counterterrorism official, He and others, senior U.S. official, former intelligence official, officials, U.S. official, officials, officials, one official, Senior White House officials, White House officials, officials, staff members, second former official, former U.S. official, and U.S. officials are, but we’re told they’re all telling the truth and have no axe to grind (that is if any of them exist at all) because the media says so.

We’re to take writers Julie Tate and Ellen Nakashima’s word for it because we all know the professional media has no partisan agenda.

Funny, the liberal media can always find a Republican who will go on the record, especially a Republican who’ll speak negatively of the president.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) said he would rather comment on the revelations in the Post story after “I know a little bit more about it,” but added: “Obviously, they are in a downward spiral right now and have got to figure out a way to come to grips with all that’s happening. And the shame of it is, there’s a really good national security team in place.”

Corker also said, “The chaos that is being created by the lack of discipline is creating an environment that I think makes — it creates a worrisome environment.”

Barack Obama went after those who leaked to the media, the compliant media avoided anonymous sources and the faucet dried up.

Over the past eight years, the administration has prosecuted nine cases involving whistle-blowers and leakers, compared with only three by all previous administrations combined. It has repeatedly used the Espionage Act, a relic of World War I-era red-baiting, not to prosecute spies but to go after government officials who talked to journalists.

Under Mr. Obama, the Justice Department and the F.B.I. have spied on reporters by monitoring their phone records, labeled one journalist an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal case for simply doing reporting and issued subpoenas to other reporters to try to force them to reveal their sources and testify in criminal cases.
New York Times, 12/30/16

We also know there’s a #deepstate of Democrat government lifers who are taking their #resist mission right into their workplaces, so some of these “sources” and “officials” actually exist. Democrats are becoming increasingly emboldened every time the media feeds them daily, new action lines with the word “Russia” and “impeach”.

The media gets all butt-hurt by the very thought of anyone who dares challenge their journalism….

But when you repeatedly justify violating the most basic of rules, it all goes downhill from there.

You might also be interested in: