MSM Cites Anonymous Leaks As Sources, Leaves Out One CRUCIAL Detail…

DOWNTOWN, ATLANTA, GEORGIA, UNITED STATES - 2015/11/14: CNN World Headquarters. (Photo by John Greim/LightRocket via Getty Images)

According to the mainstream media, The Trump administration leakers are taken as gospel and rarely questioned, yet none of the leaks have been corroborated, and none of the leakers have been willing to go on the record. Moreover, the leaks have been hastily reported by the most hostile news outlets towards the Trump administration, that have every incentive to see the president fail.

From The Gateway Pundit:

Here is updated analysis of the most recent so called ‘leaks’ being reported and repeated by the liberal mainstream media (MSM) involving President Trump.  The probability that a portion of these ‘leaks’ are completely inaccurate remains very high.

The leaks are all being reported by biased liberal media outlets that were adamantly opposed to the election of President Trump.

These ‘leaks’ in all cases still are not supported with any names of so-called sources and in all cases the ‘leaks’ are meant to destroy the current President…

Note that the most ‘leaks’ over the past few weeks have come from the Washington Post (5), the ‘Failing’ New York Times (4) and CNN (3).  The three MSM outlets that best fit the label of ‘Very Fake News’.

Evidence in Hillary Clinton’s creepy campaign manager John Podesta’s emails released before the election by WikiLeaks show that the Clinton campaign was in cahoots with the mainstream media. At least 65 MSM reporters were meeting with and/or coordinating offline with top Hillary advisors.

The mainstream media has yet to even question the motives of the leakers as an honest press should do. Jeffery Lord, a former leaker himself, but willing to go on the record, makes some very salient points.

From Conservative Review:

— Advertisement —

These stories are a mere sampling of the gusher of stories pouring forth from disaffected “Deep State” bureaucrats, current and former. And note well that to be a “former” official means the person is a member of the Obama administration who inexplicably still has access to classified or confidential information. One suspects these “officials” are a mix of career bureaucrats and Obama political appointees. What both the “current” and “former” officials have in common are two things: One, they hate the duly elected president of the United States and seek to undermine him. And two, they are cowards.

Unlike my own leak to the New York Times all those years ago, not one of these leakers had the guts — or the simple decency — to attach their name to the story they were peddling. Say again: Not. One.


  1. … [Trackback]

    […] Here you can find 26858 more Info on that Topic: […]

  2. … [Trackback]

    […] Find More on to that Topic: […]

  3. You could definitely see your expertise within the paintings you write. The arena hopes for even more passionate writers like you who aren’t afraid to mention how they believe. All the time go after your heart.

  4. An interesting discussion is worth comment. I’m sure that you ought to write much more about this topic, it might not be considered a taboo subject but generally individuals are inadequate to chat on such topics. To another. Cheers

  5. Was required to give you that not much remark to appreciate it just as before for these spectacular techniques you’ve got provided on this page. It’s so particularly generous with normal folks that you to provide unreservedly what many people would have marketed as a possible e-book to earn some dough for their own end, primarily considering that you may have tried it if you wanted. The tactics also acted being fantastic way to know that everyone’s similar desire equally as my to understand significantly more regarding this condition. I’m sure there are many more pleasing opportunities at the start if you go through your blog post post.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here