Some say she's made a secret deal with Potus to write a book about him. He's close to her and Costa (WaPo).
I am not saying she is always right and never wrong. I'm saying she's not making things up and that I find these things believable.
-
-
every example i've brought up, you've said her version was right, even when it was contradicted by later events. if she's not always right, why is that?
-
I said it was believable but could be wrong, which is different from dishonest, and I've said that conditions change.
-
I don't know a single person who isn't a reporter who thinks that Trump not hiring someone because of a moustache is believable. Not being rude, being completely serious. That is some kind of shared delusion that you guys are operating under, that it sounds remotely plausible
-
I appreciate your views - not rude at all. But just because it's not believable to many doesn't mean it's not true. It rings possible to me. What can I say? But I get where you're coming from.
-
you can justify literally anything by saying that though. how does your editor decide what to print when "well it could be true" is the standard?
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.