Connect with us

Fake News Media

WaPo’s Standard for Publication of Salacious Stories is Anyone’s Guess

How does WaPo decide which salacious stories to publish?

Published

on

The Jeff Bezos-owned Washington Post can’t seem to keep its own standards straight when it comes to publication of stories about unwanted romantic advances.

Monday, the paper published the story of Alva Johnson, a former campaign staffer, who said that President Donald J. Trump grabbed her hand and kissed her cheek without her consent, citing five corroborating witnesses, including a boyfriend, two family members, a lawyer and a therapist.

The Post’s standard for publishing such stories centers around corroborating witnesses, or so the paper said when explaining why it did not publish the rape allegations brought to it by Dr. Vanessa Tyson against Virginia’s Democrat Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax. In the context of explaining why the paper published the Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanugh, but not the allegations against Fairfax, Executive Editor Marty Baron said:

Trending: Stanford University Babies Demand “Removal” of College Republicans from Campus

Our reporting on Dr. Blasey Ford documented that in 2012 she told others of the alleged incident. Her husband learned of it during a couples therapy session, and he said he was told the name of Brett Kavanaugh at that time. Moreover, notes from therapy sessions that we reviewed showed that Dr. Blasey Ford spoke of a sexual assault by students “from an elitist boys’ school.” With that corroborating evidence, we proceeded to publish her account because it met our standards for publication. We had no such corroborating accounts or evidence in the case of Dr. Tyson. She said she had told no one what happened.

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024?

  • POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

From this it would appear that a corroborating witness – defined as another person who knew of the allegations – is the standard for publication.

Baron claimed that Tyson brought forth no corroborating witnesses, but that is false, based on a Feb 6. New York Times story. Aides to Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) confirmed for The Times that Tyson had identified him as a corroborating witness when she brought her story to The Post. 

“Late Wednesday night, aides to Mr. Scott confirmed that in late December 2017 or early January 2018, Dr. Tyson told him that she had made an allegation of sexual assault against Mr. Fairfax, in the course of giving Mr. Scott notice that she had given his name as a character reference to The Washington Post, which was investigating the allegation,” The Times wrote.

“The congressman received ‘limited information’ about the assault from The Post, but did not learn the full details until Dr. Tyson released her statement on Wednesday, the aides said,” the paper continued.

So what, then, is the real standard for publishing salacious claims at The Post? 

BLP reached out to Baron and a senior level communications official to clarify. Neither returned our request for comment.


Follow Peter D’Abrosca on Twitter: @pdabrosca

Like Peter D’Abrosca on Facebook: facebook.com/peterdabrosca

Fake News Media

Democrats’ Expert on Misinformation is CNN Hack Soledad O’Brien Who Has Pushed Fake News Incessantly for Years

The Democrats are shamelessly Orwellian.

Published

on

CNN propagandist Soledad O’Brien appeared before Congress on Wednesday as the Democrats’ expert on combating “misinformation.”

During the hearing, she called for her competitors to be censored and for alternative perspectives from the globalist-mandated consensus to be crushed.

“When news organizations make decisions based on ratings rather than responsible reporting, disinformation flourishes in dangerous ways,” O’Brien said while appearing before Congress.

“Cover the fact that lies and propaganda are being disseminated, but do not book people to lie on your show, because it elevates them and presents a lie as another side. Stop posing every story as having two sides, some stories, in fact, have many many sides, and are more complicated. And also, lies don’t have a side,’ she added, describing her vision for how news should be covered.

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024?

  • POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

However, if O’Brien’s advice were taken by newsrooms, she would never be allowed on anymore due to her record of spreading reckless conspiracy theories about Trump being a Russian asset and other nonsense.

News aggregator @amuse posted some of O’Brien’s greatest hits on the fake news leader over the past few years:

Big League Politics has reported on other times in which O’Brien humiliated herself by posting falsehoods:

As usual, members of our esteemed media were caught lying on Wednesday, this time about the motivations for President Donald J. Trump’s visit to Iraq to visit troops.

Much ado was made when Trump did not visit Iraq on Christmas Day. NBC said that he was the first president not to visit the troops as Christmastime, only to correct themselves after Trump left for Iraq late Tuesday night. This led leftists conclude that the media had “shamed” Trump into visiting our fine soldiers.

“Shaming him seems to work,” CNN’s Soledad O’Brien said in reply to a Tweet by Brit Hume.

Hume had noted that by the time left-wing actress had blasted Trump for not visiting the troops, he had already visited them. Hume blasted O’Brien for her apparent lack of understanding of the concept of time.

“Yes Ma’am,” he said. “Trump read this Tweet when it was posted and time-traveled himself back to yesterday and flew to Iraq. Genius take.”

… What was wrong was the assumption that Trump had to be “shamed” to visiting the war zone. Embarrassingly, these leftists were proved wrong by leftist POLITICO.

“According to a White House official, the Trump administration had been planning the trip for more than six weeks,” said a Wednesday POLITICO piece.

Of course, the piece chided Trump for not being able to keep his trip a secret, citing two of Trump’s remarks about a potential trip to a war zone. 

The Democrats are shameless in pushing their Orwellian agenda. They are at war with objective reality and will stoop to unfathomable depths to achieve absolute power.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending