Buzzfeed Finds Its Credibility Questioned Again

[dobieg]

You know, NeverTrumpGOP, you admitted that you used to believe in conspiracy theories. How do you know whether or not you are falling into the same pattern of thinking that causes your mind to lock onto a predetermined conclusion and only look at evidence that verifies your claim and ignore any and all evidence to the contrary? And how do you prevent yourself from doing so?

lolol


So much fun reading this today.

 

[dobieg]

Nevertheless people should be cautious in doubting Buzzfeed's journalistic chops.

Thank you for the sig material.

 

[dobieg]

Since Steele was reporting information given to him by his informers even he did not say that ALL of it was necessarily true. But what has been verified is enough to make your hair stand on end. We now have proof the Cohen DID visit Prague for example.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-russia-dossier-true-proven-929839

It is odd that the new liberal hero, Cohen, once again said he never was in Prague.


Michael Cohen
✔
@MichaelCohen212
I hear #Prague #CzechRepublic is beautiful in the summertime. I wouldn’t know as I have never been. #Mueller knows everything!

17.5K
4:21 PM - Dec 27, 2018 · Manhattan, NY

 

[Harshaw]

I don't see a whole lot of desire among the rest of the media to take BuzzFeed to the woodshed over this. Most of the "reporting" about it that I've seen has been about Trump's reaction.

That, guys, isn't the story. And if you're among those saying "well, Trump still hasn't denied it!" rather than focusing on what went wrong, then you're part of the (self-inflicted!) problem.

And if your main concern is how this will be used against you, it's triply imperative that you come out for better journalism. Circling the wagons only makes you look complicit.

This is a moment for the media to show the integrity it claims to have, and so far, they're not shining in it. Hopefully as the day goes on they'll do better.

 

[iguanaman]

It is odd that the new liberal hero, Cohen, once again said he never was in Prague.


Michael Cohen
✔
@MichaelCohen212
I hear #Prague #CzechRepublic is beautiful in the summertime. I wouldn’t know as I have never been. #Mueller knows everything!

17.5K
4:21 PM - Dec 27, 2018 · Manhattan, NY

WASHINGTON
A mobile phone traced to President Donald Trump’s former lawyer and “fixer” Michael Cohen briefly sent signals ricocheting off cell towers in the Prague area in late summer 2016, at the height of the presidential campaign, leaving an electronic record to support claims that Cohen met secretly there with Russian officials, four people with knowledge of the matter say.

During the same period of late August or early September, electronic eavesdropping by an Eastern European intelligence agency picked up a conversation among Russians, one of whom remarked that Cohen was in Prague, two people familiar with the incident said.

The phone and surveillance data, which have not previously been disclosed, lend new credence to a key part of a former British spy’s dossier of Kremlin intelligence describing purported coordination between Trump’s campaign and Russia’s election meddling operation.

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/investigations/article219016820.html

 

[Common Sense 1]

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/investigations/article219016820.html

Another BIG fat lie! But you know that don't you? :doh

 

[trixare4kids]

Another BIG fat lie! But you know that don't you? :doh

You're correct about the above.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/v..._called_dossier_false_cohen_never_prague.html

"Can you say definitively whether you know if Michael Cohen was ever in Prague in 2016?" Todd on Wednesday's edition of Meet the Press Daily on MSNBC.

"Never, never in Prague," Lanny Davis sternly said.

"Never ever?" Todd pressed.

"Never ever in Prague," Davis answered. "And the reason, just to let your viewers know what we're talking about, is that the dossier, the so-called dossier, mentions his name 14 times. One of which is a meeting with Russians in Prague. 14 times. False."

In another interview. though much more recent...

Lanny Davis, Michael Cohen’s lawyer-turned-adviser, on Sunday denied -- hopefully once and for all -- the allegation that Cohen traveled to Prague during the 2016 election, calling the accusation "one of these silly things that constantly gets repeated.”

Davis torpedoed the notorious Steele dossier claim during an interview with NBC’s Kasie Hunt.

“Did that trip ever happen?” Hunt asked Davis, a longtime Clinton loyalist.

“No. No. Everybody, America, we all love Kasie’s show. No, no Prague, ever, never,” Davis laughed in reply.

Davis explained why he has in recent months been quiet on the bogus dossier claim, saying Cohen “actually instructed me when I was serving as his lawyer, 'just don’t answer it anymore,' because it’s one of these silly things that constantly gets repeated.”

“So the answer is 'no,' he’s never been to Prague,” Davis insisted. He added that reporters have also asked if Cohen's ever visited any suburbs of Prague, and the answer to that is no, too.

https://pjmedia.com/video/lanny-dav...im-that-michael-cohen-went-to-prague-in-2016/

 

[Born Free]

Since Steele was reporting information given to him by his informers

His informers were Russians, who Crooked Hillary paid for a phony dossier by the Russians. Hillary/Russian collusion

even he did not say that ALL of it was necessarily true.

I give you credit to state the dossier was not fully truthful

But what has been verified is enough to make your hair stand on end.

Prove what has been verified and by whom. Please don't go and quote one of your fake news sources, like BuzzFeed who outright lies

We now have proof the Cohen DID visit Prague for example.

Sorry you have no proof, showing me an opinion page is not proof, and in a lot of cases what they call real news is not true.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-russia-dossier-true-proven-929839

Here you go from your own link

Revelation: The president’s former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, was accused in the dossier of meeting with “Kremlin representatives” in Prague in August 2016. Cohen has repeatedly denied traveling to the Czech capital, but McClatchy last month reported that Mueller had evidence the trip happened.

The report stated that Mueller’s team discovered proof Cohen got to Prague through Germany. The two countries are part of a number of European nations with an open borders agreement that allows undocumented travel. However, no other media outlet has been able to confirm McClatchy’s reporting.

Zero corroboration and you call that proof. First sense when does Mueller go around a tell anyone what he has evidence of anything.

Please try and stick with facts. Not uncorroborated bull****

 

[upsideguy]

It cause the entire media to lead with the story line: "If it is true that...", and the reason they led with that is the were too eager to throw the dirt without checking the reliability of the sources, which from Buzzfeed are known to be poor. The intertwining of media and politics is a witches brew of cross purposes and misinformation designed to see the gullible of a theory, beginng with a salacious accusation: "If Trump...."

"If" I robbed a bank, I'd be in big trouble. The only problem is, I didn't.

Go ahead with your analogy and try to sell your news with the by line: "It's close enough to true for me", and cling to it. I get it.

You are missing my point. I am not trying to sell this as true, I am merely stating that you trying to sell it as a total fabrication is not true. Since Mueller's office said its not accurate, they did specifically did not offer a more global dismissal. They could have. Attorney's tend to be very precise in their language.... the message in their statement is don't take the BuzzFeed report as truth as elements of it are either not true or misleading.... likely dealing with the hard evidence backing up the claim as.....

What Buzzfeed is reporting is consistent with much of what we know about Trump's behavior, Cohen's behavior and their relationship. We know Cohen lied to Congress and has lied on behalf of and at the behest of Trump in the past. We also know that Trump has no problem not telling the truth. It is not an off-the-wall story by any means. The crux of this is whether Trump commanded Cohen to lie and what hard evidence actually exists to support this.

In fact the Buzzfeed reporters are top shelf. While they aren't the NYT, they are a reputable 3rd tier news organization. There is likely a fair amount of truth in the report, just not enough to say this is so, let's impeach.

In essence, we ain't there yet, but most likely (based upon all of the other stuff we know), we will be.

 

[Harshaw]

n fact the Buzzfeed reporters are top shelf.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread:

The lead writer on the story has a history of fabrication, especially as against Administrations he's opposed to

Don't know much about the other guy, the one who said they hadn't seen the documentation.

While they aren't the NYT, they are a reputable 3rd tier news organization.

It's an odd thing to call them "top shelf" and then "3rd tier" in the next sentence. In any case, as has also been pointed out in the thread, BuzzFeed's reputation ain't the best in Navy:

I know people on the left love to use this site when referring to some right wing rag, so it must be good for others to use, no?

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/buzzfeed/

Overall, we rate Buzzfeed Left-Center Biased due to story selection that tends to favor the left and Mixed for factual reporting based on poor sourcing and a few failed fact checks. (6/30/2016) Updated (M. Huitsing 12/23/18)

People are right to use, "If true", particularly with Cormier saying he has not seen the actual evidence to support the story.

So in what way is it, or the people involved, "top shelf"?

There is likely a fair amount of truth in the report

The report made a very specific accusation, based on very specific evidence, and the Mueller camp called their characterization of that evidence "inaccurate." If their characterization of the evidence is inaccurate, then the accusation based on it is defeated. What "truth" is left? You appear to be saying that because it seems like something that could have happened, there must be "truth" to it. If that's not what you're saying, then what?

 

[upsideguy]

As I mentioned earlier in the thread:



Don't know much about the other guy, the one who said they hadn't seen the documentation.




It's an odd thing to call them "top shelf" and then "3rd tier" in the next sentence. In any case, as has also been pointed out in the thread, BuzzFeed's reputation ain't the best in Navy:



So in what way is it, or the people involved, "top shelf"?



The report made a very specific accusation, based on very specific evidence, and the Mueller camp called their characterization of that evidence "inaccurate." If their characterization of the evidence is inaccurate, then the accusation based on it is defeated. What "truth" is left? You appear to be saying that because it seems like something that could have happened, there must be "truth" to it. If that's not what you're saying, then what?

That was a 2006 report. Got anything current?

Meanwhile, in 2018, he was part of an investigative reporting team that was a Pulitzer finalist. The other reporter on the gig, Anthony Cormier, won a Pulitzer for investigative reporting in 2016. Sorry, but a team of two reporters one with a recent Pulitzer and one that was a finalist for the award constitutes a "reasonably credible team of reporters"

Will I find Pulitzer winners / finalists behind cites you offer up?

Meanwhile, I think you will find the Buzzfeed gets about the same assessment from MediaBiasFactCheck as Fox News (actually their are harder on Fox).

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/buzzfeed/
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/fox-news/

As to third tier and top shelf in the same sentence, the first comment was about the organization, the second about specific team members.... I am not certain why you fail to grasp the concept that you can have a couple of strong players in a weaker (3rd tier) organization, but let me better illustrate it....

Last year, Noah Syndergaard (Bryce Harper) was a top shelf pitcher (outfielder) who played for the New York Mets (Washington Nationals), a 3rd tier baseball team....

As to what to do with the reporting, obviously it can't be relied upon. It missed the mark in some fashion. None of us know what fashion or by how much (people that characterize it as "fake news" being just a wrong as people think it is completely correct. ) We can assume exactly what Mueller stated, its not accurate.

As Mueller is a seasoned and disciplined attorney, "not accurate" means more than "all wrong". It remains a data point begging for other validation.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

Most reactions that I heard about the Buzzfeed story was "if this is true". I do not recall people saying "this is true" But there were some denials. Eventually we will find out the truth of the matter; how much was inaccurate and how much was. The statement did not state that Buzzfeed was entirely wrong just not accurate.

This neither helps Trump or affects the investigations.

 

[Harshaw]

That was a 2006 report. Got anything current?

So the guy had a long sorry record of fakery, of exactly the type at issue here, but "that's just the past"?

A "top-shelf" guy doesn't have a past like that.

Will I find Pulitzer winners / finalists behind cites you offer up?

"Offer up" for what?

Meanwhile, I think you will find the Buzzfeed gets about the same assessment from MediaBiasFactCheck as Fox News (actually their are harder on Fox).

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/buzzfeed/
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/fox-news/

Fox News doesn't have anything to do with this. I didn't mention it. So why did you?

As to third tier and top shelf in the same sentence, the first comment was about the organization, the second about specific team members.... I am not certain why you fail to grasp the concept that you can have a couple of strong players in a weaker (3rd tier) organization, but let me better illustrate it....

Last year, Noah Syndergaard (Bryce Harper) was a top shelf pitcher (outfielder) who played for the New York Mets (Washington Nationals), a 3rd tier baseball team....

OK, fair enough.

As to what to do with the reporting, obviously it can't be relied upon. It missed the mark in some fashion. None of us know what fashion or by how much (people that characterize it as "fake news" being just a wrong as people think it is completely correct. ) We can assume exactly what Mueller stated, its not accurate.

As Mueller is a seasoned and disciplined attorney, "not accurate" means more than "all wrong". It remains a data point begging for other validation.

I asked you what "truth" is left in a story entirely about a specific accusation, where the evidence for that accusation is undermined. What's left of the story?

Get specific: what in that story do you think could still be right, consistent with the statement from the Mueller camp?

 

[Roadvirus]

Nevertheless people should be cautious in doubting Buzzfeed's journalistic chops.

Well, they just got punched in the journalistic chops.

 

[Xelor]

Well, they just got punched in the journalistic chops.

Whether they did or didn't remains to be seen. Only procrustean thinkers, careless readers and/or cursory observers would form a firm position based on Buzzfeed's original story or on Carr's statement in response to it.