Is your 'stuff' stressing you out? TV personality Matt Paxton has tips for downsizing and decluttering in our free, two-part webinar! Register now.

Reply
Regular Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
469
Views

Re: Email Evidence

469 Views
Message 1 of 18

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

Goes to show everyone that those who perpetuate FAKE NEWS, Breitbart and those who post their nonsense, have difficulty understand what FAKE NEWS is and what journalism is all about.

 

Meanwhile, they both embrace themselves with trumpy's lies....and prefer to misinform others.  Pathetic!


For years we got our news from News Papers, top news sources on ABC, CBS and NBC  and publications like Time and News Week. These were news sources with honor and integrity.  If they make a mistake they will own up to it . I prefer to trust them over most other sources such as Brietbart, Fox, Rush Limbaugh to name a few. Today so many want to call anything that does not support their point of view, "Fake News." A lot of our office holders use the term Fake News to direct attention away from themselves and anything that puts the spotlight on them. If you want a good rule of thumb for fake news, if it is outragious and if it only supports one point of view and everyone else is lying , then it might be fake news. When someone starts yelling fake news it is like Three Card Monty a game of misdirection, kind of like Tweets from on high. 

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
469
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
672
Views

Re: Email Evidence

672 Views
Message 2 of 18

@Panjandrum wrote:

Five alarm news alert!!!!! Journalists exchange emails with people interested in corresponding with them! I guess next we'll hear they talk to them on the phone and have actual face to face meetings. Lordy.


Exactly.  This is what reporters do.  I looked at the headline and thought reporters were paying people to talk.  Now "that" would be a problem.  But just asking questions?  Framing the issue so that they can get the specific type of feedback they want?  This is what they do all the time.  All of them.   It's called being an investigative reporter.  

 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
672
Views
Info Seeker
0
Kudos
693
Views

Re: Email Evidence

693 Views
Message 3 of 18

@jimc91 wrote:

From the original article:

 

A Times spokeswoman, Danielle Rhoades-Ha, told Breitbart News there is nothing abnormal about these emails.

 

“The email demonstrates the process of reporting and gathering facts,” Rhoades-Ha said in an email early Tuesday when seeking comment.
 

O’Grady, the union official with whom Davenport was colluding per these emails to solicit government leakers, has not responded to a request for comment.

 

Davenport continues in her written plea to O’Grady in the email by noting that if he successfully delivers her the government leakers she is soliciting, she will protect their identities.

 

“While I’d like to speak to staff about these examples, I DON’T need to quote them by name or with any sort of identifying details that could in any way reveal the source of the information,” Davenport writes. She continues:

 

We’re VERY sensitive to the need to protect career folks who speak to us, and we DO NOT want to endanger anyone’s employment. But, in order to ensure that our reporting is based on facts rather than rumors, we do need to feel sure that the examples we give are based on first-hand or eyewitness experiences rather than second and third-hand rumors.

Davenport then provides her contact information and encourages people to text, call, email, or contact her on the encrypted phone apps Signal or WhatsApp. She provides both her personal email address and her Times email address. Breitbart News has redacted that information from the emails published herein, as well as all personal contact information in the emails.

 

She then continues her plea for leaks and explains the nuts and bolts of how she would go about consolidating leaks into becoming key revelations in a New York Times article down the road.

“Another way to do this might be through a combination of your interviews and my reporting,” Davenport writes, adding:

 

If you gave put together multiple eyewitness accounts of a specific example of behavior that demonstrates an unprecedented lack of transparency, we could cite that. Or, if I speak to multiple people who describe, firsthand, such an example, I could cite that without needing any quotations. In general, the more folks I speak to who can offer specific, first-hand accounts of similar phenomena, the more I can write with authority in a broad way with no quotations or identifying details.

From there, she moves on to describe how she has already done this.

 

“We’ve already done this in a number of other stories this year,” Davenport writes. “Below are four stories that I reported with the help of multiple interviews with current EPA employees. Since the employees gave multiple firsthand accounts but could not be quoted, I was able to describe what was going on without naming, quoting, or identifying any of them.

 

The only employees quoted in these stories are those who specifically gave permission to do so — generally the union leaders. However, the accounts of employees who were not quoted helped to deeply inform the story and allowed me to write with more authority. So looking to do the same this time.”

 

Davenport ends her note by telling O’Grady to “feel free to send this note around to folks who might be willing to chat,” and then includes the links to the four aforementioned Timespieces built on leaks she solicited from inside the EPA.

 

The four pieces that Davenport links in the email are all critical of Pruitt and the Trump administration’s using leakers she admittedly solicited from inside the federal bureaucracy to do so. The headlines of the four pieces she links to are:

 

 

O’Grady then forwarded the email from Davenport to a large list of EPA employees. With Davenport’s full message, O’Grady added a note of his own for EPA officials he was encouraging to leak to the New York Times.

 

“Below is an e-mail I received from Coral Davenport of the New York Times,” O’Grady wrote to his colleagues. “She needs our assistance in verifying some information she has heard.”

 

It includes two bullet points that use wording to describe what Davenport is looking for that is identical to her original email O’Grady. First, O’Grady wrote that Davenport is “looking for examples of things like, information being communicated only verbally when it would historically have been put in writing, people being told not to bring phones, laptops or even take notes in meetings where they would in the past typically have done so.

 

” Second, O’Grady wrote that Davenport was looking for “eyewitness accounts of things like the administrator or top political appointees refusing to use official email, phones or computers, or any other specific, first-hand examples of practices that appear to demonstrate unprecedented secrecy or transparency.”

 

 

 

 


wow. You did a good job. very detailed.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
693
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
744
Views

Re: Email Evidence

744 Views
Message 4 of 18

jim, thank you for the verification that Breitbart knows nothing about actual news reporting.

Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
744
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
750
Views

Re: Email Evidence

750 Views
Message 5 of 18

@KidBoy2 wrote:
Rich posted..

Objective like this mess of an article? No, left wing posters can do much better than this. Many of us were English majors. Many were journalism majors. Whoever wrote this was simply trying (and failing) to be a propaganda major. Do you realize how dumb someone would have to be to be taken in by this horrible example of writing?

=================================================

" Objective like this mess of an article? No, left wing posters can do much better than this. Many of us were English majors. Many were journalism majors."


WOW! I guess I am not in your elite left wing crowd.

Please be free to call me or others that are not in your left wing camp dumb.

I do have what is called common sense which gives me the ability to understand and think for myself. That is a good thing.


Just because a person can think for their self doesn't mean that they aren't wrong most of the time.


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
750
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
757
Views

Re: Email Evidence

757 Views
Message 6 of 18
Rich posted..

Objective like this mess of an article? No, left wing posters can do much better than this. Many of us were English majors. Many were journalism majors. Whoever wrote this was simply trying (and failing) to be a propaganda major. Do you realize how dumb someone would have to be to be taken in by this horrible example of writing?

=================================================

" Objective like this mess of an article? No, left wing posters can do much better than this. Many of us were English majors. Many were journalism majors."


WOW! I guess I am not in your elite left wing crowd.

Please be free to call me or others that are not in your left wing camp dumb.

I do have what is called common sense which gives me the ability to understand and think for myself. That is a good thing.





Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
757
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
767
Views

Re: Email Evidence

767 Views
Message 7 of 18

@KidBoy2 wrote:
Part of Jim's post..

Exclusive — Deep State Teams with Fake News: Email Evidence Proves New York Times Soliciting Anti-Trump Bureaucracy Leakers Emails from a reporter for the New York Times to government employees obtained exclusively by Breitbart News demonstrate that the newspaper’s employees are not just on the receiving end of leaks, but are actually soliciting government employees to become leakers. What’s more, the emails demonstrate the Timescolluded with the president of government union to encourage and solicit these leaks—something that may become highly problematic for both institutions.

===================================================

It figures that the same left wing posters would try to discredit this as they do..they do not want to be objective. That is so typical of that group and until they have 100% control of the AARP boards I do not expect them to change.

Objective like this mess of an article?  No, left wing posters can do much better than this.  Many of us were English majors. Many were journalism majors. Whoever wrote this was simply trying (and failing) to be a propaganda major.  Do you realize how dumb someone would have to be to be taken in by this horrible example of writing? 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
767
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
769
Views

Re: Email Evidence

769 Views
Message 8 of 18
Part of Jim's post..

Exclusive — Deep State Teams with Fake News: Email Evidence Proves New York Times Soliciting Anti-Trump Bureaucracy Leakers Emails from a reporter for the New York Times to government employees obtained exclusively by Breitbart News demonstrate that the newspaper’s employees are not just on the receiving end of leaks, but are actually soliciting government employees to become leakers. What’s more, the emails demonstrate the Timescolluded with the president of government union to encourage and solicit these leaks—something that may become highly problematic for both institutions.

===================================================

It figures that the same left wing posters would try to discredit this as they do..they do not want to be objective. That is so typical of that group and until they have 100% control of the AARP boards I do not expect them to change.
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
769
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
781
Views

Re: Email Evidence

781 Views
Message 9 of 18

Instead of cutting and pasting the same crap, Jim.  What's your point?  It's called "cultivating sources".  Do you have a problem with that?  It's not seeking "top-secret" information.  Did you forget the EPA works for the tax-payers and not trumpy?


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
781
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
786
Views

Re: Email Evidence

786 Views
Message 10 of 18
again..so?
So it begins.
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
786
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Have a question about AARP membership or benefits? Ask it in the AARP Help Membership forum, Benefits & Discounts forum, or General forum.


multiple white question marks with center red question mark

Top Authors