"And Jeffrey Epstein Didn't kill himself"

[NWPilgrim]

Seems like Epstein had a good shot at making a deal and could have ratted out a whole slew of big cheeses for less time or maybe even witness protection. I would think he wouldnt have killed himself so soon, waiting until it looked like life without parole.

Exactly. With what he knew he could have negotiated a plea like he did in FL, maybe 10 yrs this time, except a lot of big names would be doing serious time.

[armtx77]

Hmmm.

ABC didnt have enough to run this story, but had enough to run after Kavanaugh for a month?

They didnt have enough evidence for 20 years of what Weinstein was doing, but said Benghazi was all about a YouTube video?

Uh, huh.

[glocktogo]

Hmmm.

ABC didnt have enough to run this story, but had enough to run after Kavanaugh for a month?

They didnt have enough evidence for 20 years of what Weinstein was doing, but said Benghazi was all about a YouTube video?

Uh, huh.

Funny how that works out, isn't it?

[WillBrink]

Hmmm.

ABC didnt have enough to run this story, but had enough to run after Kavanaugh for a month?

They didnt have enough evidence for 20 years of what Weinstein was doing, but said Benghazi was all about a YouTube video?

Uh, huh.

The only real Q is, how much of it is intentional and how much of it is due to bias and cognitive dissonance. ABC is a paragon of journalistic integrity compared to CNN and MSNC amazingly.

[.45fan]

.

[Pacific5th]

So many memes, and they never stop.

[armtx77]

The only real Q is, how much of it is intentional and how much of it is due to bias and cognitive dissonance. ABC is a paragon of journalistic integrity compared to CNN and MSNC amazingly.

Thin line between intentional and biased is pretty slim, IMO. I would lean intellectual dishonesty, before CD, but I was told by the NYT and WaPo that there is no such thing as a Deep State and just last week, the former head of Spooks R Us was applauding the work of the Deep State, but Im dabbling in conspiracy.

The propaganda, is getting difficult to sift through

[SteyrAUG]

The only real Q is, how much of it is intentional and how much of it is due to bias and cognitive dissonance. ABC is a paragon of journalistic integrity compared to CNN and MSNC amazingly.

Funny enough I think most of them actually believe it because XYZ cable channel is reporting it. They begin from a point of "There is a link between Trump and the Russians" and then simply go from there trying to find the evidence. When they instead discover a link between Russians and Hunter Biden, they don't think "oh I was wrong" , they think "this is a campaign of disinformation to throw me off the track so I have to look for the Trump / Russia link even harder."

Part of it is they can't begin to imagine they are actually wrong about anything, their "instincts" tell them otherwise and they won't for a second entertain the idea that they have a predisposed bias and continue to default to "where there is smoke, there is fire" even if they are just feeding off of each others smoke signals.

[WillBrink]

Funny enough I think most of them actually believe it because XYZ cable channel is reporting it. They begin from a point of "There is a link between Trump and the Russians" and then simply go from there trying to find the evidence. When they instead discover a link between Russians and Hunter Biden, they don't think "oh I was wrong" , they think "this is a campaign of disinformation to throw me off the track so I have to look for the Trump / Russia link even harder."

Part of it is they can't begin to imagine they are actually wrong about anything, their "instincts" tell them otherwise and they won't for a second entertain the idea that they have a predisposed bias and continue to default to "where there is smoke, there is fire" even if they are just feeding off of each others smoke signals.

Exactly so, which is why I think it's more a matter of CD and unchecked bias within their org, vs sitting around a table saying "what fake news can we invent today?" kinda deal.

[Diamondback]

Funny enough I think most of them actually believe it because XYZ cable channel is reporting it. They begin from a point of "There is a link between Trump and the Russians" and then simply go from there trying to find the evidence. When they instead discover a link between Russians and Hunter Biden, they don't think "oh I was wrong" , they think "this is a campaign of disinformation to throw me off the track so I have to look for the Trump / Russia link even harder."

Part of it is they can't begin to imagine they are actually wrong about anything, their "instincts" tell them otherwise and they won't for a second entertain the idea that they have a predisposed bias and continue to default to "where there is smoke, there is fire" even if they are just feeding off of each others smoke signals.

Reminds me of a saying Tom Clancy reported in the intel community, "If you look for something hard enough you find it, whether it exists or not."

Sounds like we need to get to work looking for those tapes on Adam Schiff's rumored House Cloakroom child-molestation ring...