09-26-2018, 09:09 AM
(09-25-2018, 09:39 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Every other news organization refused to print the story because it could not be corroborated. The New Yorker admits in the article itself the story cannot be corroborated.
Was that the reason? My understanding was that the reason why the other two news agencies following the story didn't go to print was because the second accuser had an exclusive set up with the New Yorker. It had nothing to do with them not seeing the story as solid. There have also been several statements that have come out corroborating her story. I'm not saying it happened as she is reporting, but to dismiss it so quickly as you do is misguided.
Just to add this:
The NYT reiterating that they did not “decline” or “pass” on the Ramirez story as claimed by several conservative politicians. They were simply unable to secure the central interview with her (or with the contemporaneous corroborators who spoke to NYer): https://t.co/EofWO9ZE9G pic.twitter.com/GSyqSXyZm1
— Ronan Farrow (@RonanFarrow) September 25, 2018
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
