(Speakers corner) What will Trump run on in 2020?

[Panshot]

Using the old, anonymous source to corroborate a commie officials remarks and then you liberals assuming that it must be true because of the anonymous source "not authorized to speak on the matter"

Anonymous sources are not a new occurrence in journalism, and the ethical standards employed by agencies like the AP are quite clear:

Under AP's rules, material from anonymous sources may be used only if:

The material is information and not opinion or speculation, and is vital to the news report.

The information is not available except under the conditions of anonymity imposed by the source.

The source is reliable, and in a position to have accurate information.

As a litmus test, I find these standards well within the realm of acceptable journalism.

Yeah the professa that tries to teach me about nuances but "it seems" is a real factual statement huh professuh? That is an opinion.

My challenge to you was to cite a single line in the article in which Talmadge presented any opinion as fact.

As stated, he qualified the statement in question - twice. But thanks for repeating what I already pointed out.

So Eric Talmadge is now the final arbiter of all objective news reporting and ohhh he's the AP bureau chief who the @#$ cares does that make him your media god and he's now the final say on truth?

I didn't say he was a media god, or that he was the final say on anything.

What I said was that when it comes to North Korea, as the AP's Pyongyang bureau chief (for the past six years), and someone who has covered Asia for decades, Talmadge has a great deal more insight and access, not to mention a better reputation and significantly more credibility, than you or Trump do.

The commie official never said he was an enemy of the US? Well aren't you a smart one, yeah he's gonna on record and say I'm an enemy of the US and these are my comments.

And so you admit you lied. Fair enough.

Again you said I used Trump as my baseline for veracity, did I point that out in responding... nope I said if this was an objective article without bias and personal opinions it would have been titled... "Conflicting accounts come out of the talks" not it "seems" north koreans were telling the truth. Anything else besides your circular argument?

You really should stop trying to incorporate other's phrases in your responses - you're just not very good at it.

And yes, you are using Trump - a demonstrated liar and embellisher of the truth - as your baseline of veracity.

You've not demonstrated that Talmadge, the anonymous official or the two ministers made any false statements with regard to the failed summit.

And yes, the article does point out that their were conflicting accounts. So much for all your ballyhoo about reading comprehension.