ScreamingEagle
Gold Member
- Jul 5, 2004
- 13,399
- 1,706
- 245
In the ongoing war between the Trump administration and the left-wing media, the American people are witnessing an unprecedented power struggle between someone they voted for because they want to make America great again and a cartel committed to keeping that from happening.
Examples:
"Is it true what some inside the administration are saying the president has not disavowed support from former KKK member David Duke?"
"Tillerson refuses to deny that he called Trump a moron."
First, they start a rumor by saying it was "overheard" by someone on the president's staff. When asked who said it, they claim it's a confidential source, which allows them to make up any story with impunity. Once the rumor gets aired, they know that it will be absorbed by the public, causing concern and doubt about the stability of the administration. When a dignified man like Tillerson rejects the question as too petty to warrant a response, they can say he "refused" to deny the charge. But Tillerson is smart enough to know that he's being baited into a controversy that doesn't exist.
It's a tactic so old, it has hair on it! You ask a question that assumes a fact, as you put the person on the defensive trying to answer it. "When did you stop beating your wife?" Anything you say after that is merely perpetuating an image of something that never occurred in the first place.
What I'd like to see is a new way of dealing with these false stories. To wit: reporter: "It's been overheard among the president's staff that so-and-so said blah, blah, blah." Response: "Overheard by whom? Unless you can tell me who said what you're alleging, I view it as nothing but a rumor designed to divide the country. Next question!"
Read more: Blog: Media strategy, 2017: 'When did you stop beating your wife?'
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
Examples:
"Is it true what some inside the administration are saying the president has not disavowed support from former KKK member David Duke?"
"Tillerson refuses to deny that he called Trump a moron."
First, they start a rumor by saying it was "overheard" by someone on the president's staff. When asked who said it, they claim it's a confidential source, which allows them to make up any story with impunity. Once the rumor gets aired, they know that it will be absorbed by the public, causing concern and doubt about the stability of the administration. When a dignified man like Tillerson rejects the question as too petty to warrant a response, they can say he "refused" to deny the charge. But Tillerson is smart enough to know that he's being baited into a controversy that doesn't exist.
It's a tactic so old, it has hair on it! You ask a question that assumes a fact, as you put the person on the defensive trying to answer it. "When did you stop beating your wife?" Anything you say after that is merely perpetuating an image of something that never occurred in the first place.
What I'd like to see is a new way of dealing with these false stories. To wit: reporter: "It's been overheard among the president's staff that so-and-so said blah, blah, blah." Response: "Overheard by whom? Unless you can tell me who said what you're alleging, I view it as nothing but a rumor designed to divide the country. Next question!"
Read more: Blog: Media strategy, 2017: 'When did you stop beating your wife?'
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
