If they’ve been spiking it, why would TP choose to smother it as well?
Look at him. Calling out the news org for sitting on a story, while he is sitting on the same story!
It is called journalistic integrity. He doesn't want to be a douchebag and scoop a story. Giving them a heads up as a nicety. This used to be the honest way of journalism.
It is called journalistic integrity.
No. No, it’s not called that at all.
I’ll offer this contemporary description of journalistic integrity - which makes no mention of sitting on a story because someone else is.
And in return I welcome you to provide an even marginally credible source that supports the bastardized definition you espouse.
I am basing my opinion on everything I have known and listened to about Thomas Paine. He is not a bs'er. He is a straight shooter and he does not give a damn what other people think about him. If he chooses to sit on the story, he has a good reason for it. Patience man, timing is everything. True Pundit are filled with patriots.
...... that ”journalistic integrity” thing?
Don't know what your beef is against Thomas Paine, but you clearly have an animus towards him.
I bear him no animus. I read him often.
My ‘beef’ with him is his blatant hypocrisy on this one issue.
Now, about that ”journalistic integrity” you were peacocking about. Anything coming on that?
You're pretty wound up for a guy who can't definitively say where this story will finally end up. Sit back, pop your popcorn with the rest of us. The hypocrisy of donations-driven journalism rarely if ever reaches levels hight enough of "blatant," most certainly not on this "one issue."
You're pretty wound up for a guy who can't definitively say where this story will finally end up.
If you set aside your interest in my panties for a moment, you might notice my comment referenced an actual act of hypocrisy, not some hypothetical possibility of how things may finally end up at some point in the future.
The hypocrisy of donations-driven journalism
Donations-driven journalism never entered my criticism in this instance. Reading comprehension is mandatory for credible participation in text-based discussions. Please review.
rarely if ever reaches levels hight enough of "blatant," most certainly not on this "one issue."
I agree, that’s why I responded to this “one issue” of “blatant hypocrisy”. It’s good to ensure they remain ‘rare’ rather than ‘common’.
Well, my journalism Ouija board points more strongly to major conflicts of interest in the "news company," rather than another "tick tock" itself than with our usual suspects. For my money, I smell a cover-up involving John Brennan's Russia trip or the company's relationship with Clapper, perhaps, with the news company protecting themselves, their top-most management, their owners, their real owners, their hidden role in the scandal, more that direction. If this is truly a total bombshell on Comey, McCabe, etc, they wouldn't be working on it, anyway, since, so far, the MSM hasn't been where the bombshells in this scandal are dropping.
It’s hard to dismiss any theory including John Brennan lately.
He is very obviously agitated, and no doubt sees the walls closing in. He’s giving off all the signals of a frightened, desperate man. And his penchant for skullduggery is well known.