I don't know what happened to Harry Reid, but her sure looks like someone punched him in the face.

Powerline might indeed be wrong, but chances aware Reid is not truthful either.

This interview with the powerline guy is pretty unbelievable-- he seems barely repentant at all, and says he still thinks there needs to be investigation of Reid lying about the cause of the injuries...

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/john-hinderaker-powerline-harry-reid

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I heard from conservative media was a questioning of how Reid's injuries occurred and a reporting of what this guy made up. As a question. I'm sure blogs reported it as truth. But Bexk, Hannity, et al questioned it all. Reid is a snake; he made his own bed

That is a journalistic no no. Putting a question mark at the end of the sentence does not absolve you of spreading rumors.

How was anyone to know it was a rumor when the liar put it out as fact? Regardless, questioning is exactly what a talk show host should do. Their job is to stimulate discussion and give opinion

Because the liar was never vetted. The questioning should have happened at the level before it ever gets to air. But, you know, journalism is dead.

Once again, a political commentator is just that - their job is to question those stories and subjects floating around. They did just that.

Herewith, the Top 10 Real Explanations for Harry Reid’s Injuries!

10. Unwisely intervened in a fight between the notoriously ill-tempered leprechaun and chupacabra.

9. Pushed down stairs in the Capitol by Chuck Schumer.

8. Accidentally read minority dissent by Clarence Thomas in random court case; banged face on desk in disgust.

7. Media mugging.

6. Attacked by gang of Christmas caroling clean coal spokescoals after his push for green energy put them out of a job.

5. Told Barbara Boxer he disagreed with a ruling from the Senate Ethics Committee, forcing her to reluctantly yet forcefully bring out her pimp hand.

4. Selfie with Loch Ness Monster gone horribly wrong.

3. Beta-testing super-authentic Mike Tyson Wii game.

2. Self-flagellation imposed as part of penance for voting for Iraq War.

And the No. 1 Real Explanation for Harry Reid’s Injuries…

1. Injured on the set of live-action version of The Simpsons, where he has a walk-on role as Mr. Burns.

http://www.reviewjournal.com/columns-blogs/politics/slash-politics/what-s-the-real-story-behind-reid-s-injuries

Ah, Harry.

on January 22, Politico, relying almost certainly upon Reid’s staff authorized by Reid, reported that “[s]ources familiar with the incident said Reid was exercising in his bathroom, with the exercise band attached to the shower door.”

In his CNBC interview, Reid adds a new detail to his story, claiming “I got hurt in my own bathroom with my wife standing there.” (emphasis added).

Last week, Senator Reid told Univision’s Jorge Ramos he attached his exercise band to “a big metal hook” in an unspecified room of his Nevada home.

In his first version of the story, Reid said, the band “broke.” In the next version he told Ramos it “slipped.”

“I was doing that [exercising with resistance bands] in my new home here in Nevada,” Reid told Ramos, “and a big metal hook that came out from the wall that was hooked there that the strap had no handle on it, slipped, spun me around, uh, about, oh I guess four feet and so I smashed my face into a cabinet so hard that uh…” (emphasis added).

What ever happen to that conservative guy who bugged a senator phone?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I heard from conservative media was a questioning of how Reid's injuries occurred and a reporting of what this guy made up. As a question. I'm sure blogs reported it as truth. But Bexk, Hannity, et al questioned it all. Reid is a snake; he made his own bed

That is a journalistic no no. Putting a question mark at the end of the sentence does not absolve you of spreading rumors.

How was anyone to know it was a rumor when the liar put it out as fact? Regardless, questioning is exactly what a talk show host should do. Their job is to stimulate discussion and give opinion

Because the liar was never vetted. The questioning should have happened at the level before it ever gets to air. But, you know, journalism is dead.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I heard from conservative media was a questioning of how Reid's injuries occurred and a reporting of what this guy made up. As a question. I'm sure blogs reported it as truth. But Bexk, Hannity, et al questioned it all. Reid is a snake; he made his own bed

That is a journalistic no no. Putting a question mark at the end of the sentence does not absolve you of spreading rumors.

How was anyone to know it was a rumor when the liar put it out as fact? Regardless, questioning is exactly what a talk show host should do. Their job is to stimulate discussion and give opinion

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I heard from conservative media was a questioning of how Reid's injuries occurred and a reporting of what this guy made up. As a question. I'm sure blogs reported it as truth. But Bexk, Hannity, et al questioned it all. Reid is a snake; he made his own bed

That is a journalistic no no. Putting a question mark at the end of the sentence does not absolve you of spreading rumors.

Oh come on. That's what Glenn Beck does. It's who has is. It's his signature thing.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since we are in an investigaive mode, let me ask: Has this "one guy" been investigated? Why so much unconditional trust in some dude who says his premise was a deliberate lie?

As far as I know he hasn't been connected to a lie detector, but he is using his real name now and there was never any evidence to support the story he claims to have made up. Powerlineblog is suddenly denying that it ever trusted the source in the first place and complaining about being being lied to.

Well, the guy could be lying. And absense of evidence is not the same as evidence of absense. I think if Harry can dish it out, he should be able to take it

Anonymous wrote:What I heard from conservative media was a questioning of how Reid's injuries occurred and a reporting of what this guy made up. As a question. I'm sure blogs reported it as truth. But Bexk, Hannity, et al questioned it all. Reid is a snake; he made his own bed

That is a journalistic no no. Putting a question mark at the end of the sentence does not absolve you of spreading rumors.

Anonymous wrote:Since we are in an investigaive mode, let me ask: Has this "one guy" been investigated? Why so much unconditional trust in some dude who says his premise was a deliberate lie?

As far as I know he hasn't been connected to a lie detector, but he is using his real name now and there was never any evidence to support the story he claims to have made up. Powerlineblog is suddenly denying that it ever trusted the source in the first place and complaining about being being lied to.

Since we are in an investigaive mode, let me ask: Has this "one guy" been investigated? Why so much unconditional trust in some dude who says his premise was a deliberate lie?

What I heard from conservative media was a questioning of how Reid's injuries occurred and a reporting of what this guy made up. As a question. I'm sure blogs reported it as truth. But Bexk, Hannity, et al questioned it all. Reid is a snake; he made his own bed

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The left denigrates any source that doesn't support their point of view. Case in point this thread

When a "source" runs a story based on nothing but the word of someone who admits to using a false name and doesn't bother with the least bit of collaboration, the source deserves to be denigrated. I assume that you consider it to be top flight reporting?

OK Mr Right Wing Puke Tunnel. Seems to me it's those mainstream papers that go silent every time the truth comes out. See Brown as a good example

When the Rolling Stone rape article turned out to be false, there where hundreds of articles criticizing it. The Columbia School of Journalism was asked to conduct a full scale investigation into the article. If this is silence, for once the silence truly is deafening. As for Michael Brown, again I am not sure how you define "silent", but Michael Brown's entire life history was publicized. I am not sure what more you could expect from the press.

But, as to the topic of this thread, are you truly standing by a publication that knowingly publishes a story on nothing more than the word of someone who admits to using a false name? Are you seriously going to just ignore that and try to make this about other media (and wrongly at that)?

After the damage was done. Conservative media saw it way earlier and with good reason

Look at Jenner and the hate, now that he's come out....as a Republican. And Sawyer: "you're a REPUBLICAN????" Hilarious