Should CNN be considered a credible news source?
I am serious .
@AbaraXas
@Norm Lenhart
Well the homo's statement is patently false on its face.
See, Flynn was forced to resign because of spying that was done by the 'Crats illegally and there is an ongoing investigation by law enforcement into that crime.
Also, since "zero" means "none" it's clear that at least two DEMOCRATS have come forward recently with evidence (their own statements) that illegal spying was done under pretense of "legal monitoring".
Susan Rice's voluminous requests for unmasking is utterly, completely and absolutely unprecedented in the history of the U.S. government.
Only a blithering partisan idiot like sour Lemon (who lost all credibility as a "journalist" long ago) would even make such a blatantly false, insufferably stupid statement.
So as far as anything reported by the homo, no, it has no credibility whatsoever. See, journalists are not supposed to engage in commentary or opinion, they are supposed to be reporting on facts. Commentators issue opinions.
So again, as far as how a credible news organization is supposed to conduct itself (with objectivity and dedication to reporting facts, not opinions) CNN has zero credibility.
Remember when Donna Brazile used her position with CNN to feed questions to Hill-O-Lies Clinton before the CNN debate? Not once but at least TWICE (that we know of). She resigned after that but like Dan Rather after he resigned, Brazille has refused to apologize for or admit to what she did.
Not exactly what I'd call "professional journalism". So no, CNN has no credibility as anything more than a hyper-partisan "praetorian guard" which sees its rightful duty not as an impartial reporter of information but as an advocate for and a protector of leftist politicians.
