Washington Posts admits publishing false story -

[Always in His Presence]

Seems they changed the quote to make it sound bad.

WaPo admits it used false Trump quotes

The Washington Post has published an astonishing retraction two months after a bombshell story about a phone call between Donald Trump and an elections investigator in Georgia.

The newspaper reported in January that the then President had spoken to Frances Watson in December, asking her to “find the fraud” in the state and that she would be a “national hero” if she did.

Numerous other US media outlets including CNN, ABC News, NBC News and USA Today all subsequently claimed that they had “confirmed” The Washington Post’s reporting.

But a newly surfaced recording – which had been deleted from Ms Watson’s device and was only recovered by officials responding to a freedom-of-information request – has revealed the quotes attributed to Mr Trump, and relayed to media by an anonymous source, were false.

The Washington Post added a lengthy correction to its original story on Monday, admitting that it “misquoted” Mr Trump based on “information provided by a source”.

“Correction: Two months after publication of this story, the Georgia Secretary of State released an audio recording of President Donald Trump’s December phone call with the state’s top elections investigator,” the note read.

“The recording revealed that The Post misquoted Trump’s comments on the call, based on information provided by a source. Trump did not tell the investigator to ‘find the fraud’ or say she would be ‘a national hero’ if she did so.
​

Eventually the lies come out. Will CNN, ABC News, NBC News and USA issue a retraction and apologize to Trump.

I doubt it.

​

 

[grasping the after wind]

Seems they changed the quote to make it sound bad.

WaPo admits it used false Trump quotes

The Washington Post has published an astonishing retraction two months after a bombshell story about a phone call between Donald Trump and an elections investigator in Georgia.

The newspaper reported in January that the then President had spoken to Frances Watson in December, asking her to “find the fraud” in the state and that she would be a “national hero” if she did.

Numerous other US media outlets including CNN, ABC News, NBC News and USA Today all subsequently claimed that they had “confirmed” The Washington Post’s reporting.

But a newly surfaced recording – which had been deleted from Ms Watson’s device and was only recovered by officials responding to a freedom-of-information request – has revealed the quotes attributed to Mr Trump, and relayed to media by an anonymous source, were false.

The Washington Post added a lengthy correction to its original story on Monday, admitting that it “misquoted” Mr Trump based on “information provided by a source”.

“Correction: Two months after publication of this story, the Georgia Secretary of State released an audio recording of President Donald Trump’s December phone call with the state’s top elections investigator,” the note read.

“The recording revealed that The Post misquoted Trump’s comments on the call, based on information provided by a source. Trump did not tell the investigator to ‘find the fraud’ or say she would be ‘a national hero’ if she did so.
​

Eventually the lies come out. Will CNN, ABC News, NBC News and USA issue a retraction and apologize to Trump.

I doubt it.

​

Journalists used to have to verify their sources' stories. Too bad we no longer have any journalists.

 

[Jake Arsenal]

Is there someplace left to go? Nowhere we can get on our own.

 

[Fantine]

That is what honest newspapers do--publish retractions when they make a mistake.

WAPO makes fewer mistakes than most.

I am reassured that even if the wording of Trump's conversation with a Georgia election official is not exactly right, the correction wouldn't have made a difference.

Fulton County is doing a criminal investigation probe into Trump's activities following his November 3 election loss in Georgia. I am sure that they looked at much more primary source evidence than the WAPO story before initating a grand jury investigation. When one sheet of paper falls off a stack, there's still a stack there to investigate.

 

[grasping the after wind]

That is what honest newspapers do--publish retractions when they make a mistake.

WAPO makes fewer mistakes than most.

I am reassured that even if the wording of Trump's conversation with a Georgia election official is not exactly right, the correction wouldn't have made a difference.

Fulton County is doing a criminal investigation probe into Trump's activities following his November 3 election loss in Georgia. I am sure that they looked at much more primary source evidence than the WAPO story before initating a grand jury investigation. When one sheet of paper falls off a stack, there's still a stack there to investigate.

Competent newspapers check their sources before publishing misquotes.

 

[Fantine]

And, as I said, WAPO is a competent newspaper. Would this make news if such an error was commonplace?

Competent newspapers rarely make mistakes. When they do, they print a retraction.

 

[iluvatar5150]

So, if I'm understanding this correctly, the quote was wrong but the sentiment or message was correct. Trump didn't say to "find the fraud"; he said that they'd find "dishonesty." He didn't say that she would be a "national hero" but did say that "you'll be praised."

Is that about it?

Trump still called, encouraging her to find fraud that didn't exist.

And, as I said, WAPO is a competent newspaper. Would this make news if such an error was commonplace?

Competent newspapers rarely make mistakes. When they do, they print a retraction.

The Federalist is obviously more reliable because they don't print retractions as often.

 

[grasping the after wind]

And, as I said, WAPO is a competent newspaper. Would this make news if such an error was commonplace?

Competent newspapers rarely make mistakes. When they do, they print a retraction.

In this case. When they get caught misquoting in a front page story, they print a retraction on some page where it will not be seen m by most readers. Competent newspapers do not routinely use one anonymous source without even seeking secondary verification. I don't say WAPO is incompetent, just not a competent newspaper it is very competent in being what it aims to be i.e. a competent propaganda instrument.

 

[iluvatar5150]

In this case. When they get caught misquoting in a front page story, they print a retraction on some page where it will not be seen m by most readers. Competent newspapers do not routinely use one anonymous source without even seeking secondary verification. I don't say WAPO is incompetent, just not a competent newspaper it is very competent in being what it aims to be i.e. a competent propaganda instrument.

This op-ed is currently linked on the front page of their web site:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...t-correction-trump-call-georgia-investigator/

As for the print edition, since this broke today, any updates would be printed tomorrow.

 

[Fantine]

As iluvatar noted, the sentiment of the statement was the same even if a few words were wrong.

And Fulton County would not be holding a grand jury investigation unless there was a lot more evidence than that. Does that mean the former president will be criminally indicted? That will be up to the grand jury. Obviously there is evidence to investigate, and the grand jury will have to weigh and consider it.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Competent newspapers check their sources before publishing misquotes.

WAPO is nowhere near a competent news source. Neither are the left leaning on air media that jump without checking sources.

They get a pass on anything they do - anyone counting the lies of the media over the last year? They were over 50,000 just on Russian collusion.

Sad really, true journalism is dead.

 

[The Barbarian]

Frances Watson: Hello, Mr. President. I am actually doing very well.

Trump: Good. Well you have a big fan in our great chief, right? Chief of staff, Mark.

Watson: I did! I met him. I, um, it was a pleasure to meet him yesterday.

Trump: That is great. He's a great — he was a big success for us. He was a great congressman and then, when you lead by 35 points it's hard to get people out of there, but I tried very hard, for two years. And we got him, and he's done a fantastic job. I just wanted to thank you for everything. He told me you've been great.

And you know, look, this country is counting on it. Because it's very interesting. So I won Florida in a record number. Ohio in a record. Texas in a record. Alabama by 40 — 40 points. And I won everything but Georgia. And, you know, and I won Georgia. I know that. By a lot. And the people know it. And, you know, something happened. Something bad happened.

And I hope you're doing that [inaudible] — you know, I hope you're going back two years, as opposed to just checking, you know, one against the other because that would just sort of be a signature check that didn't mean anything.

But if you go back two years, and if you can get to Fulton, you are going to find things that are going to be unbelievable. The dishonesty that we've heard from —

Watson: Right.

Trump: Rudy — you know, just good sources. Really good sources. But Fulton. Fulton is the motherload, you know, as the expression goes. Fulton County —

Watson: Right.

Trump: And, uh.

Watson: Well, Mr. President, I appreciate your comment. And I can assure you that our team, and the GBI, that we're only interested in the truth.

Trump: That's great.

Watson: And finding the information that's based on the facts. We've been working 12-, 16-hour days. And—

Trump: Great.

Watson: — you know we're working through it. So I can assure you that. I do appreciate you calling. I know that you're very, very busy, a very important man, and I'm very honored that you called. And, you know, and quite—

Trump: It's so important what you're doing.

Watson: Quite frankly I'm shocked that you would take time to do that, but I am very appreciative.

Trump: Yeah, Mark asked me to do it. He thinks you're great. You know, you just have the most important job in the country right now, because if we win Georgia — first of all, if we win, you're going to have two wins. They're not going to win right now, you know. They're down. Because the people of Georgia are so angry at what happened to me. They know I won. Won by hundreds of thousands of votes. It wasn't close.

And Alabama, you know… I won South Carolina in a record. Alabama in a record. Florida in a record. You know, I won Florida by 6- or 700,000 votes. It's never happened before with a Republican. With all the money they spent. You know, you heard all that, these guys going down, spending a fortune.

And we won Texas by a record. Texas was won by the biggest, the biggest number ever. And it, you know. And Ohio of course. You know that. You know about that. That was won by nine points or something. And it's… all of it. Iowa. And it never made sense. And, you know, they dropped ballots. They dropped all these ballots.

Stacey Abrams. Really, really terrible. Just a terrible thing.

And I will say this. If and when — I mean, hopefully this will show, because if you go back two years or four years you're going to see it's a totally different signature — but, but hopefully when the right answer comes out you'll be praised. I mean, I don't know why, you know they've made it so hard. They will be praised. People will say, "Great." Because that's what it's about. That ability to check and to make it right. Because everyone knows it's wrong. There's just no way.

You know, they had people in Georgia, for instance, that won, and I was way ahead of them, and they won because of me — you know I pulled them, as they call it, coattails — we pulled them across and they say, "There's no way I beat you by 15 points," you know. I've had that — we've had plenty of those calls too.

Trump: Well, and I appreciate it too, Frances. Do you think they'll be working after Christmas, to keep it going fast? Because, you know, we have that date of the 6th, which is a very important date.

Watson: Right, right. I know you've got that coming up. And I can assure you that I'm going to be working and we're going to be working. And it's—

Trump: Good.

Watson: And I appreciate it. And you know, our team's out there working, you know. We've got pandemic—

Trump: I hear the Georgia, it's not the FBI, what was it, the BI, right?

Watson: Right.

Trump: But I hear, I hear they're fantastic. And I hear that I'm 96% with them, so that's good, okay.

Watson: [laughter]

 

[The Barbarian]

WAPO is nowhere near a competent news source.

Their willingness to admit to a mistake makes them more credible than sources that aren't willing to do that.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Their willingness to admit to a mistake makes them more credible than sources that aren't willing to do that.

They got caught in a lie to say they are more credible than CNN, NBC News etc is not really a hallmark.

They still continued a four year pattern of publishing unsubstantiated claims.

 

[Hank77]

Competent newspapers check their sources before publishing misquotes.

The Washington Post reported on the substance of Trump’s Dec. 23 call in January, describing him saying that Watson should “find the fraud” and that she would be a “national hero,” based on an account from Jordan Fuchs, the deputy secretary of state, whom Watson briefed on his comments.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...32ea2e-827a-11eb-ac37-4383f7709abe_story.html

I suspect that they reasoned this person to be a very reliable source.

 

[The Barbarian]

They got caught in a lie to say they are more credible than CNN, NBC News etc is not really a hallmark.

Most likely, they had a source that gave them some poor information. At any rate, the willingness to admit an error makes them more credible for any person who cares about the truth.

Not everyone agrees with that. We all know of politicians who are unable to admit when they mess up. One just got fired for that failing.

 

[Hank77]

Most likely, they had a source that gave them some poor information.

See post #15.

 

[The Barbarian]

See post #15.

Ah, so they just made up the story about a "lie." I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Most likely, they had a source that gave them some poor information. At any rate, the willingness to admit an error makes them more credible for any person who cares about the truth.

Not everyone agrees with that. We all know of politicians who are unable to admit when they mess up. One just got fired for that failing.

Well, your assumption could be right and again, it could be completely wrong. Willingness to admit and error AFTER the lie has been exposed nationally is not exactly being credible in my opinion. They had no other choice but print a retraction and attempt to save face. After the egg was all over their face.

We can also note the media that HAS not made retractions, nor have they apologized.

 

[The Barbarian]

Well, your assumption could be right and again, it could be completely wrong.

I get it. From the Trump point of view, any admission of error is a mistake. But for anyone with any sense, the willingness to be honest about such things aids one's credibility. When it became known that their source was wrong, they just retracted it. People notice who is willing to do that, and trust them.

As I said, the last WH occupant got fired for not being honest in that way.