[edynoid]

For the record, I am not alleging this in particular. For all I know, it might be true. Although given Breitbart's history reading anything on that site does not hold much value.

After all, they have run stories about Hillary Clinton running a child sex ring and continuously deny the scientifically evident reality of climate change, for example.

[jazzyk]

So, using your logic, I assume nothing in the NYT holds much value to you, because they have run stories (without proving any evidence) about "Trump and the prostitutes" in Moscow?

[SippinLean]

Do you have any reason or evidence to support that comment?

From https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/10/us/politics/donald-trump-...:

>The chiefs of America’s intelligence agencies last week presented President Obama and President-elect Donald J. Trump with a summary of UNSUBSTANTIATED reports

>The summary is based on memos generated by POLITICAL OPERATIVES SEEKING TO DERAIL MR. TRUMP’S CANDIDACY

>The memos describe sex videos involving prostitutes with Mr. Trump in a 2013 visit to a Moscow hotel

(emphasis mine)

They make it very clear they were unsubstantiated and generated by people with a clear intent and bias, there is no comparison to BB's knowingly publishing falsehoods.

[jazzyk]

Please see my reply in another sub-thread.

[SamBam]

Has the NYT ever claimed that Trump met prostitutes in Moscow?

Go ahead, find a link saying they have.

Did Breitbart push the PizzaGate sex ring story? [Yes](https://twitter.com/BreitbartNews/status/789143692540055552), [absolutely](https://twitter.com/AndrewBreitbart/status/33636278100561920).

[jazzyk]

This is off-topic, so very briefly:

The NYT published at least two stories about an "unverified" dossier on Trump. Admitting it is unverified, yet they claim:

1. "consequences have been incalculable and will play out long past Inauguration Day" 2. "By all accounts, Mr. Steele has an excellent reputation"

Is it just me, or do they (subtly) suggest that, while "unverified", there may be something to the dossier?

If it is unverified (and quite damning), why publish it?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/10/us/politics/donald-trump-...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/us/politics/donald-trump-...

[SippinLean]

>If it is unverified (and quite damning), why publish it?

They are reporting on the effects of unsubstantiated reports, not publishing them as fact. A far cry from BB knowingly publishing falsehoods.

>Has the NYT ever claimed that Trump met prostitutes in Moscow? Go ahead, find a link saying they have.

You skipped over that part. Have they ever claimed that?

[MR_FEET]

or the sinking of the maine