Reply With Quote
Apparently his office already responded to the allegations...
Here, in another MSM site:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...ican-republic/
Apparently his office already responded to the allegations...
Here, in another MSM site:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...ican-republic/
what could she possibly ask him that wouldn't be answered with "no comment?" I would be a stupid interview.
Questions for these interviews are typically pre-discussed. I'd put the likelihood at about 98% that Menendez and his handlers said they would not field questions about the pros ution investigation. So yes, I can imagine Raddatz giving a similar interview to a Republican under investigation. Can you imagine Newsbusters writing a blog like this if she did?
Doubt it. I can't remember a repub interview who had a scandal not get reemed. Even when they tell the interviewer that they wouldn't discuss that.
His staff denying an overall accusation is one thing.
Video coming out of the pros utes and then having the ability to actually interview the man in question is another.
Asked about the allegations, Menendez spokeswoman Tricia Enright refused to answer any questions on the subject. “We’re not going to respond to a completely false accusation,” she wrote by email.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/01/wo...#ixzz2JJ54vhdA
Yep case closed. Why would journalists ask questions and follow-ups?
what is the follow-up to the senator's unequivocal denial? lemme guess: "Are you sure you didn't do it? oh, you are. one more follow-up, then. Are you really sure?"
The staff email quoted is from the same day as the interview... after the alleged pros ute video became public...
Yeah because that b.s. worked with politicians before. This would be comical if it wasn't so accepted that D's get passes that R's don't.
And...
So had they known that, the "journalist" should have asked him questions about his FBI investigation?
What are you implying?
Apparently, even the group that alerted the FBI isn't even sure the source is credible:
Still, Sloan raised concerns about the credibility of the source, saying she is "increasingly su ious" about the alleged facts in the case.
"He refused to ever be contacted by us by phone," she said. "It's really easy to make a lot of allegations. ... Who knows ... if that's even a real person."
Why would he know anything about that? Shouldn't the journalist ask the FBI?
Do you think the FBI keeps Bob Menendez up to date on the investigation?
So because the source isn't credible, the "journalist" should not have asked him anything on it?What are you implying?
Apparently, even the group that alerted the FBI isn't even sure the source is credible:
Still, Sloan raised concerns about the credibility of the source, saying she is "increasingly su ious" about the alleged facts in the case.
"He refused to ever be contacted by us by phone," she said. "It's really easy to make a lot of allegations. ... Who knows ... if that's even a real person."
So not only is the MSM not biased but they shouldn't follow up on leads or get direct quotes when what?
The FBI is involved?
It's a politician?
It's a Democrat
???
I don't know? I also don't know why that is funny. If the "journalist" is doing a story on the event, then yes. If the "journalist" is doing an interview with (D) Bob Menendez, then sure why not. Get the quote from the FBI. Then get a quote from (D) Menendez.Why would he know anything about that? Shouldn't the journalist ask the FBI?
Do you think the FBI keeps Bob Menendez up to date on the investigation?
If the case goes anywhere (which it sounds like it won't given the shadiness of the witness), then the media should definitely ask him about. but for now, nobody knows nothing really, so what could you possibly ask the senator except whether he did it or not?
This is like saying Barry should continually answer questions about him being a Muslim or born in Kenya.So because the source isn't credible, the "journalist" should not have asked him anything on it?
The journalist didn't ask, MSM bias!
What are you implying?What are you implying?
Apparently, even the group that alerted the FBI isn't even sure the source is credible:
Still, Sloan raised concerns about the credibility of the source, saying she is "increasingly su ious" about the alleged facts in the case.
"He refused to ever be contacted by us by phone," she said. "It's really easy to make a lot of allegations. ... Who knows ... if that's even a real person."
A politician should not be asked questions when he is accused of a crime against children?
This is like saying Barry should continually answer questions about him being a Muslim or born in Kenya.
The journalist didn't ask, MSM bias!
that makes no sense. Which since you are protecting a democrat does make sense. Being a muslim is not a crime. FTR
because this is a non-story until proven it is?
Some dude posts a video of some chick saying she slept with <xxxxxx> when she was underage and now <xxxxxx> needs to answer questions about it???
That's pretty ironic. This thread reeks of butthurt about not getting the news the way you want them.
they should, but right now all we have is a dubious "source" making allegations.
Journalist didn't ask a question. Nothing to see here.
So the journalist must decide the level of credibility of the source before asking a question?
But being Kenyan and US President is...
that makes no sense. Which since you are protecting a democrat does make sense. Being a muslim is not a crime. FTR
I've yet to vote for a Democrat and as a matter of fact, I didn't vote for Menendez when I had a chance (he's actually Senator from NJ)... but keep the echo chamber going
How dare the MSM media not ask about some obscure internet video! Bias!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
