DEI Ruins EVERYTHING: Check Out How Woke 'Velma' Season 2 Updated Hex Girls...
Three Year Letterman HILARIOUSLY Mocks Protester Tackle in Epic Takedown
This Ain't It … Readers Sound Off on the Onion's First (GROSS) Article...
Donald Trump Dared to Speak Prompting a Pearl Clutching Daniel Dale Fact Check
'Jews Fight Back' - Jon Lovitz Spells it Out For Antisemites
Performative Northwestern Seder Roundly Decried for Taking Place on the Wrong Day
School Is in Session: Guy Learns the HARD WAY After Asking X Users...
AOC Visits Columbia 'Encampment' One Day After Released Video of Leader Calling for...
Wait, What? Julia Ioffe: College Presidents are TERRIFIED of the GOP. Shutting Down...
Incredible! Tornado Chaser Captures Stunning Footage of Nebraska Twister
We Regret to Inform You the 'Experts' Are at It Again: They Say...
Biden's INSANE Proposed Capital Gains Tax Would WRECK Economy
J.K. Rowling Takes Victory Lap and Applauds David Bell, Tavistock Gender Clinic Whistleblo...
You Don't Despise the Media Enough: CNN Omits MAJOR Bit of Info on...
Speaker Johnson Takes Charge of Academia's Radicalism Problem

'Overhyping' in progress: Jim Acosta's single anonymous sourced story on Sarah Sanders is top news at CNN

Earlier today, CNN reported, via Jim Acosta and a single anonymous source, that President Donald Trump is “very unhappy” with Sarah Sanders and how she handled questions Wednesday on Stormy Daniels. “Sarah gave the Stormy Daniels storyline steroids yesterday,” according to this single anonymous source:

Advertisement

Well, OK. By now we know that sources in the White House have agendas and it’s usually a good idea to take a report like this from a single source with a grain of salt, right?

Or maybe you make it the top story on your website instead:

https://twitter.com/emilyjashinsky/status/971793921046208519

Sigh. Not only that, the actual write-up of the tweet above took 3 people at CNN to complete. The byline includes Jim Acosta and Veronica Stracqualursi, with Kevin Liptak listed as contributing to the report.

Advertisement

As for the source, the online write-up describes him or her as someone “close to the White House,” which could by any of, oh, a few thousand people or so. Maybe for a top billed article like this there should at least be as many sources as reporters before “overhyping” it?

https://twitter.com/emilyjashinsky/status/971794481665191937

Exit question: In the hours since this story was first reported, CNN can’t find a single other source to corroborate it?

***

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement