General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I Believe Frankens Accusers Because He Groped Me, Too [View all]There's a difference between being anonymous and a reliable news agency not disclosing the person's identity. We have been told more than enough information to believe this morning's accuser. It's more than obvious that the true believer spin machine stuck on "anonymous" because we know enough that "liar" is not believable... nor is "not serious" or "right-winger". You're left with "DU doesn't know her name" while dodging any conversation regarding whether the reporter and editor are reliable (because they obviously are). Another of the earlier accusers that you would call anonymous was not only known by a Politico reporter, that reporter had been told of the incident at the time that it happened. That's not an "anonymous" source either... it's a source known to the reporter... just not known to DU.
I'm not spinning anything.
You're not spinning anything well... but you're definitely spinning.
Come on... give us a taste of what you'll say if he resigns tomorrow. By implication you've challenged to veracity or sanity of several DUers... a majority of Democratic senators... at least a pair of reporters (and, of course, the victims). How will Franken fare?