Patribotics seems like a rather dubious source to be posting on DU.

[Gravitycollapse]

There's a lot of completely unsubstantiated claims made on the site and I think it's a disservice to DU to post questionable news sources without alerting the community beforehand.

Patribotics appears to be nothing more than a newly minted, anonymous Wordpress blog with a very specific political agenda. Just because that agenda sounds appealing to DU members does not mean it is a reputable source.

[canetoad]

1. You'd hope

That DUers would be excercising a bit of judgement and discernment. If only Mensch reports; take with big grain of salt. If both Mensch and Taylor - check out more sources. You know the process.

Mensch has been correct a couple of times on big things. Many of her posts are hyperventilatingly, earnestly, just wrong. Still, she shouldn't be written off for that. Discernment, validating and checking sources.

[Gravitycollapse]

2. Mensch's judgement is too questionable to be trusted.

She believes in some truly unbelievable garbage that no sane or un-bought person would agree with. There's a difference between problematic speculation and outright bullshitting. Seems like Mensch has traversed that gap.

[pnwmom]

3. I remember when many DUers were heaping scorn on

the Steele dossier, and saying Buzzfeed should never have published it.

And then other sources began to confirm much of the info in the dossier (significant parts are not possible to confirm or deny); and then it turned out the FBI took it so seriously that they considered paying Steele to work directly for them.

So we are in new territory now, where the MSM often seem to be months behind the information curve. (As they were with the FISA warrants.)

I think people should be able to make up their own minds. And when they read Mensch, they should pay attention. She carefully makes distinctions between information that her sources have given her and she is reporting as true -- versus her own opinions and speculation. When she says she's just guessing about something, then believe her. When she says she's reporting something, then see if other people are reporting the same thing. She was a conservative British MP so she has different sources than Claude Taylor, a Democrat who worked under Clinton. When they both are hearing the same thing, that may be significant.

I think people on DU are capable of analyzing these issues and these discussions shouldn't be banned from this site. If you aren't interested in these topics then don't read the threads. Don't try to censor other people unless they break other rules (not supporting Democrats, not using hate speech, etc.)

[Gravitycollapse]

4. Investigative journalists who "just guess" are not investigative journalists. They're liars.

Just because something might become true after the fact does not mean the person is secretly a prophet or has some inside knowledge. When you make a large number of uninformed guesses on a subject you might know well you are bound to get a few guesses right.

[pnwmom]

5. She is capable of wearing two hats. People who read her should pay attention

to which hat she is wearing. When she's just giving her opinion, she'll tell you. When she's passing along information from a source that she has reason to trust, then she'll tell you.

She wasn't guessing about the FISA warrant in October on the Alfa bank server and US persons. The BBC and the Guardian, using separate sources, were able to confirm her report.

[melman]

6. Right

Like in this interview where she explains there's a difference between what she believes and what she reports.


In other words, sometimes she's reporting and sometimes just telling you what she believes.

@ 3:45

The only problem is that's utterly ridiculous.

[Gravitycollapse]

8. She genuinely has zero credibility.

It's disturbing that people trust her on this site.

[womanofthehills]

49. Louise Mensch has over a quarter of a million followers because she is getting it right

Louise says it, than it takes days or months for MSM to say it. Why are you so against a person working so hard against Trump?

[MineralMan]

50. No. She has followers because she writes what they want to read.

There is a huge difference.

[sweetloukillbot]

52. This

[MineralMan]

53. Yup.

[womanofthehills]

57. No. She has followers because she gets the info before MSM.

Civil Rights Lawyer - Andrew Laufer





NYT and WaPo basically repeated the story she posted first.





and she seems pretty tech savvy:

[Ninsianna]

54. I think it's genuinely disturbing how some people have been attacking her

not her sources, not what she's saying, but her personally for reasons of their own.

It's disturbing that people think that personal attacks on sources are acceptable, and also that anyone on this site is simply following her without thought.

We're paying attention the facts, and not attacking the messenger out of ignorance or because she says things we don't like about people we do, or vice versa.

[Gravitycollapse]

7. Placing the onus on consumers to fact check news is why Fox News exists.

There are ethical considerations in journalism. One of those considerations is ensuring that claims you report on are factually based, not conjured from thin air.

Mensch is a conspiracy theorist who believes in things that are so unbelievable that they demand proof. Without that proof, her claims can be dismissed as mere speculation. Conspiracy theorists don't have any authority to report on the news and I sure as hell am not going to believe them when they continue to make outlandish claims over and over again. Just because they occasionally say something true doesn't negate all the BS they spout.

[pnwmom]

9. As i said, she herself distinguishes between personal speculation/belief

vs. information that her sources have given her and she believes is trustworthy.

No one is suggesting that you SHOULD accept her speculation.

But anyone who dismissed her report of the FISA warrant turned out to be wrong. And the Dems who refused to believe her claims that Comey, despite his mistakes, was pursuing a real investigation, were also wrong. She was right that he was one of the good guys; many of us have only realized that since DT fired him.

[Gravitycollapse]

11. Principled, real journalists do not speculate on outlandish claims.

Putin did not murder Andrew Breitbart to replace him with Bannon. The New Years massacre in Istanbul was not a Russian false flag.

Believe her BS at your own peril.

[brush]

32. We all get that..."believe her at our own peril". We either believe or not, that is our business...

no one else's.

[mhw]

42. You know that for certain?

Seems a fair question

[mhw]

41. If everything posted online had to be absolute truth, we'd have a different Prez.

Anyone must take what they read & know that some postings are indeed just guesses. Maybe for an emotionl reaction or maybe due to lack of research.
Who knows.
But asking that one journo be held to higher standards than all others without knowing why her followers have stood with her is concerning.

I'm sticking with independent journalists.

[Silver Gaia]

10. +1

[triron]

27. !00% agree!

[mhw]

35. Yup. But you aren't going to hear any apologies from her discreditors

I take her & her global sources as more credible than, oh say the TV 24/7 & most often linked to for believable news. Their 24/7 pure lovefest reality show coverage of DTrump's campaign proived how reliable & spot on their 'BREAKING' News Coverage actually is.

I'll take what Indy journalists have to offer before I'll ever trust our Murdoch Media again.
Talk about uncredible news, huh?

TV news courted the misery that we now exist under. Trump.
Yippie for credible news.

I'll take my news from independents before corporate anyday.

Knowing what we know about Murdoch Media, why should that too be allowed on DU?
They went all-in for Trump. Afterall.


K& R your post pnwmom

[GliderGuider]

47. She was also right about Assange, Snowden and Greenwald being agents of influence

She picked up on that before many of us because she is strongly pro-IC. When she's wrong, as she was when she said Weiner's sexting target was not an under-age girl, she goes to great lengths to correct her own record - publicly.

The thing that causes most legitimate skepticism is that what she reports from her sources is so outlandish as to defy credibility. And yet, this whole situation is so outlandish that even the truth seems unbelievable.

That goes for legitimate skepticism. There are other forms of skepticism that seem to reach a crescendo here on the weekends, that aren't legitimate at all.

[eShirl]

12. I, for one, am able to read something without believing it. n/t

[emulatorloo]

45. Lol

[Dr Hobbitstein]

13. It's run by a conservative conspiracy theorist

Who had terrible things to say about Black Lives Matter, believes Russia killed Brietbart, and is a supporter of Brexit...
Yet she's worshipped (and her terrible stances are even defended) by some here because she has bad (mostly false or unproven) claims about Trump. She was correct ONCE. That's not a good track record. Stopped watches are correct more often

[kentuck]

14. It is rather disconcerting to see so many DU'ers...

...fall for fake news.

[PDittie]

18. Not just here...

https://www.vox.com/world/2017/5/19/15561842/trump-russia-louise-mensch

[demmiblue]

19. Read that yesterday... really good article.

Mensch seems a wee bit paranoid.

Yesterday, I learned that Bernie is a Russian agent of influence:



After reading the comments to her on Twitter, I found that some of her followers are just as

[Historic NY]

29. The thing they all have in common is $$$...

including VOX. all competing to sell the best story to get subscriptions.

[cwydro]

37. Lot of gullible people here.

I've seen DUers believe stories that are obviously satire.

[SonofDonald]

15. And 45 keeps saying trust me, believe me.

I'll believe what I want, from who I want to, and recently, I ran out of salt.

I go on the best informed opinion, but faux news isn't one of them, as it seems lately a lot of her speculation has come true or will be soon, there is enough corroborating evidence to believe she's close enough, and lately with the MSM playing catch up hourly I'm confident I understand some of what's going on.

And I could care less what she said in the past, it has zero bearing on what she's been right on recently.

Wasn't the "Joe" guy on msnbc a died in the wool 43 apologist?, now he's quoted as standing against 45 big time, makes it obvious that you can be wrong, and still be right wouldn't you think?.

But why am I wasting my time with you?, after all you're only the 30th poster with the same message I've read here lately.

[mhw]

43. Thank You. Every time her name is posted online her clicks increase.

Maybe a % of them are reading what she writes & agreeing more with her outing of Trump & Putin than waiting for Murdoch Media to present their edited version.

for indy journos ..Mensch & Taylor

[MineralMan]

16. Brace yourself. You're about to get slammed.

[GliderGuider]

17. Shrug.

We'll read and post what we think is important and/or interesting. What I don't get is the nannies trying to talk us out of doing that.

[Madam45for2923]

23. Concerted effort to discredit someone and stop others from reading, makes me suspect

they protest too much.

As you posted: I will continue to read and post what I find important &/or interesting.

[womanofthehills]

51. Agreed - why pick on Louise Mensch?

I read Louise and Claude every day and she broke the recent stories posted in WaPo and NYT this week.

[hrmjustin]

20. Personally I don't consider it a reputable site.

[sarah FAILIN]

21. Nobody is forcing you to read it.

You can't deny she gets a lot right.

[emulatorloo]

22. Curious, where were you when DU'ers were citing Breitbart and Fox uncritically?

uncritically in GDP 2016?

Fwiw, I read Mench with a big old grain of salt. A fair amt of things she's said have later been confirmed by mainstream press. Other things have not been.

I don't beleive most DU'ers are as gullible as you believe they are.

[Madam45for2923]

24. Thanks for the sincere heads up & concern & advice.

Back to reading/following whoever I damn please.

[mhw]

44. Precisely.

Thanks

[L. Coyote]

60. First, where do we bill for the wasted minutes?

[sarisataka]

25. Some folks like to escape

reality and read fantasy fiction

[Mr. Ected]

26. No one can be trusted it seems

Rachel reported last night that many mainstream media sources (WaPo, NYT, Politico, CNN, etc.) have reported that Comey went to Rosenstein shortly before he was fired by Trump, asking for more resources for the investigation into Trump-Russia collusion. The DOJ is staunchly denying that this took place.

So who is telling the truth? If DOJ is intentionally misleading Congress by misstating the course of events that took place at that time, they're complicit in the coverup. If they are, however, telling the truth....then how did so many media outlets get it wrong?

Things be cray, alright.

[Eliot Rosewater]

28. Any source that encourages me to believe the worst traitors in our history might go

down for their treason, gives me hope and keeps me from self inflicted harm, even if not true

It is so hard to live among so many Americans who like it when their pretend strong leader is a traitor.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

30. Ditto!

[MedusaX]

31. While your dedication as a self-appointed DU chaperone is without question,

you motivation is not.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

I trust that you will respect the individual rights of all DU users, yours included, to draw one's own informed conclusions based on data of one's own choosing.

Thanks, again, for your continued support & demonstration of RESPECT for every individual's :

• FREEDOM to explore all information sources...

• RIGHT to evaluate all information & determine VALIDITY and RELIABILITY for themselves

• COGNITIVE CAPABILITY to draw their own conclusions

• INALIENABLE RIGHT to resist peer pressure should they choose to do so ...

[Madam45for2923]

39. Medusa this is an awesome post. A Manifesto of sorts!

• FREEDOM to explore all information sources...

• RIGHT to evaluate all information & determine VALIDITY and RELIABILITY for themselves

• COGNITIVE CAPABILITY to draw their own conclusions

• INALIENABLE RIGHT to resist peer pressure should they choose to do so ...

[mhw]

33. Lol. Well since Bannon has rallied his alt-right maniacs to swarm

..Mensch & Taylor's twitter accts discrediting and name calling, which is their go-to method of silencing, then I will be all in to support Louise & Claude Taylor.

They have been correct more than not .
I have read their work for sometime and I see nothing about either that gives credence to your statement.
However our opinions are ours.

I 'll continue to defend independent journalists who are certainly speaking out as to the bs of Putin & Trump in their coup on our Gov't & its people.

Thank you

[flotsam]

34. My what an original thread...

except for the other dozen guys who are driven to point out how stupid we are to follow her by posting about it several times EVERY STINKING DAY. You are acting smug and superior and convincing no one of anything. But please do carry on because when you continue posting this several times a day you convince people this may not be just your passion to help this less mentally able but perhaps a paying gig.

[mhw]

38. Yup. Mensch sure has hit a wtf moment for Bannon.

Makes me want to support her even MORE.

[lunasun]

36. IMO it should not be in late breaking newsLBN is it more analysis but

If listed under the editorials & analysis forum , then some of the info could be considered ct which is restricted.
Nothing wrong with the general discussion group postings to discuss it.
But yeah it not news , and should not be highlighted as a news breakthrough by any stretch.
Who is cashing in on the followers and all those clicks ?

[mhw]

40. Who's cashing in on news from MSM?

Who?
Times Mag today has a article that was actually on Mensch's blog a month ago.

Its not the first time this has occurred.
So maybe Times is actually Later BN.

I don't see the issue with any journo who's sources exist within the "5 EYES" nations providing info to readers, as it comes to them.

Besides MSM TV News is boring. Same headline sent out on every channel as "Breaking News".

Louise & Taylor are fast paced & the followers are interesting in their deducting of info.

I'm sticking by Louise & Claude.

[MineralMan]

55. And I'm sure they appreciate your support.

Did you know you can donate over on Louise's blog. They take PayPal. I'll bet you'd get a thank you page displayed if you did that. Suitable for framing.

[mhw]

58. And what is wrong with that?

Indy journos haven't the corporate billions to support them.
I guess its the same as any candidate or cause asking for contributions.
I don't see your point in the statement here.
Bye..

[Denzil_DC]

65. Mensch has been on the Murdoch payroll for a long time, and is married to Peter Mensch.

Google him. He's managed a bunch of big-name bands, including Metallica and many others.

She may class as an "indy journo" in some sense when she's not writing her million-selling "chick-lit" novels or for Heat Street or whatever other paid outlet she's managed to find, but her family's not exactly struggling for money.

Which has no bearing on her credibility or anything else. I think those of us who have reservations about her for various reasons have piped up often enough that it's not a discussion worth having any more.

[lunasun]

61. When I Go to https://patribotics.blog, there are commercial ads . Maybe if you donate you do not

get the ads similiar to DU star members, but I bet most people reading that This just in > breaking news > Sessions will be arrested tonight ! Click to read and probably are not donors and click with advertising presented to them and blog paid

[stevenleser]

48. Not even close to the most dubious source by far

If we are going to go on a crusade against dubious sources being posted here there are a bunch of sites that would need to come first

[L. Coyote]

59. Louise Mensch has been a stalward and ahead of the media curve on #TrumpRussia.

Bravo for independent journalists, or all this could be swept under the carpet out of view.

She told everyone before we voted! Where were you on election day? What did you report on? Links please.

FBI has FISA warrant for Trump secret server connected to Russia.

[grantcart]

62. So having one valid tweet out of 100 makes her a reliable source?

She also stated 7 days ago that a sealed indictment has already been issued against Trump. If you read LeCarre or any other writer who actually worked as an IO then you know that the first step in creating a "useful idiot" to promote your false information is to feed them some good information. You have fallen for the simplest trick in intelligence, if you want people to fall for bad information you have to give them some taste of the good stuff first.

You can either follow Mensch or Nance but not both. Here is what Nance thinks:

The "Real Deal" aka Malcolm Nance said it the best:

“She’s batshit crazy, OK?” Nance told The Daily Beast. “She is a fruit loop of the highest order.”



1) They make the leap that since she had an early breaking lead that everything that follows is gold. She got a tip about the Alfa bank connection that was confirmed by other sources within a few days. Since then however almost all of her "revelations" including that Trump is considering resigning or that Trump has already been secretly indicted remain laughably unconfirmed.

2) Real news people don't try to explain the motives of the people that are providing information. Mensch attributes her flood of revelations to the fact that the international intelligence community loves her because she stood up for them when no one else did. I have known 6 active or former intelligence officers, 3 for DIA and 3 for the CIA. One was a professor, two were in my language classes and 3 I worked with when I had some overlapping work (very slightly overlapping). They were all different types of people but the one thing that none of them had was sentimentality. When she talks about the sentimental way that IO hold her in high regard it is clearly what she thinks of herself.

3) Her fans think that because she was one of the first to talk about the existence of the Steele dossier that this somehow shows that she is well connected. It actually shows the opposite. The dossier was originally a product for the Bushes and then for the Democrats. Over that time period there were literally hundreds of people who were aware of it, including dozens of news people. None of the news people didn't want to go public until they could confirm some elements of it. Mensch tweeted when she first heard about it and it shows that she is a rumor monger who might get a lead here and there but will rush to get it out before she can confirm it.

4) The "Real Deal" aka Malcolm Nance said it the best:

“She’s batshit crazy, OK?” Nance told The Daily Beast. “She is a fruit loop of the highest order.”

5) If you are still a fan of Mensch then let me leave you with this question

If she is so good at digging in and getting sources and she is so committed to revealing the truth then why isn't she digging and revealing what is going on with the other great bureaucracy, Fox News? There are firings, revelations and breaking news stories at Fox but she isn't hearing anything.

I wonder if that is because she works for Rupert Murdoch?

[L. Coyote]

63. Whoot, whoot ... ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT being considered by Judiciary Committee

Link to tweet

[grantcart]

64. You are aware that she is tweeting breaking news

from her own blog, lol.

She is her own great source. But if you like it you can go to the blog and make a contribution.

Again, she works at a place exploding with breaking news and can't seem to find a single breaking story about Rupert Murdoch, her boss.

[L. Coyote]

66. You are out of date. Mensch is no longer leading News Corp.'s Heat Street

News Crop. is a massive entity and many people work in different parts of it. Do you go after all of them?