Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Who else is skeptical about Louise Mensch as a source? (Original Post) tenderfoot May 2017 OP
I'll throw her under the bus as soon as she's proven wrong. NightWatcher May 2017 #1
I agree, but lately they have been correct padfun May 2017 #2
Put me down for skeptical BannonsLiver May 2017 #3
Yawn. A grain of salt doesn't hurt, but she has been reliable on TrumpRussia. Bernardo de La Paz May 2017 #4
Put me down for highly trustworthy Qutzupalotl May 2017 #5
Put me down for highly trustworthy as well. PEJ27 May 2017 #10
Not me SonofDonald May 2017 #6
She seems to have some good sources on this Jarqui May 2017 #7
I'm sure you'll supply us with an objective and valid reason for your mistrust, yes? LanternWaste May 2017 #8
It is reasonable to to suspect that Mensch is an intelligence agency asset. nt PufPuf23 May 2017 #9
She cc's FBI on tons of her tweets PEJ27 May 2017 #11

NightWatcher

(39,343 posts)
1. I'll throw her under the bus as soon as she's proven wrong.
Thu May 11, 2017, 03:24 PM
May 2017

There are people in the know who are reaching out using people like her and Palmer to anonymously get info out.

padfun

(1,786 posts)
2. I agree, but lately they have been correct
Thu May 11, 2017, 03:25 PM
May 2017

Louise and Claude have been talking about two Grand Juries for two weeks now, and it finally came out in the MSM that those Grand Juries are active.

So they can be very good sources but be careful because they will talk before verifying.

Bernardo de La Paz

(49,001 posts)
4. Yawn. A grain of salt doesn't hurt, but she has been reliable on TrumpRussia.
Thu May 11, 2017, 03:30 PM
May 2017

Her other stuff can get weird sometimes, but she has been straight arrow and hard nosed about TrumpRussia.

Qutzupalotl

(14,308 posts)
5. Put me down for highly trustworthy
Thu May 11, 2017, 03:30 PM
May 2017

due to her connections and track record. My only beef with her is she seems too quick to label her critics as Russian spies. But on the other hand, Team Deza has been swarming her lately, and for good reason: she's getting too close to the truth.

But I place Claude Taylor (@truefactsstated) above her in a class by himself. He knew about the grand juries in NY and Eastern District of VA well before MSM got wind of it (or could double-source it).

 

PEJ27

(5 posts)
10. Put me down for highly trustworthy as well.
Thu May 11, 2017, 04:32 PM
May 2017

She and Claude and Rick Wilson and John Schindler along with a bunch of techs and supporting cast have all been right so far. Like someone else said, if you follow her on Twitter, be mindful that she will throw out a "what if?" when she's onto a good thought so that's led some to think she's CRAZY. But then she researches and uses an army of experts and sources to prove herself right before she blogs it on patribiotics. And then she's CRAZY GOOD and weeks to months ahead of mainstream media.

Jarqui

(10,123 posts)
7. She seems to have some good sources on this
Thu May 11, 2017, 03:59 PM
May 2017

as do Claude Taylor and John Schindler for example.

I'm more cautious about how they try to join their dots. But they've got a lot of specific facts right before others in the media ...

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
8. I'm sure you'll supply us with an objective and valid reason for your mistrust, yes?
Thu May 11, 2017, 04:04 PM
May 2017

Regardless of irrelevant thanks and happy weekdays, I'm sure you'll supply us with an objective and valid reason for your mistrust, yes?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Who else is skeptical abo...