[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Firebot

There's a pretty clear attempt by Liberal apologists (yes iggy_oi I will call a spade a spade) to dismiss the Han Dong allegations by dismissing Global's source off as it it was some bloke off the street that went around to sell a fake story rather than a legitimate source with privileged direct access to confidential info that these news organizations could not get a copy of to validate.

I haven’t seen someone struggle with differentiating opinions from facts to this degree in quite some time. Calling a spade a spade only works when you factually define what the spade in question is, otherwise(and in fairness typically this is the case) that saying is just being used as a means to attempt to add credibility to one’s opinion.

It makes sense for people to question anonymous sources, especially when they haven’t seen any hard evidence and there are potentially political motives at play. Doing that in itself doesn’t make them an apologist, nor does it in any way absolve the liberals from facing any scrutiny. Now if the facts and evidence actually do come out and it turns out that these allegations are true and those same people are saying things like “well it’s not bad because of reasons x, y or z” or “what about Harper, or Duffy, or etc etc?” then I’d be inclined to agree with you should you make that assessment.

With all of that being said, even you would have to admit that there’s clearly some questionable things being reported as being said by these sources that rightfully so should at the very least make people skeptical about the legitimacy and motives of these sources. Specifically I would point to the allegation that Dong said releasing the two Michael’s would make the CPC look good. Now I’m not going to say that he didn’t say that because frankly neither you or I know whether or not he did, but I can say that for the life of me I can’t figure out how anybody could possibly have reached that conclusion and acted on it. If you have a credible explanation for how the liberals getting the Michael’s released earlier would have somehow made the CPC look good I’d be happy to hear it.

This is clearly not the end of the story no matter how some have been desperately trying to brush it under the carpet almost immediately. I wouldn't be surprised to see a new type of leak on the transcripts at an opportune time in the next few weeks (again, assuming the allegations are correct and that the Liberals were not honest in their 'no actionable evidence' claim ).

Credit where it’s due, at least you’re pumping your breaks a little bit here and starting to more clearly indicate when your statements are based on an assumption. Progress is good, I hope you keep it up.