Funny that DC reporters who have “sources familiar with Trump’s thinking” and “sources” who know play-by-play from the Oval moments after it happens, did not know of Trump’s pending move today.

Or about his Iraq trip

Or Kavanaugh as his choice

They make up these “sources.”
TODAY @kaitlancollins @Kevinliptakcnn @jeffzeleny supposedly know from “sources” how Trump felt this week about Barr. What a joke. Besides, they report here stuff which are common sense about Trump so it is basically a safe guess packaged as if they have sources. Brazen FRAUD!
Odd. @kaitlancollins @Kevinliptakcnn @jeffzeleny R not ashamed of each other to guess Trump “news” and package it as if it is sourced.

Key to spot it:

1) It is common sense for the story to have happened.

2) Makes no diff if true.

3) No follow up events to check it against.
Let’s review a dozen or two stories by @kaitlancollins that were attributed to sources. Note that they have 1, 2 or all 3 components of news that are as good as being made up out of thin air or pulled from a hat yet are packaged as sourced.
First up. This screen grab is of more than 3 weeks into the shutdown and Trump held steady until then. It’s a safe guess that he is not in an inch-giving mood but @kaitlancollins has a “source” for it.
This news has component 2 (irrelevant even if true) and component 3 (there is no later event against which to check it). @jeffzeleny joins @kaitlancollins often in those made up news packaged as sourced.

BTW @jonathanvswan pulls the same joke but he at least also has real stuff.
This news has mostly component 1 (safe guess that it happened). I mean, GOP were holding tight for a few weeks so it is a safe bet that Trump/VP called him to not be scared. They were not going to let this nomination slip away at that point.
No kidding, Collins.
This “sources” news by Collins has component 2 and 3.
It’s a safe bet Trump would fume so why not say a “source” says it? This news has also component 2 and 3. In fact, Kelly served for almost another year a CoS so we never know if it even happened.
This news is irrelevant if it happened (component 2 of made up stories packaged as sourced).
Um ya. Trump fires almost anyone so it is safe to report that Trump will fire Nielsen. BUT note this was a week after the election when the “when not if” talk was seen as days or weeks away. So ya at some point she will be out but 2 months later and Nielson is still there.
THREE sources tell @kaitlancollins? Irrelevant if this story is true and there is no later event against which to check if it happened.

BTW Pruitt left the Admin four months before Sessions.

cc @JayCaruso
Er, 6 months later and Trump pardoned only one person since then.

The tweet by Collins was same day as Alice Marie Johnson was commuted so Collins’ figured Trump is sure heavy into pardoning mode so why not “source” the “news” and to make it more real slap a number onto it?
This news has all three components: Safe guess it happened. Irrelevant if it did happen. No later event against which to check if it indeed happened.
It is common sense that this likely happened. So Collins reports that it did indeed happen and that a “source” says it.

BTW @gabrielsherman pulls the same shtick.
Irrelevant if true and there is no later event against which to check it. = Made up stuff.
Safe bet Trump would fume at Bannon for his comment that Don Jr was “treasonous.” Trump released a statement days earlier against Bannon. Plus what Collins reports here is irrelevant even if true and there is no event against which to check it: All 3 markings of a made up news.
NYT reported that Jared didn’t get clearance so it makes sense that neither did his spouse @IvankaTrump. NYT reprorted that Trump told Kelly to clear Jared so common sense says (and it’s a safe bet) that Trump did the same for Ivanka. Right on cue, Collins has it as a “story.”
CBS is saying for an hour that @SecNielsen is out but @jaketapper and @maggieNYT were caught off guard and their WH-related contacts also don't know, so both of them are playing it safe and are tweeting in a way that is as good as not tweeting anything at all. Read and laugh:
CBS had a scoop but @jaketapper and @maggieNYT had no clue what is flying minutes before Neilson has been pushed out. They both suggested Nielson is possibly not out. They guessed/hedged. Then they pretend to know comments Trump makes in the Oval and within mins of it happening.
5:04 CBS says Nielson meeting DJT to resign.

5:26 @jaketapper tweets her status is unclear

5:45 @maggieNYT tweets per sources the outcome is not clear.

5:49 @jonathanvswan "bingos" Maggie as if he too is read in on this.

6:02 Trump tweets Nielson out!

While Jake, Maggie and Jonathan pretended to have sources who know the play by play in the Oval as it happens, Fox' WH Journo @johnrobertsFox sent a straight forward tweet. Funny that this happened 48 hours after @billmaher's panel whined about FakeNews on Fox.
I think @maggieNYT is of the best-sourced WH Journos, but I think by now she is inflating her sources prowess to keep up with @jonathanvswan et al who have gotten points despite inflating sourcing. At 5:45, Maggie didn't know Nielson's status but by 6:45 she has the deatils? Pls!
DOJ announced 9:40'ish that Mueller will speak. At about 10:30, Journos said that the WH was informed about it last night. Odd that those Journos who pretend to know the play-by-play of within the Oval, did not report this thing until after DOJ announced that Mueller will speak.
Here @peterbakernyt of the NYT reports of how Trump allegedly behaved during/right after the Mueller presser. You don't need sources for it. You don't need to he a plugged-in journo for this. You just need to follow politics and you assume that this possibly happened.
Trump announces that Sanders is leaving the WH at the end of June 2019 to the date (actually, almost to the hour) of @CBSNews reporting a year ago from "sources" that Sanders will leave the WH at the end of 2018.
Media "sources" yesterday said Trump will force the citizenship Q onto the Census via Executive Order. Dem Lawmakers and Lib Activists lashed out. Turned out, the same day, that the EO was to collect info from other sources. Trump backed down but media claimed he is plowing ahead
28/ At some point DNI Coats will be gone. @jonathanvswan says today per 5 sources that Trump is onto this since February. Flashback to July 2018 when Coats ripped Trump on Putin. This is what Swan "sources" told him (which is as good/valid as him making it up on his own):
Another story and more non-info from Swan "sources." There is nothing here that you can't imagine on your own is the case. So why do we need "sources" who tell Swan things which say/add nothing surprising or newsworthy? I guess some of those "sources" and quotes are FAKE!
30/ "CNN HAS LEARNED" that Trump spoke with aides about tomorrow's Mueller appearance reports @kaitlancollins. This is an obvious made up sourced-news with all 3 markings:

A) common sense it happens.

B) makes no diff if it indeed happened.

C) No later event can confirm it.
31/ Is there literally NO ONE at CNN ashamed of Collins' brazen fake-sourced news? The Chyron writers? Producers? Hosts? Anyone with half a brain knows that Trump feels triumphed by the Mueller hearing but Collins has "sources" for it. cc @CNNPR
32/ Today, Swan broke a story and Trump confirmed it hours later. It is accurate scoops like these that makes people think his fake news/sources are also real. He spreads fake sourced/fake news to make it appear that he is more connected than he is, and to generate real sources.
A few days ago, @Acosta had an apparent Fake Sourced news on @RepRatcliffe, and tonight Swan has a Fake Sourced news on Trump's Retweeting that maybe the Clintons got to Epstein.

Both items have all 3 characteristics of made up Source News as explained in the thread 👆🏼
34/ Trump tweeted today AM that later he will announce counter measures on China. This likely meant Trump would tweet new tariffs. In stepped Jonathan Swan to report from "sources" late afternoon that Trump would do it. Trump did it and some think Swan had sources on this guess.
A) Trump tweets at 10:59 AM "I will be responding to China's tariffs this afternoon."

B) Tweeting is how he always announces.

C) Tariffs is his easy stick on China

D) By 4:40 there is only a narrow window for Trump to still respond "this afternoon.

Look at Swan's "sources."
36/ September 7th Saturday eve Trump announced that he had planned and then cancelled Sunday meetings with the Taliban.

Tuesday Sep 10th Trump tweeted that he had asked NSA John Bolton a night before to resign.

Jonathan Swan's Twitter feed did not have any of these items.
11:07 -> Collins tweets the "WH just announced" that Bolton will brief on camera, but no mention that Bolton's firing is imminent.

11:58 -> Trump fires Bolton.

Have this in mind when Collins pretends that she has WH sources who give her real-time play-by-play from the Oval.
38/ The WashPost made up a story on the DNI thinking it is a safe bet/common sense thing to have had happened but the DNI shot it down. Also not that all those with supposed play-by-play knowledge of the Oval did not break anything big on this story in recent week.
I see that @EliStokols @ChrisMegerian @Noahbierman produced a likely fake-sourced item which checks off all three:

A) Common sense to think that this happened.

B) There is no later event against which to check this.

C) Nothing changes even if the reporting/quotes are true.
40/ The tweet below by Haberman follows Trump Blitztweets today at Dems regarding Ukraine. There is nothing in the tweet that anyone sitting in a basement can't think of on their own.
41/ This tweet by @woodruffbets says/informs nothing in the name of an Intel Source. It is as good as anyone on MSNBC or at the DNC saying it, yet Betsy tweets it as and it has 2,141 Retweets and 4,577 Likes in less than an hour.
42/ Gabriel Sherman supposedly knows everything happening at Fox News and in the Oval Office too. But the Shep Smith departure news came today without Sherman's tweeting about it.

I am sure over the weekend he will have sources about "the final 48 hours of Shep Smith at Fox."
Like clock work, Gabriel Sherman who didn't have an advance tweet about Shep Smith's pending leave, had "sources" hours later giving him the back story. BTW did "Murdochs/Fox choose Trump" over Shep or did Fox want Shep to stay? Sherman claims both things 45 minutes apart. Clown.
After major media spun Mulvaney's words on quid-pro-quo/Ukraine today, it is a safe guess that Trump was not happy and it does not matter even if true. Right on cue, @Acosta "is told" that Trump was not happy. Meanwhile, Maggie reports from sources that Trump WAS happy!
I see that @anitakumar01 - a WH reporter for Politico - is doing the same fake sourced stuff as many other WH Journos do (such as Haberman, Sherman, Swan, Acosta and Kaitlin Collins).

See this:
46/ One of the most secure "sourced-news" about the Trump WH is reporting that so and so is on the way out since people indeed fly fast from that place. Another safe but useless news is how unhappy the WH was with a staffer's TV performance. Two Journos are doing it here:
47/ Why attribute this narrative-confirming quote to a source close to power when this quote is as good as Josh making it up on his own to get Retweets, to push a narrative and to pretend being sourced? cc @senatemajldr
Trump tweeted 9:23 PM "something very big has just happened" (likely Baghdadi), yet 2.5 hours later and none of the four who claim to know play-by-play inside the Oval (Haberman, Sherman, Swan and CNN's Collins), tweetet anything about this.

They rarely know real Trump WH news!
The Baghdadi mission started 5:00 PM on Sat, yet hours after Trump tweeted about it (9:23) none of the "sourced" WH Journos had tweeted anything about it. Had they known about it but just wanted to protect the mission (doubt it), they would unload tweets once Trump tweeted.



Here, @Acosta has an alleged quote from a WH official that...

1) Is as good as Acosta making it up.

2) Changes nothing even if it is true. It's Immaterial News.

3) There are no later events against which to check if this quote/news is real.

See how @jabeale calls out Acosta.
Trump met at the White House with the Treasury Secretary and Powell from the Fed today AM. News of it broke AFTER the meeting when the Fed reeased a statement about it. Swan, Haberman, Sherman, and CNN's Collins had no sourced tweets that such a (rare) meeting will take place.
Another of @kaitlancollins' Fake Sourced stories goes bust. 24 hours ago, at 5:03, she tweeted that SecDef Esper raised concerns with the WH regarding Trump's move on Navy SEAL Gallagher. Yet now comes the news that Esper fired the Navy Sec for trying to upstage Trump on this!
Sat AM: Haberman says Navy Sec Spencer threatened to resign.

Sat PM: Spencer denies it.

Sun Afternoon: Spencer is fired.

Sun Eve: Spencer "I resign."

Haherman: My reporting held up.

Yossi: No it didn't and poor CNN Collins tried getting in on the story with a fake add-on.
55/ Here, @michaelcrowley of the NYT pretends that until the Afghan trip the WH was unable to keep secrets but as this👆🏼 thread illustrates: Many big stories of the WH did NOT leak (Kavanaugh for one) and most "sourced" news of the WH is made up/guessed stuff.
WHOA! Gabriel Sherman produces two Fake Sourced news items in one day:

A) Kushner effort to draft @NikkiHaley for VP fizzled; as if Trump was about to drop Pence for 2020.

B) Trump finally agrees that Giuliani is a liability. Er, he is under federal investigation so duh.
Once AGAIN, CNN's Collins has "sources" who tell her something that common sense suggest took place and it is irrelevant if it indeed took place. My guess is there are no sources for any of it! It's made up JUNK because it is safe to do since common sense says that it happened.
I HOPE that some day there will be accountability about this BRAZEN corrupting of journalism where White House reporters make stuff up (about a POTUS) in name of sources and it gets reported by their networks and others as if the reporting and stories are real when it is NOT!
It's a SCAM with many media players in it such as @VanityFair, @nytimes, @CNN and @axios so they won't report such a scam about themselves and most other journos don't want to be black listed, so no one but idiot me is onto this for a year. READ THE THREAD! The evidence is OPEN!
60/ Many people LOL at Trump when he says that Journos make up sources/stories about him, but this thread 👆🏼has DOZENS of examples of Journos making stuff up about Trump while they also don't report in advance many big items coming out of the Oval.
Haberman "sources" said Derek Lyons will become deputy COS. This didn't happen. = Source was clueless. Full stop! But to save face, Haberman then tweeted it may be someone else. No kidding.
Anyway when it was someone else, Haberman's tweets "here is someone else" as if she knew.
62/ Odd that the Journos with supposed sources who are "familiar with Trump's thinking" and who report about off-the-cuff comments that Trump made hours earlier about congressional hearings, did not report on this Oval visit from yesterday.
An hour ago, "sources" told CNN's Collins that Trump will give an address tonight following Iran's strike on a military installation in Iraq. Half hour ago, the WH said on the record that there is no speech tonight. Safe bet guess flopped. Oy!
64/ Swan has you believing that he knows the play by play out of the Ov as it happens. Odd, because he reports now that Trump compiled a list over the last 18 months about the "Deep State." Why did it take 18 months - not 18 minutes - for Swan to know this?
Pete attacked Sanders many times and Pete did not drop out to help Amy. So it is a safe bet that Pete will endorse Biden at some point. Zeleny is safe-guessing a likely outcome but he is reporting it as if he has sources for it. This shtick is usually reserved for Trump.
"I'am told" = made stuff up out right.

"People familiar with Trump's thinking" = a co worker gives an opinion about Trump. I mean, who isn't familiar with his thinking at this time?

"Confirming the NYT's earlier report" = A source is using me/others to push the same story.
67/ Friday night 8:08, Trump tweeted that he is firing Mulvaney. Later Fri and today, Habermam & Swan share the "back" story which says Trump was busy with this Thursday. How did neither of those two, who pretend to know the play by play from the Oval, pre-tweet this news Fri?
68/ Swan reports that Trump is not happy with Wray per sources; days after the Flynn memos were released. It’s common sense that Trump is not happy. To be safe, Swan reports Trump won’t fire Wray. This story is as good as being made up because it makes sense that Trump is angry.
Soon, Haberman and Swan will have reports of sources within the WH who say that @kayleighmcenany performs well on TV for The Audience of One who is very pleased followed by reports weeks later of how angry @realDonaldTrump is that she is outshining him. Use. Rinse. Repeat.
70/ So Jonathan Grifter Swan reproted that the WH was NOT discussing to name ANTIFA a terror org but on the same day, Trump did just that. What does Axios do? Packages it as if Swan was accurate but Trump just changed his mind. No clowns. Swan’s Fake Sourced Reporting was busted!
As this thread illustrates, some Journos pretend to know the play by plays out of the Oval and moments after it happens. Strange, because only now Sunday night, does Haberman reprot that POTUS was taken to the bunker Friday night. Why did it take her 48 hours to know this? Odd.
72/ This sourced quote is not attributed to anyone so it can be any of dozens of people or it can be Swan just making it up since there is no end date to know if it is true; nor does it matter even if it is true. These non-tangible stories by Swan are his staple.
SecDef publically disagrees with a POTUS in a major way. No Admin would be thrilled especially Trump. Right? Obama fired a General for speaking up, but leave it for this SHAMELESS GRIFTER Swan (followed by Sherman) to tweet as if sources are telling him soemthing tangible.
74/ The @jonathanvswan grift is two fold: He likely pads his reputation of having more sources/stories than he really has by writing stories that can’t be checked out; does not matter if they are real and common sense says that it happened, so what’s the risk to say “sources”?
75/ The other benefit of this @jonathanvswan grift is that by having a reputation as a guy plugged in, it encourages real sources with real stories to share it with him (it makes those new sources feel good), so Swam then has a story that shows that he is indeed connected.
76/ In summary: Swan has sources but his total of sources and sources with real stories is likely way lower than what it appears; which is why so many of his stories are slippery as explained above which means that he likely bakes goods and tweets it as real. Wait. There is more:
77/ Because @jonathanvswan’s grift landed him publicity, others in DC are doing the same as tweets of this thread show. This includes @gabrielsherman (of the worst); @kaitlancollins and @Acosta, and @maggieNYT who cultivates real sources but she wanted in on this cheap action.
78/ I am surprised at Haberman. She used to work hard for stories; reach out to people for takes/info and possibly still does it, but so much of her tweeting in the Trump era is the same slippery garbage as Swan: Can’t be checked. Doesn’t matter if true. Safe guessing stories
In this tweet Swan says

A) “Trump is furious about Esper; has been asking for names.” Common sense.

B) “People advised against firing.” It would be huge so of course there will be such advice.

C) Swan hedges on outcome also goes with the safer guess.

Why even tweet?
80/ Trump is furious when his former staffers attack him and Trump tends to attack them in public. This by Swan may have come from Trump directly or it could be that Swam pulled it out of a hat because it is common sense that this is likely the case. From Swan in Sep 2018:
Friday June 5, @TeamTrump had an ad promoting the terms “renewing, restoring” America. Today June 7, Swam scoops that Thursday June 4 the campaign decided to use the term “renewing, restoring.” The ad is out 48 for hours so I guess they decided to use it. What’s the scoop?
Swan on 9/21/18: “A source who has been talking to Prez Trump throughout the Kavanaugh crisis [says] ‘you have no idea’ how hard it has been to keep him from attacking his Supreme Court nominee's accuser.” Common sense Trump would want to tweet and he did. Made up sourced news?
Look at this Swan tweet from 8/18/19: How can we confirm if Trump did or did not expect a resignation letter from then-DNI Deputy Gordon? How is it relevant? “He wasn’t ever going to pick her as acting DNI.” Is this an opinion or sourced? Is anything here sourced or just guessed?
84/ Swan is reporting that current/former WH aides texted him about Trump’s tweet on the 75 year old in Buffalo. Swan has sources so even if this story is true it says/adds nothing to the conversation (not even on a tabloid level) but for Swan to affirm that he has sources.
Everything here by Jonathan Swan of Axios is what people know/think of Trump. For decades, he is reviewing press clippings so it is possible that he dis so during Coronavirus, and who does not know that Trump is dying for rallies? But... Swan has sources to report the obvious. 🤷🏼‍♂️
86/ A reminder that the Journos who supposedly know the play-by-play of this administration, did not tweet this news early today or last night. Time and again those sourced reporters miss actual news but they have loads of speculative, irrelevant news that can’t be confirmed.
“Every insider account of Trump says basically the same thing” which means officials/reporters can make stuff up because it is “exactly who he appears to be in public.” Exactly, so many “sourced” Trump stories reinforce known presumptions so they are as good as being made up.
88/ Anyone can think this. Everyone can make this up. Such an obvious grift.
This by @maggieNYT adds nothing to the conversation. Common sense says that this or a veriation possibly took place. Maggie just reports this safe-bet-that-it-happened in name of sources. I can do the same if this was my grift. No proof that she has sources for this.
90/ Anyone can make up the story here in the name of sources. Note that Alex’s earlier tweet subtweeted Swan who is a master at these intangible sourced stories. We are being had by many “WH Reporters.” Haberman. Acosta. Sherman. Collins (CNN). Now Alex got in on it.
With cases and deaths rising in Florida, it makes it difficult to hold there a large convention event. Right? Safe bet that such an event may be canceled. Right? On cue, @gabrielsherman has “sources” to tell him a safe-bet/common sense thing. Chance is he made up this story!
There is buzz the last few says that anger is growing insdie the WH at Jared. @amber_athey had a story on this. Right on cue, Swan has sources that Trump said the same thing that everyone is anyway saying/thinking. Sourced stories that reinforce a narrative are possibly made up.
93/ Trump tweeted a few weeks ago that he may pardon Stone. Trump also told @seanhannity that he should watch what will happen. On cue, @kaitlancollins has “at least half a dozen sources” that Trump will make a move for Stone. What is she saying that anyone can’t make up?
So... @EmeraldRobinson tweeted Fri at 7:12 pm that Trump spoke with Roger Stone. Instead of crediting Emerald as I saw some WH reproters did, CNN’s Kaitlan Collins tweets at 7:49 that she is told that Trump/Stone have spoken. An attempt to act as if she had another sourced story.
95/ Trump had a mask when he was at Walter Reed. Common sense says that people around Trump pushed him to it. Leave it for 2 CNN’ers to have a quote from a “presidential adviser” to say what a safe guess says happened. Meaning, you can make up the quote ans no one would know.
Maggie tweeted the @parscale shakeup in the campaign two minutes AFTER Trump posted it on Facebook. This move did not happen from one minute to the next. Odd that there were no tweete hours esrier by many Sourced Reporters that this will happen today.
So... @kaitlancollins reports that @parscale did not know until a few hours ago about the demotion. Thast’s what 4-5 PM?

Maybe he did know; maybe he didn’t. So it’s a safe bet to claim via a source that he didn’t know. There is a 50% chance this is true. Irrelevant if it isn’t.
So... @Cernovich has sources. But tonight he was just tweeting common knowledge about Kushner & Pascale. A half hour later, @PeterAlexander reports the same two points but he has it from a “source close to the WH.”

Peter is a WH reporter and getting in on the Sourced News grift.
Reading from prepared remarks (which means it was decided earlier), Trump said he is canceling the GOP convention.

NOT ONE of the Sourced WH Reporters tweeted about it before:

Gabriel Sherman.

How did they miss a tangible story?

👆🏼thread shows why!
100/ At 5:16 @Acosta tweeted a common known thing. Namely, Fauci wont be at the briefing. He was not there the last 2 days so why would he be here today? Acosta sourced this safe guess as “we are told.”

Odd. He was not told about a real news that was announced minutes later?
At the WH briefing today, Fox News pulled away as a video of Portland chaos was shown. Within 2 minutes of this, Axios’ white house reporter claims to have a quote from a WH official sniping at Fox. Within two minutes. You buy it?
102/ POTUS @realDonaldTrump announced fifteen minutes ago a peace deal between the UAE and Israel, yet NOT ONE of the Sourced WH reporters who pretend that they know the minute by minute from the Oval due to their vast sources tweeted about it in advance.
103/ @JeffreyGoldberg claims to have 4 first-hand sources on the Paris 2018 comments by Trump.

If true, wouldn’t Swan/Maggie have reported this the last 30 months?

Goldberg does not have the sourcing he claims to have or Swan/Maggie don’t have their claimed level of sourcing.
Odd that It took 30 months for this would-be explosive story about Trump in Paris to come out from a “white house that leaks like sieve.”

Either this story/level of sourcing is made up or many of the sourced stories about Trump the last 3-4 years 👆🏼are made up.
A WH official told the pool that Trump will announce a drawdown of troops in Iraq/Afghanistan.

This news was not first reported by Journos who pretend to know how Trump feels a half hour after he felt it.

Those “Sourced Reporters” keep missing real Trump/WH news.
/106 @Acosta has sources today (5 days after @TheAtlantic story about veterans/Paris) that “the president was definitely stressed out about this, and saw this as potentially damaging among veterans and military voters.”

Funny that Sourced Acosta did not break the drawdown news.
107/ Get this. AP’s White House reporter @JonLemire suggests to have a source to repeat an exact quote from Trump within a half hour of Trump saying the quote (which does not change anything even if he say it).
You can follow @YossiGestetner.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: