Keith:
Perhaps you should research who The Crux and Stansfield Research are before you post on line!
Oh yes, The post about Hillary Lying for 12 minutes was brought to you by something called Anonymous. Now that is a very valid source! Lol
Enjoy your fantasies. Lol
Franchi
Franchi, good points. In the intelligence community, intelligence reports always carry a comment concerning the source (while being very careful to preserve his--or her--identity). Something like: "Source has excellent access to the information in question and has reported reliably in the past." Not that you can't get good information from a questionable source. Hey, even Keith gets things right once in awhile.
But when I was training intelligence analysts, I always stressed the need to consider the source when they were evaluating information. I can come up with sources claiming that at least half a dozen different people killed JFK. All coming from "nonfiction" books or articles.
When it comes to politicians lying, this election cycle likely tops every one I can recall. I expect I could come up with 12 minutes' worth of Trump taking different positions on just one subject. And there's no difficulty at all finding different positions he's held on gun rights.
This time around, I think the only way to cast a vote for president for someone who hasn't indulged in serial lying would be to check the "none of the above" box.