http://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2023/04/05/cnn-complains-that-varietys-hit-piece-on-don-lemon-relies-on-anonymous-sources/
As Twitchy reported earlier, Variety is out with a new story about CNN’s Don Lemon that paints him as a misogynist and a diva.
Hmmm ... maybe Jeffrey Toobin could give Don Lemon some helpful advice?
Variety (@Variety) ~ Don Lemon’s Misogyny at CNN, Exposed: Malicious Texts, Mocking Female Co-Workers and ‘Diva-Like Behavior’
http://variety.com/2023/tv/news/cnn-don-lemon-misogyny-history-nikki-haley-1235574286/
Some who read the piece can’t believe CNN kept Lemon on while purging other on-air talents. Lemon even hosted a talk show on CNN+ for the month that it lasted. They pulled him from his prime time slot and stuck him on the morning show, though.
CNN has responded to the piece about Lemon, noting that Variety relies on anonymous sources and unsubstantiated claims from 15 years ago.
Jon Nicosia (@NewsPolitics) ~ @CNN responded to the Don Lemon disaster: "The Variety story provides no actual proof, and instead relies on anonymous sources and unsubstantiated claims from 10 to 15 years ago. CNN is unable to corroborate the alleged accounts." -- WAIT. I thought we 'Believe all Women'??
No, no, no ... you're talking about Democrats, here ... remember their mantra - "Rules for thee, but not for me."
That reminded a lot of people of CNN’s coverage of Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s hearings, where they went through his high school yearbook to determine that he spiked the punch at parties and arranged gang bangs.
Pradheep J. Shanker (@Neoavatara) ~ Remember when CNN televised account after account about Brett Kavanaugh from THIRTY years before, without a single substantiated claim?
Ah ... good times.
Brad Slager: Just Watching Walls Moving Out (@MartiniShark) ~ Funny, when it was Brett Kavanaugh facing far less valid claims which were far older CNN spent weeks delving into THOSE claims. Now? #BelieveAllWomen has now become #BitchesBeTrippin'.
Sour Patch Lyds (@sourpatchlyds) ~ Wait, like CNN does? 🤔
Rusty (@rustyweiss74) ~ Not only that, but CNN publishes stories everyday relying on anonymous sources and unsubstantiated claims. They wouldn't have any content if it weren't for anonymous sources. But y'all are supposed to believe THOSE.
IronTarkus (@FirstIronTarkus) ~ So the story is as credible as anything @CNN airs.
Jon Awesome-Best Life (@RealStarMan) ~ I heard the sources were pulled into a black hole.
"Into," or "out from"?
Red Dot in a Blue Dot in a Red State (@reddotaustintx) ~ Since when were anonymous sources and unsubstantiated claims a problem for @CNN journalists?
Ian (@IanLysaght) ~ BREAKING: Anonymous sources, suddenly bad.
Marty (@nysportsfan1364) ~ There go the goalposts again!
Robert Smith (@RSmithInc) ~ Funny how that works.
Live by hypocrisy, die by hypocrisy.
Northsider2U (@CHI_guy08 ) ~ “No actual proof.” Then why did they run with the #Trump/Russia hoax like it was all facts? 🤔
Ultra-Extreme Deplorable Petr (@PragueArtist) ~ Cowards. Afraid of being called a racist or homophobe.
commonsense (@commonsense258 ) ~ CNN goes out of their way to protect a misogynistic man while punishing women who complain about misogyny at their network.
Who are you going to believe? Vanity Fair, which used anonymous sources, or CNN, which doesn’t deny any of it and only says it’s “unable to corroborate the alleged accounts”? CNN is unable to corroborate a lot of its stories; what’s different about this?
| 
