Illuminattile said:
What makes you say that? Smoking Gun is almost always reliable.
Man, I am not going to turn this into a report, but I am sure I can take a lot of shots (excuse the pun) at The Smokig Gun. I won't bother to go through the tons of documents they have.
I'll give one more reason to not trust them all the time. In one document, they say that Michael Jackson paid the 1993 accuser $15 mil. In another document, on the same website, it says $20 mil. What's even worse is that both documents are supposed to be the same meaning that both are supposed to be the original agreement. But how's that possible? That's ludicrious. Either way, at least one of them has to be BS or both are.
Very plausible. The same website contradicting itself.
My problem with The Smoking Gun is that it is a business, and at times, it gets in way over its head. It operates for the sake of profit, and may very well do what's not necessarily "honest" to make its money.
PS: This post is relevant to the thread because it attacks the credibility of the source that was cited for the story.