Sources: Sources I like are wrong about some things. Sources I don't like are occasionally correct. One has to look past who is giving the information. The giver of information usually only gives that which agrees with the bias of the presenter. Good to keep in mind, but that isn't a valid reason to disagree.
Sources: Sources I like are wrong about some things. Sources I don't like are occasionally correct. One has to look past who is giving the information. The giver of information usually only gives that which agrees with the bias of the presenter. Good to keep in mind, but that isn't a valid reason to disagree.
As it stands the Russian claim doesn't present any supporting evidence though there may be some available that wasn't given. Rationally, this would not really be given any thought at all until one hears the response of the accused. "Misinformation" is not denial. It feels like a dodge and adds credence to the accusation. No response would have been better.
Sources: Sources I like are wrong about some things. Sources I don't like are occasionally correct. One has to look past who is giving the information. The giver of information usually only gives that which agrees with the bias of the presenter. Good to keep in mind, but that isn't a valid reason to disagree.
As it stands the Russian claim doesn't present any supporting evidence though there may be some available that wasn't given. Rationally, this would not really be given any thought at all until one hears the response of the accused. "Misinformation" is not denial. It feels like a dodge and adds credence to the accusation. No response would have been better.