@roguePOTUSStaff’s double-bluffing in the age of alternative exaggerations

 By ann summers


“If your mother says she loves you, check it out.”

“One study found that large newspapers’ use of anonymous sources dropped dramatically between 2003 and 2004. The Project for Excellence in Journalism, a research group found use of anonymous sources dropped from 29 percent of all articles in 2003 to just 7 percent in 2004.”
C4vYMtbW8AEqrkg_1_.jpgMilo and his “daddy”

Now that Infowars has decided to serve as the “White House plumber”  proxy in accusing alleged WH staff leakers by name— we could now decide to challenge @roguePOTUSStaff as a news source, or even rank entertainment.

As if giving press credentials to pseudo-journalists like Breitbart and others giving RW pervert hand signs gave them any additional credibility than someone taking the official WH tour. When they go to the WHCA dinner they’ll be the first to be mocked, because rented prom tuxes.

21261034059_d4163861ca_k4The site has been useful primarily as a check on external events and never as a single source although the absence / presence of data was useful during the early days of what now has become Biglygatetm.Because there are now so many twitter sleepers. spoofers, and trolls like NAMiloBLA, it is possible that @roguePOTUSStaff was always compromised, perhaps by Bannon and even staffed sub rosa by Breitbart in terms of authorship.

As indicated earlier it was interesting to get a fragment of new insights on the disaster that is Lord Dampnut’s manor. No one is leaking classified material and it isn’t WikiLeaks.

The website associated with @roguePOTUSStaff at least provides one level of credibility, but as one looks at the tweets and without extensive content analysis, there are some issues that allow us to be entertained, but only by fragmentary “alternative facts”.

The problem of online texts is that they are are always multi-voiced even if an utterance is transcribed just like any dubbed video is never as authentic as unedited reality television (aka actual live news). This heteroglossia is in all digital texts, even the non-novel. Online “journalism” now suffers that fate when very little can be verified and everything can be photoshopped.


“A double bluff is an attempt to deceive someone by telling them exactly what you intend to do when you know that they will assume you are lying.”


real resistance …

Accuracy and standards for factual reporting

  • Reporters are expected to be as accurate as possible given the time allotted to story preparation and the space available, and to seek reliable sources.
  • Events with a single eyewitness are reported with attribution. Events with two or more independent eyewitnesses may be reported as fact. Controversial facts are reported with attribution.
  • Independent fact-checking by another employee of the publisher is desirable.
  • Corrections are published when errors are discovered.
  • Defendants at trial are treated only as having “allegedly” committed crimes, until conviction, when their crimes are generally reported as fact (unless, that is, there is serious controversy about wrongful conviction).
  • Opinion surveys and statistical information deserve special treatment to communicate in precise terms any conclusions, to contextualize the results, and to specify accuracy, including estimated error and methodological criticism or flaws.

  • Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
  • Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
  • Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.
  • Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.
  • Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
  • Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects or victims of sex crimes.
  • Be judicious about naming criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges.
  • Balance a criminal suspect’s fair trial rights with the public’s right to be informed.

journalistic professionalism is a combination of two factors, secondary socialization of journalists in the workplace and the fetishization of journalistic norms and standards


This entry was posted in 2016 Election, Conspiracy, Fascists/Corporatists, Free Speech, Government Propaganda, History, Humor, Hypocrisy, Internet, Media, Political Science, Politics, Presidential Elections, Presidents, Propaganda, Society, Technology, United States and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to @roguePOTUSStaff’s double-bluffing in the age of alternative exaggerations

  1. Terry Welshans says:

    I am not satisfied that @roguePOTUSStaff is real. I am about 50% sure it is Bannon. Everything tweeted by that account breaks as news shortly after the tweet, but I still see it as disinformation from inside, not a revelation of the unexpected.

  2. There are other Twitter accounts that purport to be coming from behind the scenes. No way to know if they are genuine or not. Here are two of them. The latter of these two seems more real than the “Rogue” accounts.



  3. Whether any of these rogue accounts are real or not, they don’t dare release any classified stuff. The leaks will be mostly gossip. Leak classified stuff you go to jail. Leak gossip and all they could do is fire you.

  4. In the meantime, our elected congresscritters are scurrying for cover like cockroaches on the kitchen floor when you turn on the light. Tennessee’s Marsha Blackburn had a town hall that was limited to only 130 hand-picked attendees. A somewhat larger crowd gathered outside. She represents what is probably the most solid red district in the state. Poor Marsha thought she was safe. What could possibly have gone wrong?

    The hand-picked voters she let in turned on her. One of them yelled, “We are not stupid. Stop this.”

    A high school student asked, “Is it right to prioritize people based on their religion?”

    Blackburn deflected, resorting to politibabble. She went on, “Next question.”

    The next question was a now-insistent, “Is it right to prioritize people based on their religion? Yes or no!”

    The brave congresslady cut the town hall short, leaving the hall to boos and catcalls.
    Full story here.

Comments are closed.