There’s no chance in hell that it will name the anonymous sources. But when are we going to stop accepting, willy-nilly, anything and everything that an unnamed source says.
Sure, I know that without Deep Throat we would never had know about Watergate and Nixon and his crew of lawbreakers would never have gone to prison. But it has now become an accepted and daily practice for Americans to be exposed unremittingly to take-it-for-certain unsourced stories.
Too often, the media is a willing participant in a self-serving game by the leakers. For the sake of an exclusive story. It has become a plague on what is supposed to be a profession; now it has become a conduit for self-serving propaganda. As a former, decades-long Chicago journalist I have grown to despise this practice. It’s too easy for a reporter to be used to advance an agenda. It breaks faith with readers. It’s overuse makes readers suspicious, with good reason.
In the case of the Washington Post story “revealing,” according to “sources,”, that Trump disclosed classified information to high Russian officials, Americans are in no position to judge the accuracy of the report in the face of denials by the only people who were present in the meeting. All it does is fuel the fires on both political sides. Including those who would defend Trump even if he said he went over Niagara Falls in a barrel yesterday and survived. Or those who have constructed the most paranoid scenario about Trump betraying America to the Russians.
In fact, we know so little about what specifically is alleged to have done that hardly any credence should be given to the Washington Post story. And this is from someone–me–who thinks that Trump is a jerk and ought to resign.