Scully said in a statement that his tweet to Scaramucci was sent “out of frustration,” and that he lied about its origins when he saw that it had “created new controversy.”
“These were both errors in judgement for which I am totally responsible. I apologize,” said Scully.
Ah, it’s OK. You’re just grossly biased. It’s all good…just give it some distance. Like Biden hasn’t sniffed a kid in a while, so it’s all good.
This opinion piece is spot on imo:
What’s the biggest scandal of the week? Is it that: (a) U.S. spy agencies have warned that President Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, was promoting Russian disinformation to smear Joe Biden over his son’s business dealings in Ukraine? Or is it that: (b) Twitter and Facebook hesitated to act as a conduit for Giuliani’s wild charges? If you’re a partisan Republican, the answer is obviously (b). If you’re a normal, patriotic American, the answer should be (a).
Note my copious use of “allegedly” and “supposed.” That’s because we have no idea whether the emails are legitimate. The Murdoch tabloid did not provide header information or metadata to allow other media organizations to verify them. Thus we have no way of knowing if these emails were hacked or whether they are genuine — or perhaps a mixture of fake and real.
Caution is particularly in order because Giuliani had been working to malign Biden with Andriy Derkach, a Ukrainian lawmaker who has been described by Trump’s own Treasury Department as an “active Russian agent.” The Washington Post reported on Thursday that Trump had been warned last year by the U.S. intelligence community “that Giuliani was being used to feed Russian misinformation to the president.” (Giuliani told The Washington Post he was not informed that Derkach was working with Russian intelligence.) Trump’s own national security adviser reportedly told him “that any information Giuliani brought back from Ukraine should be considered contaminated by Russia.” NBC News reports the FBI is now investigating whether the emails hyped by the New York Post “are linked to a foreign intelligence operation.”
The right is simply wrong to claim it is the victim of “censorship” by social media companies — and the mainstream press should refrain from using that loaded and inaccurate term. The top nine links on Facebook on Thursday were all from right-wing sources — talk-radio host Dan Bongino, Fox “News,” Trump, Breitbart and Franklin Graham. But Facebook and Twitter are private-sector companies, and they have no obligation to pass along possible Russian disinformation. That’s not “censorship.” It’s editorial judgment, and it’s something we need more of online.
Forget specific articles, FB was censoring entire left-leaning websites!
Mark Zuckerberg signed off on a Facebook algorithm change in 2017 that throttled traffic to progressive news sites, costing journalism outlet Mother Jones hundreds of thousands of dollars, according to a report by The Wall Street Journal and comments by Mother Jones senior staff published Friday.
The Wall Street Journal report cited sources that said Facebook was concerned about negatively affecting conservative news outlets when it planned on changing the algorithm that governs users’ news feeds in 2017. In turn, Mark Zuckerberg signed off on an alternative that targeted “left-leaning sites like Mother Jones…more than previously planned,” WSJ reported.
I’m sure the Republican controlled senate will be looking for answers in 3,2,1, 
President Trump just posted the full, unedited interview with Lesley Stahl from ‘60 minutes’.
38 minutes.
Leslie Stahl’s favorite comeback, kind of whining: “But, it’s never been verified”.
This investigative reporter must be living in one of those bubble tables that some cities’ restaurants are using.
The interview ends rather normally. Time is up, all topics were covered.
The 2 are not BFFs, like 60 Minutes apparently is with Biden.
And Pence’s interview by her:
https: //www.facebook.com/153080620724/posts/10165669672855725/
Leslie Stahl is so “upset” that her questions weren’t answered, but Pence appreciated the “speech” she just gave, ha ha.
Unedited!
The Donald routes around censorship.
Is his leaked version different from CBS’ version?
This poor guy thinks he’s clever. I will leak it first and not look weak.
No, it’s the same.
Obviously you did not watch the video.
It is 38 minutes from start of him asking “Ready”, to him leaving.
If anything it is longer than the typically edited version on 60 Minutes’ Sunday evening program.
Zero interruptions, except once to stop some flag that was fluttering.
Anyway. Not promoting anyone to watch it. You do what you do.
So, did 60 minutes edit out questions, or just dead time?
Wanna make a bet? 
Anyone got a link to the CBS version so we can compare?
It’s out Sunday night. Both versions have Trump begging for easy questions, whining about media, talking over questions, and ending the interview because he got triggered.
But you’ve seen it already?
CBS might do him a favor and take out the part where he’s begging for softballs pre-interview.
Oh, You’re doing that thing where you speculate and phrase it as if it’s a fact.
No, everything I described is in the interview, it’s online now.
Yups. 
That must be why I’m posting the interview.
Now this is that thing where you pretend to miss the point in order to save face.
What responsible media looks like. Of course cue Republican waterworks.
This might be a lot easier if they could run on something other than disinformation. 
House Judiciary Committee Republicans and committee member Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA) are spreading a misleading claim about a new Twitter feature that asks users to read articles before retweeting them. Earlier this year, Twitter started testing a prompt to discourage knee-jerk retweets. It appears on links across the entire service, but Republican lawmakers have cited individual warnings on right-leaning articles as the latest of many censorship accusations.
Twitter’s communications team tweeted a somewhat exasperated response. “We’re doing this to encourage everyone to read news articles before Tweeting them, regardless of the publication or the article,” a spokesperson wrote. “If you want to retweet or quote tweet it, literally just click once more.”
There’s skimming, and then there’s reading for comprehension.
And there’s whatever it is stupid people do.
