Anonymous Sources

Every story that says Trump colluded with the Russians to get elected has a single theme running through them: they are "supported" by UNNAMED, anonymous sources. And somewhere, in every story, there is a line buried, saying, in effect, "we don't have any proof of this yet, but our sources are sure it's true." But do these "sources" even exist? Like with the "imaginary friend" that told Harry Reid that presidential candidate Romney didn't pay his taxes for ten years, a story subsequently proven false, they can't "name their sources" because they don't exist. The Dumocrats use this scam everywhere. Stories appear every day that are "supported" by "anonymous sources." I have gotten to the point that I disbelieve everything I hear that does not have a NAMED SOURCE. And even some that do. Because I know just about ALL of them are LIES. They make up these lies to hopefully discredit their opponents, while the liberal media repeats their lies, over and over without fact-checking them. Then they say, "where there's smoke, there must be fire," to further fool the gullible people in the public, which number enough to sway many elections if the Republicans don't "galvanize" their voters. (Just common sense)