activist in washington who is a respected figure and had provided this name. >> he did at one point, i understand, do work for williams and connolly. >> if we are talking about credibility. >> right. i understand it's relevant background. in this case it was very short mention and we only talked in brief terms about what he is doing right now. so we didn't see all of that context to be necessary. but, i understand why you are bringing it up and i think it's fair. >> tucker: um-huh. just a short mention. of course it's the critical claim in the story/book. we left out some context. turns out some people think it's relevant when a character destroying smear comes from political activists rather than from, say, ordinary citizens. you ought to be able to know that when you are reading the piece. the "times" disagrees though. they don't think you don't have a right to that context. of course these are also the people who took the trump dossier seriously and buried the context in that. you know in some ways it's a