There's a difference between fake news (FB trash) and media sources that lean towards an agenda. Sadly, I think there are few if any truly unbiased news sources these days, so it has become a requirement to read/watch everything critically. Anybody who whole-hog believes everything that their source offers without at least considering (not necessarily agreeing with) opposing sources is a fool. I subscribe to several news sources and leading up to the election I was disgusted by the WaPo's level of Trump bashing because, separated from politics, they have had excellent investigative journalism pieces. What is sad is that the free press is what makes much of our government accountable to the people, but we're at the point where we only believe what suits us. To watch people who deny stories about Trump because they don't believe the news source - while Trump himself is tweeting in confirmation of those actions - is just mind boggling.
100% valid, but this is where the problem lies with Trump. I'm doubtful that the specific details of the conversation in question will ever be known, but I don't think this was a cognizant action by Trump. In other words, I don't think Trump was briefed on code-word classified info provided by the Israelis, to which he then turned around and said, "I'm gonna give this to the Russians." I imagine that he handled this discussion like he does any other discussion; he doesn't stick to script, he improvises (poorly), and he likes to throw in tidbits of data that he has heard from here and there to sound like he has a solid grasp of his point. I can imagine him saying, "Listen, we're gonna crush ISIS. We've been tracking them for a while and we know that they've got plans to do XYZ on commercial airplanes. We're gonna stop it. It's gonna be great." Meanwhile the guys in the room are looking around nervously because this on the talking points. The president's staff shouldn't have to go into damage control this often in response to what he says or tweets.