3 Clues New York Times Hiding FBI Evidence of Trump-Russia Tie
I don't know what game the New York Times is playing. But America can simply not afford another Judith-Miller-moment. In that instance, our nation's newspaper of record misled the public into supporting the disastrous war in Iraq. ISIS, the collapse of Syria, and its horrendous refugee crisis are just a few of that war's unintended consequences.
This time, however, the New York Times published a shabbily-written piece, which attempted to bury three breaking news reports detailing Donald Trump's unsavory connections with Russia. The NY Times article quoted unnamed law enforcement officials, who insisted that none of their investigations had linked Mr. Trump to the Russian government. According to these sources, even the hacking into Democratic emails, was merely aimed at "disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump".
The timing of the article came only a few hours after publication of the last of several investigative pieces, all of which presented compelling evidence tying the Trump campaign to the Russians. One story in Slate identified a server hidden in Trump Tower, which secretly communicated with the oligarch-controlled Alfa Bank of Russia. Mother Jones reported the confession of a former spy, who identified Trump as an "asset" whom the Russian government had been grooming. And Senator Harry Reid disclosed in a letter that the FBI was refusing to publicly acknowledge its discovery of "close ties and coordination" between the Trump campaign and the government of dictator Vladimir Putin.
These stories added to what we already knew of Trump's longstanding ties to the Russians. His former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, was paid several million dollars to help depose the legitimate president of Ukraine. Trump's military adviser, Michael Flynn, was known to have provided briefings to Russian agencies regarding U.S. actions in the Middle East and elsewhere. Another of Trump's advisors, Carter Page, serves as the back channel to Russian billionaire oligarchs, who run the state owned oil company.
But why do I say that the New York Times is being disengenuous in its reporting about Trump's ties to the Russians?
1. The NY Times article insisted, using unnamed sources, that the Russian hackers who attacked the Democratic Party servers, had no interest in swaying the U.S. election. But why, then, didn't these hackers reveal any of the dirty linen flapping in the fouled air of Donald Trump's scandal-ridden campaign.
3. Nowhere in the article was there mention of Marine Le Pen. Who's she and what's her connection to Trump? A diary in the Dailykos explains the haunting parallels between Trump's Russia ties and the way the far-right Le Front Nationale in France led by Le Pen, has been cultivated by Putin and his financiers. In exchange, Le Pen's party has embraced Putin, supports his annexation of Crimea as well as Russian efforts to dismantle NATO.
This time, however, the New York Times published a shabbily-written piece, which attempted to bury three breaking news reports detailing Donald Trump's unsavory connections with Russia. The NY Times article quoted unnamed law enforcement officials, who insisted that none of their investigations had linked Mr. Trump to the Russian government. According to these sources, even the hacking into Democratic emails, was merely aimed at "disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump".
The timing of the article came only a few hours after publication of the last of several investigative pieces, all of which presented compelling evidence tying the Trump campaign to the Russians. One story in Slate identified a server hidden in Trump Tower, which secretly communicated with the oligarch-controlled Alfa Bank of Russia. Mother Jones reported the confession of a former spy, who identified Trump as an "asset" whom the Russian government had been grooming. And Senator Harry Reid disclosed in a letter that the FBI was refusing to publicly acknowledge its discovery of "close ties and coordination" between the Trump campaign and the government of dictator Vladimir Putin.
These stories added to what we already knew of Trump's longstanding ties to the Russians. His former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, was paid several million dollars to help depose the legitimate president of Ukraine. Trump's military adviser, Michael Flynn, was known to have provided briefings to Russian agencies regarding U.S. actions in the Middle East and elsewhere. Another of Trump's advisors, Carter Page, serves as the back channel to Russian billionaire oligarchs, who run the state owned oil company.
But why do I say that the New York Times is being disengenuous in its reporting about Trump's ties to the Russians?
1. The NY Times article insisted, using unnamed sources, that the Russian hackers who attacked the Democratic Party servers, had no interest in swaying the U.S. election. But why, then, didn't these hackers reveal any of the dirty linen flapping in the fouled air of Donald Trump's scandal-ridden campaign.
2. No comments allowed. The NY Times draws readers to its articles by beefing up its comment pages. However, no reader comments were allowed in this article to address its glaring inconsistencies.
3. Nowhere in the article was there mention of Marine Le Pen. Who's she and what's her connection to Trump? A diary in the Dailykos explains the haunting parallels between Trump's Russia ties and the way the far-right Le Front Nationale in France led by Le Pen, has been cultivated by Putin and his financiers. In exchange, Le Pen's party has embraced Putin, supports his annexation of Crimea as well as Russian efforts to dismantle NATO.
Comments