New York Times Russia Hoax Attempt Was So Wrong That Even Jake Tapper Called It Out

[anatta]

Jake Tapper told the truth about something?

unlike WAPO and NYTimes -yes

[artichoke]

unlike WAPO and NYTimes -yes

[Tranquillus in Exile]

it was the DNI basically spinning or lying

As recently as September the DNI was trying to block the whistleblower's complaint in the Trump Ukraine affair, refusing to release it to the House Intel Committee.

Now Maguire and his cronies have been "spinning or lying" AGAINST Trump - to the House Intel Committee?

This is too deep for me! But one thing I think we can be sure of: SOMEBODY is spinning (or lying).

[dukkha]

As recently as September the DNI was trying to block the whistleblower's complaint in the Trump Ukraine affair, refusing to release it to the House Intel Committee.

Now Maguire and his cronies have been "spinning or lying" AGAINST Trump - to the House Intel Committee?

This is too deep for me! But one thing I think we can be sure of: SOMEBODY is spinning (or lying).

did you see my thread on Jake Tapper's tweet?he confirms there was no mention of "Russians preferring Trump"
But you might be correct, that must just be Fake News or Shifty Schiffs spin, not the DNI

[dukkha]

lol..this IS the thread -see OP

[archives]

There is a lot of information missing both from the New York Times story and the companion piece in the Washington Post. For instance, there is no mention of what the evidence was. We don’t know which agencies concurred with the opinion. We don’t know their level of confidence in the assessment. We don’t even know how Pierson defended her presentation in the face of reported pushback by House Republicans.

Russia is trying to interfere in our elections. So is China which has extensive investment in mainstream US media. We do the same.
It’s the cost of business if you live in a nation where you actually vote in meaningful elections.
The Russians having developed a working relationship with Trump should be viewed as a good thing.
There is no evidence that he is as in thrall to Putin as was Obama (take a close look at Obama’s policies after he had “more flexibility”).
There is a great deal of evidence that he’s quite willing to kill Russians if he’s crossed. They will learn to work with the next president, too, but stability and predictability in international affairs is important to nations.

The New York Times, and its junior partner the Washington Post, are desperate for some kind of fake scandal to throw at President Trump since the last dozen or so have dried up and blown away.
The formula of Russia + nebulous evidence + sources that may or may not exist is tried and true.
But when you look inside the New York Times reporting you see hints that they knew exactly what Tapper just reported. For instance, this is how that story describes the briefer, compare it to the Tapper tweet:

That intelligence official, Shelby Pierson, is an aide to Mr. Maguire who has a reputation of delivering intelligence in somewhat blunt terms.

Tapper says everyone pushed back on the analysis, this is what the Washington Post says:

Other people familiar with the briefing described it as a contentious re-litigating of a previous intelligence assessment that Russia interfered in 2016 to help Trump. Republican members asked why the Russians would want to help Trump when he has levied punishing sanctions on their country, and they challenged Pierson to back up her claim with evidence. It is unclear how she responded.

It seems like the New York Times decided to frame it as Russia-likes-Trump both to set a narrative for the remainder of the election season and prepare the battlefield for the real prize which is the fight for the next DNI by making a case that Trump can’t be allowed to appoint his choice to that position.
https://www.redstate.com/streiff/202...-called-it-out

"RedState?" Really? Would you accept an article with the exact opposite arguememt from "Mother Jones?"

Regardless, of course the NYT article didn't evidence, it was a security briefing, no one present is going to reveal details concerning security concerns. And from Trump's reactionary moves, no one will ever hear the evidence or details, he took immediate steps to squash that possibility

Russia is interfering, even Wray confirmed that, and it does raise questions why Trump and Mitch won't admit the obvious, but the briefing also included that Russia was doing it aid the reelection of Trump, which as I mentioned above, Trump is now doing his best to bury the proof and fabricate that it never existed, the usual scenario

And before you go there, yes, the Russians are also aiding Bernie in the primaries, makes sense, follows the strategdy, doing their best to insure the rival Trump wants, and at least Bernie admitted it and denounced it, unlike Trump

[jimmymccready]

It is fun to watch Trump supporters squeal at the truth that the Russians want him as president.

[FastLane]

Interesting. When a Leftist says something that the right agrees with, all of sudden it's the truth.

Yep if they agree with Republicans its proof of truth.

[FastLane]

It is fun to watch Trump supporters squeal at the truth that the Russians want him as president.

Bernie is a Russian plant.

[archives]

Bernie is a Russian plant.

Russia aiding Bernie is clear sign they are interested in keep Trump in the White House, sure seems part of a strategdy, doing their best to give Trump the candidate he wants, just makes you wonder if Trump could win any election without aid from Russia

[Cancel 2020.1]

I'd love to see the alternate reality version of this board if it had come out years ago that Russians supported Obama for the Presidency.

We wouldn't even need claims of interference. Russian support alone would send talk radio & righties everywhere over the edge.

[Phantasmal]

I'd love to see the alternate reality version of this board if it had come out years ago that Russians supported Obama for the Presidency.

We wouldn't even need claims of interference. Russian support alone would send talk radio & righties everywhere over the edge.

It really is quite amazing, isn’t it.

[Mason Michaels]

It would be like someone claiming the US interferes in the affairs of other countries. Completely preposterous. No evidence. Obviously just made up shit. Why would we do that???

You mean like invading Iraq to gain control of their oil?

[dukkha]

"RedState?" Really? Would you accept an article with the exact opposite arguememt from "Mother Jones?"

Regardless, of course the NYT article didn't evidence, it was a security briefing, no one present is going to reveal details concerning security concerns. And from Trump's reactionary moves, no one will ever hear the evidence or details, he took immediate steps to squash that possibility

Russia is interfering, even Wray confirmed that, and it does raise questions why Trump and Mitch won't admit the obvious, but the briefing also included that Russia was doing it aid the reelection of Trump, which as I mentioned above, Trump is now doing his best to bury the proof and fabricate that it never existed, the usual scenario

And before you go there, yes, the Russians are also aiding Bernie in the primaries, makes sense, follows the strategdy, doing their best to insure the rival Trump wants, and at least Bernie admitted it and denounced it, unlike Trump

good lord. you are OBSESSES with sourcing. to the bolded-
Look at what Jake Tapper tweeted - go to his profile and you'd see more details - but there was no claims of "Russian preference" of Trump.

I used "red state" because there wasn't an MS coverage of the Fake News by the NYT

[Jack]

You mean like invading Iraq to gain control of their oil?

Yes. Exactly. More Fake News.