True Pundit

Politics World

NYT’s Story On Russian Influence Completely Omits Key Evidence

FOLLOW US!
Follow on FacebookFollow on Twitter

The New York Times’s piece on how federal authorities warned a Republican lawmaker he was being targeted by Russian intelligence omits two key pieces of new evidence in the Trump-Russia saga.

New reporting by Time and Reuters runs counter to the establishment media’s narrative of Russia’s intentions and the Trump administration’s ties to the Putin regime.

NYT’s article, published Friday, makes no mention of a Time magazine article published Thursday, quoting senior U.S. intelligence officials who said they overheard Russian military intelligence bragging about targeting Hillary Clinton as payback for her actions as secretary of state.

In May 2016, U.S. officials overheard a Russian military intelligence officer with GRU say in his group “was going to cause chaos in the upcoming U.S. election” to “pay Clinton back for what President Vladimir Putin believed was an influence operation she had run against him” during Russia’s 2011 parliamentary elections.

NYT also did not include a Reuters report that members of “Donald Trump’s campaign were in contact with Russian officials and others with Kremlin ties in at least 18 calls and emails during the last seven months of the 2016 presidential race,” based on information given to them by “current and former” intelligence officials.

Reuters’ Thursday article had one big caveat: “The people who described the contacts to Reuters said they had seen no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion between the campaign and Russia in the communications reviewed so far.”

But NYT reported this Friday:

“Mr. Trump’s presidency has been plagued by questions about his links to Russia. Journalists have uncovered repeated instances of meetings between Trump associates and Russians that were not disclosed or that the White House initially mischaracterized.”

NYT repeated what U.S. intelligence agencies concluded earlier this year — that the “coordinated campaign of hacking and propaganda to damage Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and help Mr. Trump.” They ignored new evidence produced by Time.

Interestingly enough, the same lead NYT reporter who wrote Friday’s piece on California Rep. Dana Rohrbacher buried the fact there was no evidence of collusion in a March 20 article: “American officials have said that they have so far found no proof of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.”

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].

FOLLOW US!
Follow on FacebookFollow on Twitter

  • ddcannady

    Conservatism has not been successful as opposition to the Left. It’s a defense of an America that was, but is no more(if it ever really was). We are in an all out struggle against a formal two-tiered society of peasants and nobles. The European traditionalism of many 20th century immigrants, who never cared or understood the ideas of freedom and government of the people, has nearly overcome our Constitutional Republic through “democracy”. Our elected officials put their left hands on The Bible, raise their right hands and lie through their teeth that they will uphold the Constitution. We don’t need “healthcare” or an escalation of the War on Drugs, we need to take this government apart and bury the pieces. We need the realization of the unalienable rights guaranteed under the Constitution. We are not children and our leaders are not our parents, to care for us or tend to our needs. That’s what royalty claimed to be.

  • RedPillPlease

    “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
    – John Adams

    “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”
    – Benjamin Franklin

    This is why our Constitution no longer works and why lawmakers are called in to step between the natural rights of self-government and a growing population of lawlessness.