The Hill News Site Withheld Mueller ‘Bombshell’ For Months; Shielding the Special Counsel, FBI & Hillary from Congressional Investigation
We have to ask the question why did The Hill withhold its ‘bombshell’ report on U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller and the FBI for untold months?
True Pundit’s Thomas Paine wrote The Hill’s editor Bob Cusack weeks ago telling him to publish the story — which the publication had been sitting on for months — or Paine would out The Hill for continuing to bury important Intel on Mueller and the FBI, shielding each from Congressional scrutiny.
Perhaps The Hill’s game was to not publish any Intel on Mueller and Hillary Clinton at all. The story that was published ended up in the site’s opinion section and detailed Mueller’s and the FBI’s relationship with Russian Oligarch Oleg Deripaska, a Putin associate tied to Mueller’s Paul Manafort case. The FBI, under Mueller, had worked with Deripaska to seek his help in getting American intelligence operative and hostage Robert Levinson freed from Iran.
Lauded by elite Right-wing media pundits and FOX news all week, The Hill’s story looked almost identical to a True Pundit story written five months ago on Dec. 17, 2017 entitled Comey & Mueller Ignored McCabe’s Ties to Russian Crime Figures & His Reported Tampering in Russian FBI Cases, Files. In fact, some of the same wording from True Pundit’s groundbreaking story — linking Deripaska to the FBI under Mueller and Andrew McCabe — was even employed by The Hill.
We’re pretty laid back about Big Media ripping off our scoops and Intel but it’s gotten out of control. At least change the words around. We published ours 5 MONTHS ago. Again, No credit given to True Pundit by multi-million news companies. SAD!https://t.co/zs4uAgakUy pic.twitter.com/3WY9sWdj9b
— Thomas Paine (@Thomas1774Paine) May 14, 2018
Yet no right-wing pundits lauded True Pundit’s exclusive work which preceded The Hill’s John Solomon’s piece by 150 days. Or scolded The Hill for lifting identical Intel and wording from True Pundit without acknowledging the publication for breaking the story. Instead they rushed to promote it. That’s a sad fact but expected since pundits rarely produce their own original work and therefore are not capable of comprehending the complexities of doing so.
Solomon did uncover additional details and important new wrinkles on the story, yet failed to acknowledge True Pundit’s work five months earlier which more than buttressed The Hill’s piece.
That’s beyond shoddy journalism in our book. Publications like The Hill should know better and act accordingly. Yet they seldom do.
The bigger story is why The Hill, a mainstream media publication, protected Mueller and Clinton by burying the story for months, allowing Mueller free to run rampant and unchecked by Congressional investigators, who are now asking questions about the FBI’s dealings with Deripaska. The Russian oligarch — at the same time he was dealing with the FBI was under investigation by the same FBI, according to True Pundit’s findings in 2017.
True Pundit’s Thomas Paine contacted Hill editor Cusack twice in recent weeks, the first time in late April seeking answers to the same questions in a story entitled “Big Media Company Withholds FBI Investigative Bombshell For Months; Shielding Mueller, Hillary & FBI Brass from Publicity Disaster.”
As a professional courtesy, True Pundit withheld The Hill’s name at the time.
Perhaps Solomon and Cusack can answer these questions and acknowledge news start-up True Pundit for paving the way — without credit — for their big story.
After they conclude The Hill’s self-congratulatory publicity tour on FOX News.
And perhaps Congress can take action on True Pundit’s intelligence when it breaks, not five months later when it is rehashed by a mainstream publication.
Cusack did not respond to True Pundit emails — included below, the most recent notifying the publication used True Pundit content without attribution.
So much for mutual professional courtesy.
Why did you wait untold months to print John Solomon’s story on Mueller and the Levinson investigation?
And then put it on the opinion page?
During that time frame Mueller could have coerced more plea deals or indicted other innocent dupes. Sitting on stories of national importance like that sheds a bad light on your publication.
At least stand behind your reporter, who echoed much intelligence from a Dec. 2017 True Pundit story on Mueller, McCabe and Deripaska. (No credit to True Pundit was cited by The Hill, however).
If you want to protect the FBI, its top spokesman just retired. Send your resume.
Mr. Bob Cusack,
Hope this note finds you well. We have been trying to develop a story since November 2017 in regards to the FBI and Robert Alan “Bob” Levinson. We touched on the issue previously in a related story but sought more details.
Since that time the majority of well-placed FBI sources confirm The Hill had been developing the same story, although the Hill reporter — Whom we will not mention here — started research prior to our endeavors.
Normally this is fine; however, many of the key sources have sworn a definite allegiance to The Hill reporter and will not discuss details until ‘your’ story runs. So we have been waiting. Along with the public.
This happens in journalism and there is nothing wrong with sources being loyal to a particular reporter and not speaking to other reporters. Those are simply the breaks.
However, this was six months ago. And now more than one of those potential sources are inquiring why The Hill has not run its story involving Robert Mueller, Andrew McCabe, and even potentially Hillary Clinton in regards to the Bureau’s botched and likely purposely-tanked Levinson case.
FBI-linked sources convey to us The Hill story was finished in December 2017. That was five months ago. Yet it remains unpublished.
If you need to dish the story off to another publication, we can discuss that as well. But I seriously doubt that is the case. We ask, at this crucial point, that you:
1. Print the story or
2. Advise if you have spiked this story so that we may relay that information to the FBI-linked sources, freeing them to speak.
3. In essence, clear the playing field for other media outlets to cultivate the intelligence, if you intend to spike/kill the story.
This is a timely and important story that neither we nor any other media has been able to develop and report because again, you’ve locked down sources. Normally we would work around this but this is a unique story and we do not have that luxury as the group of well-placed sources is very close knit.
Cut it loose (publish it or kill it) or we can write about you not cutting it loose. And you can answer to other folks — including the loyal FBI-linked sources — why you sat on the story for months when the issue of FBI corruption is at its peak of national interest. That is not something I’d like to do but either way, the story gets out in the public domain. It’s somewhat ironic that the story deals with an American taken and kept hostage and the same is now alleged for The Hill’s story which has been reportedly sitting in the tank for months.
You’ve done the grunt work here. Please publish or advise otherwise so we can move forward and get this story out.