Strange Bedfellows Indeed, The Times Rushes To The FBI’s Defense
If you want to see the where the great divide in American politics is these days, it’s not left right anymore, matter of fact it’s nearly entirely post ideological and solely focused on keeping the “Right” people in control of the levers of power. This is how we get what would have once been the mind boggling spectacle of the New York Times selling out it’s journalistic integrity to run interference for the FBI.
It’s important to remember regarding this story is that the main stream media uniformly dismissed the Trump campaign’s claims it was being spied on by the Obama administration in any way shape or form during the campaign. The charges were met with derision, name calling via “Conspiracy Theory” (the way that’s used you’d think nobody ever conspired), and attempts at guilt by association, Alex Jones proves to be a useful tool after all. Over time it’s come out that the reporters were getting information via leaks and were actively gaslighting the country.
Now we get to see just how the press and the police are linking hands to do damage control. We have the MSM going to work to soften and confuse the information after being leaked information from the FBI IG report.
The friendly reporters at the Washington Post wrote the story gently, full of reassuring quotes to downplay its significance. The information only came about because House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes subpoenaed the bank records of Fusion GPS, over the objections of Democrats on the committee. Even in this Times story, Clinton’s secret funding was not mentioned.
Likewise, the admissions in this New York Times story are coming out now, years after selective leaks to compliant reporters, just before an inspector general report detailing some of these actions is slated to be released this month. In fact, the Wall Street Journalreported that people mentioned in the report are beginning to get previews of what it alleges. It’s reasonable to assume that much of the new information in the New York Times report relates to information that will be coming out in the inspector general report.
The same techniques used with Benghazi, and Fast and Furious. Bury the Clinton and Obama connections and never talk about them.
No Russians, No Russians, No Russians, you would never know from the times reporting
In paragraph 69 of the lengthy story, The New York Times takes itself to task for burying the lede in its October 31, 2016, story about the FBI not finding any proof of involvement with Russian election meddling.
The key fact of the article — that the F.B.I. had opened a broad investigation into possible links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign — was published in the 10th paragraph.
It is somewhat funny, then, to read what The New York Times buries in paragraph 70 of the story:
A year and a half later, no public evidence has surfaced connecting Mr. Trump’s advisers to the hacking or linking Mr. Trump himself to the Russian government’s disruptive efforts.
No evidence of collusion after two years of investigation with unlimited resources? You don’t say! What could that mean?
70 paragraphs preface to tell people there was no collusion.
Yes not only were they spied on, there were spies and wiretaps.
The F.B.I. obtained phone records and other documents using national security letters — a secret type of subpoena — officials said. And at least one government informant met several times with Mr. Page and Mr. Papadopoulos, current and former officials said. That has become a politically contentious point, with Mr. Trump’s allies questioning whether the F.B.I. was spying on the Trump campaign or trying to entrap campaign officials.
While the times waxes loquaciously over things of complete non interest, the FBI’s abuse of FISA warrants, national security letters and at this point completely illegal investigation of a presidential campaign is glossed over. Remember this is the FBI using a report paid for by the Clinton campaign to justify investigating the Trump campaign, all the while knowing full well it was completely unreliable. Whats more the Obama administration via Sally Yates, further stripped out protections due American citizens and made certain the targets were known by name and the information was spread as widely as possible.
What we see happening with this is as I said at the beginning not left/right it’s about a press that wants to maintain it’s advantage in access and people who have come to power without any concern about constitution or country. The only real concerns are being able to get the most possible from their cronyism.
Drink up That’s it for the Watercooler today. As always it’s an open thread