Media became coconspirators with Clinton in Russia hoax
Just days after Hillary Clinton emissaries Christopher Steele and Michael Sussmann approached the FBI in September 2016 with dirt that would infuse the Russia collusion probe, the campaign's opposition research firm sent some of the same information to New York Times journalists.
"Gents good to see you yesterday," a Fusion GPS executive wrote the reporters. "Sounded like you might be interested in some of the attached russia-related material. these are internal, open source research drafts, as agreed, pls treat this as background/not for attribution. as you'll see it's all easily replicated anyway."
The invitation to further dirty up Donald Trump continued: "Can also send you a [name]/Toronto memo once i dig it out. I'm skipping over [name] and [company name]. believe your guys have done that up ... leave it to you to distribute internally, or not, as you see fit. don't believe sunny isles/hollywood or panama or toronto have been touched by brands xy or z. amazingly, don't think anyone has done up the trump tower poker ring story either. pretty vivid color there."
The missive is one of hundreds of emails that Special Counsel John Durham has obtained between Clinton campaign operatives and journalists that spread "unverified derogatory information" about Donald Trump, spawning the false Russia collusion narrative shortly before Election Day 2016. They've now been made public in court filings.
Durham recently disclosed several communications with reporters in a filing designed to reject the Clinton campaign's claim that its Steele dossier and other research should be shielded from public view at an upcoming trial because it was covered by attorney client privilege.
Durham's argument is straightforward: Attorney-client privilege doesn't apply to materials the campaign distributed widely to third parties.
But his filing also puts the traditional media on notice that when Sussmann's trial on a charge of lying to the FBI begins next month, the unholy alliance between traditional media reporters and the Democrat machine will be laid bare for the world to see.
And it is clear prosecutors have a clear theory that much of the information spread and then reported by the news media was glaringly weak if not outright false. Durham's filings refer to the Clinton opposition research alternately as a "red herring," "unverified" "too obvious" to be true, or containing a "very weak link." In some cases, those were words used by the very researchers helping assemble the materials.
Yet the traditional media reported it and re-reported it for nearly two years before Special Counsel Robert Mueller concluded there was no evidence of a Trump-Russia conspiracy to hijack the 2016 election.
...
Democrats and the media colluded on disinformation about Trump. I think Obama was in on the scam too and is now pushing the so-called Ministry of Disinformation that is to be run by one of the purveyors of disinformation. I have no confidence that the Democrats have the slightest interest in correcting the record of their own disinformation scams.
Comments
Post a Comment