The New Russian Hoax

The mainstream media and the failing Democrats simply can’t let Russia go.

A leak to the New York Times this weekend, alleged Russia was paying Taliban-linked militants to kill coalition forces in Afghanistan, including American troops. The story claimed the intelligence was “briefed to President Trump,” and “officials” recommended potential responses, including and sanctions, but the White House failed to act.

Democrats and the mainstream media gave the story significant airtime and used it to suggest it was further evidence President Donald J. Trump was an agent of Russia. Never mind, the authors of the report, helped perpetuate the original Russian hoax, which was later debunked by Special Counsel Bob Mueller’s report.

According to The Federalist:

It is worth noting that the three New York Times reporters — Charlie Savage, Eric Schmitt, and Michael Schwirtz — also played key roles in disseminating the Russia collusion hoax, in which anonymous intelligence officials worked with co-conspirators in the media for years to put out a false and defamatory narrative that President Donald Trump had colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election or was otherwise compromised. The New York Times was one of the biggest outlets engaged in the Russia hoax. The reporters even include some of their previous Russia collusion hoax spin, and omit key facts about Trump’s actions against Russia, in their bounty story.

Yesterday, White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany denied the President was ever briefed on the intelligence:

“The U.S. receives thousands of reports a day on intelligence and they are subject to strict scrutiny. While the White House does not routinely comment on alleged intelligence or internal deliberations, the CIA director, NSA – National Security Advisor – and the Chief of Staff can all confirm that neither the President nor the Vice President were briefed on the alleged Russian bounty intelligence.”

The New York Times has made no effort to correct their record of erroneous reporting. In fact, despite the statements from the CIA, the NSA, and the Chief of Staff attesting that the President and Vice President were not briefed on any such matter, the story remains counterfactual and days later wrongfully claims that President Trump was briefed on the bounty and took no action.

McEnany continued:

“There is no consensus within the intelligence community on these allegations. And in effect, there are dissenting opinions from some in the intelligence community, with the regards to the veracity of what’s being reported. And the veracity of the underlying allegations continues to be evaluated. The President is briefed on verified intelligence. And again, I would just point you back to the absolutely irresponsible decision of the New York Times to falsely report that he was briefed on something that he in fact was not briefed on. And I really think that it’s time for the New York Times to step back and ask themselves why they’ve been wrong, so wrong, so often. It is inexcusable, the failed Russian reporting of the New York Times, and I think it’s time that the New York Times and also the Washington Post hand back their Pulitzers.”

The pathetic New York Times simply cannot resist a Russia hit on President Trump no matter how inaccurate and unfounded it may be. They are defect of journalistic standards and devoid of morality. Here are just a handful of the times they have been wrong:

• The New York Times falsely claimed Paul Manafort asked for polling data to be passed along to Oleg Deripaska before having to issue a correction.
• In June of 2017, the New York Times falsely wrote all 17 intel agencies had agreed on Russian interference, before having to issue a correction that it was only four agencies.
• In 2017, February of that year, the New York Times published a story claiming Trump campaign aides had repeated contacts with Russian intelligence — which even James Comey had said was almost entirely wrong.
• New York Times published a column in March of 2019 by a former Times executive editor that asserted the Trump campaign and Russia “had an overarching deal” that the “quid of help in the campaign against Hillary…for the quo of a new pro-Russian foreign policy.”  That’s what we call the “Russia hoax,” which was investigated for three years with taxpayer dollars before ultimately getting an exoneration in the Mueller report.

This New York Times obsession surrounding their ties between President Trump and Russia that have been proven time and time again to be false, inaccurate, uncorroborated, and flat out fabricated are disgraceful. Their political agenda is clear, as is their total unwillingness to learn from their past mistakes .