Posted on 07/10/2017 12:34:33 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
When Hillary Clinton claimed “17 intelligence agencies” agree on Russian meddling in the third presidential debate, a host of media outlets including The New York Times rated the claim as 100 percent true. Nine months later, those same outlets say the stat is obviously false, and there’s been a “simple” explanation as to why all along.
A closer look at how the claim survived and thrived over those nine months reveals a startling lack of skepticism in the press when it comes to the Russia narrative. The truth is the great majority of the 17 agencies that make up the U.S. intelligence community had nothing to do with the investigation and made no judgments about the matter.
“The reason the views of only those four intelligence agencies, not all 17, were included in the assessment is simple: They were the ones tracking and analyzing the Russian campaign,” The New York Times now reports. “The rest were doing other work.”
Strange admission for the paper, since its star political reporter recently reiterated the false claim as she was in the middle of writing an article characterizing President Trump as stubbornly foolish.
“The latest presidential tweets were proof to dismayed members of Mr. Trump’s party that he still refuses to acknowledge a basic fact agreed upon by 17 American intelligence agencies that he now oversees: Russia orchestrated the attacks, and did it to help him get elected,” Maggie Haberman wrote. Her story was later corrected to reflect the — basic fact — that only three agencies working under the Director of National Intelligence contributed to the intelligence community’s conclusion.
A few days later, the Associated Press echoed that correction in a “clarification” bulletin acknowledging there’s no truth to the claim the wire service had repeatedly blasted out for publication to news...
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
I think they've been at it a lot longer than that.
More proof that the lib media are in the tank for Democrats.
Too bad SNOPES and FactCheck.org only check Republicans.
Those of us that get our news from the web knew that the 17 agency claim was bogus last year. One thing that proved to me that Michael Medved is part of the swamp was when he kept repeating the lie, as late as a couple of weeks ago. I do not believe it was out of ignorance.
I wonder what it feels like to believe you work for the newspaper business when you’re really just a tool for the anti-American agenda.
Sadly, it probably feels great.
I wonder what it feels like to believe you work for the newspaper business when you’re really just a tool for the anti-American agenda.
Those people are driven out of the business early on. I have a friend (Journalism major) who made it up to a major market (Minneapolis). He quit because the media was so agenda driven. Scandals involving Republicans - front page . Scandals involving Democrats - Spiked.
Spying is not meddling.
As for Putin ordering the spying, how would the US government know - either by spying on Putin, spying on his subordinates or by a Russian turncoat.
The last is doubtful, so the Obama administration leaked that we were successfully spying on Putin or a top KGB person. That certainly would have put an end to by Russian counterintelligence.
If anyone ever has time to look at my past posts back then they will see I was questioning which agencies were saying this, as 17 of them never came out in public and stated this Russia crap.
Of course many in this country just repeat what they are told, and never questioning it.
NY Times Needs 8 Revisions to Fine-Tune Its Trump-Putin Meeting Spin
MRC NewsBusters ^ | 07/10/2017 | Tom Blumer
Posted on 7/10/2017, 12:18:18 PM by ForYourChildren
The New York Times posted eight revisions over a 23-hour period to its Saturday and then-Sunday story about U.S. President Donald Trump’s first meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
In the process, the paper’s headline went from an original “Russians Call Trump Meeting Putin a Win, but Doubt Concrete Gains,” to a more certain “Russians Call Trump Meeting Putin a Win,” to a celebratory “Russia Crows Over Putin’s Trump Meeting.”
Additionally, as obsessed as the press has been with Russia and Putin supposedly influencing the 2016 presidential election and Trump’s campaign and administration, one would think that the folks at the Times would recognize when Vladimir Putin is not in a photo. Nope. On Saturday, in a tweet about “body language,” the Times used a photo it claimed showed Trump and Putin shaking hands. The problem is that it really showed Trump with Polish President Andrzej Duda.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3568143/posts
Every time I heard that “17 intelligence agencies” mantra I was screaming at the TV!!
“NAME THEM, YOU IDIOTS!! THEN GIVE YOUR SOURCE REFERENCES!!”
And I could never understand why conservative interviewers or panel members didn’t do exactly that when confronted with that FALSE FACT.
This is not new for the MSM pushing a false narrative. For well over a year (2015-16), the media pushed the narrative that hillary was unstoppable in being elected president. It was a foregone conclusion.
The Russia collusion meme is entirely fabricated by select dems with the usual MSM sycophants gleefully promoting this propaganda.
They also made the War In Iraq out to be a crazed disaster with “insurgents” blowing our guys away all over the place. Scaring Soccer Moms into ushering in the big eared traitor for 8 miserable years.
In reality the Iraq War was the most one sided @$$ kicking in all of recorded human conflict.
Dont you know, Trump being unChristian and saying “grab them by the pu$$u” makes all the media
lies washed away... in the head of corrupt liberals seeking
to
wash away their murders
NOT all “17 US Intel organizations” have assets assigned to monitor “Russia”.
It was obviously a lie to anyone who bothered to read the actual reports.
-PJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.