Posted on 04/22/2018 6:39:58 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Amy Chozick, who covered the Hillary Clinton campaign for the New York Times and wrote the new campaign book Chasing Hillary, has an essay on the front of the paper's Sunday Review in which she sports sackcloth and ashes for the sin of actually reporting on publicly available emails leaked from the Clinton campaign -- while ignoring all the dirty details in the emails themselves:
WikiLeaks tweeted a link to emails from the Gmail account of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta, including excerpts from her speeches to Wall Street firms.
Chozick berated herself for actually reporting anti-Hillary information that dropped in her lap, courtesy of WikiLeaks.
But it wasn’t a scoop. It was more like a bank heist.
Editors and reporters huddled to discuss how to handle the emails. Everyone agreed that since the emails were already out there -- and of importance to voters -- it was The Times’s job to “confirm” and “contextualize” them. I didn’t argue that it appeared the emails were stolen by a hostile foreign government that had staged an attack on our electoral system. I didn’t push to hold off on publishing them until we could have a less harried discussion. I didn’t raise the possibility that we’d become puppets in Vladimir Putin’s master plan. I chose the byline.
In December, after the election, my colleagues in Washington wrote a Pulitzer-winning article about how the Russians had pulled off the perfect hack....
The Bernie Bros and Mr. Trump’s Twitter trolls had called me a donkey-faced whore and a Hillary shill, but nothing hurt worse than my own colleagues calling me a de facto instrument of Russian intelligence. The worst part was, they were right.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Yeah, sure. Enough about that. Have they found any juicy stuff from Cohen’s legal files???? What will they publish next???
Why would she assume at thei time - before the DNC spin - that the emails were stolen by Putin? But let’s say they were for the sake of argument.
The times publishes stolen (aka leaked) information all the time. Only a problem if it hurts Democrats?
Hahaha…this has to be a parody.
What is Chozick going to do when Hillary Clinton is tried and convicted of endangering the security of the United States by misusing classified documents?
Not upset by what was in them but by how they were found out.
Just like with Planned Parenthood or collusion with PACs. The Left has nearly perfect defenses when it comes to protecting the Left.
“It was more like a bank heist.”
And, ‘We The People’ have put UP with the Clinton Crime Family for HOW MANY DECADES by now?
Please! PLEASE! Let this just be OVER! I don’t even CARE if they’re SMOTE DOWN or imprisoned at this point! Just let them FADE from memory and be STRICKEN from all public records forever!
Such awful, self-serving, greedy, perverted and disgusting human beings!
“Contextualize”.
No doubt.
NYT Democrat hack shill weasels.
The 5 most outrageous things Hillary Clinton said in her FBI interview
CNBC ^ | 02 September 2016 | Jake Novak / FR Posted by Lorianne
Here are five of the most outrageous statements Clinton made in that three-and-a-half hour FBI interview:
1. She cited her 2012 concussion as the reason that she cannot remember details of briefings during her “transition out of office.”
2. She said she never even thought whether emails she exchanged on a future U.S. drone attack should be classified.
3. She said she thought the “C” before a paragraph indicated alphabetical order. The C actually stands for “classified.”
4. She said no one ever raised concerns to her about her use of a private email server.
5. She said she could not recall any training on how to handle classified information.
What’s more, Clinton aides told the FBI that the Secretary of State frequently replaced her Blackberry phone and the whereabouts of her old device would become “unknown.” The FBI report suggests there were at least 13 different devices used.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
Observer: Sidney Blumenthal ‘Was Reading Above-Top-Secret NSA Reports Hours After They Appeared’
FR posted by blam / September 6, 2016
Former NSA officer John Schindler reports on a devastating fact NOT mentioned in the FBI’s investigation of Hillary Clinton conducting State Department business on an unsecure homebrew email server. From the Observer:
[Sidney] Blumenthal’s email read exactly like classified NSA reporting, as anybody acquainted with our SIGINT would immediately recognize. As one veteran agency official told me back in January, Blumenthal’s email was NSA information with “at least 90 percent confidence.”
Which was no coincidence, since an NSA investigation subsequently determined that Blumenthal’s Sudan assessment was derived from their reporting—in some cases verbatim. As I reported in March, NSA concluded that Blumenthal’s Sudan report came from four different agency SIGINT reports, all classified Top Secret/SCI. Then it got worse:
At least one of those reports was issued under the GAMMA compartment, which is an NSA handling caveat that is applied to extraordinarily sensitive information (for instance, decrypted conversations between top foreign leadership, as this was). GAMMA is properly viewed as a SIGINT Special Access Program, or SAP, several of which Clinton compromised in another series of her “unclassified” emails.
NSA had no doubt that Blumenthal somehow got his hands on some of their “crown jewels” information. “It’s word-for-word, verbatim copying,” an agency official of them explained. “In one case, an entire paragraph was lifted from an NSA report” that was classified Top Secret/SCI. To add to the mystery, Sid emailed Hillary his “personal” assessment on Sudan only hours after some of those classified NSA reports were issued. (snip)(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
They won’t make the grave error of reporting the news again, that’s for sure.
EVERYTHING leads to Clinton and Obama. What a f-ing joke this is. Even Libtards know this. Can someone wake up sleepy Sessions?
Lots of effort and information in your postings this evening in the several threads where they have appeared..
Thank you.
Slanting stories and hiding details that don’t fit a specific political narrative should be classified a crime, punishable by at least 2 years in prison. It’s fraud, and should be thought of as such.
He and the NYS Attorney Dictator Eric “The Smarmy Weasel” Schneiderman are pushing pushing pushing to GET TRUMP!
It is so sick. All of it.
Unbelievable. Apologizing for REPORTING THE NEWS!!
That was a very good summary; thanks.
And that's the problem. We have a free press, but not a fair press.
You are very welcome.
I’ve seen people go to prison just for uttering a code word outside a secure facility.
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.