Erupting with furious propaganda now that the whole Russian hoax is about to be exposed by Atty. Gen. William Barr and U.S. Atty. John Durham, the New York Times spends its resources accusing 73-year-old Donald Trump of engaging in conspiracy theories. When it comes to the Russian hoax, the New York Times led the propaganda battle with the Washington Post writing anonymously sourced article-after-article for three years trying, sentencing and convicting Trump of Russian collusion. When Special Counsel Robert Mueller delivered his Final Report March 23, 2019 clearing Trump or his campaign of conspiracy with Russia, Democrats and the New York Times gasped. No, the Times faces utter humiliation for not reporting on the grotesque corruption in former President Barack Obama’s White House, Department of Justice [DOJ], FBI and other agencies involved in illegally investigating Trump’s alleged Russian ties.
Instead of the New York Times taking an objective approach of what happened at the DOJ and FBI, they threw their editorial weight behind outrageous charges made by Democrats and former members of Obama’s White House. When Barr and Durham finish their investigation embarrassing Obama’s White House, the New York Times will be thoroughly humiliated for their biased reporting of the Russian hoax. Anticipating Barr’s report, the Times has already started discrediting Barr, obscuring the real story of how the Obama White House, DOJ, FBI, CIA, National Security Agency, etc., all spied on the Trump campaign to help Hillary get elected in 2016. Hillary paid Glenn Simpson’s opposition research firm FusionGPS MI6 agent Michael Steele to concoct a fake dossier filled with outright lies and Russian disinformation about Trump’s alleged Russian ties.
Instead of exposing the Russian hoax, the New York Times perpetuated the lies, accusing Trump of whipping up unfounded conspiracy theories. Now the Times will have a tough time explaining away what happened at Obama’s White House, DOJ, FBI, CIA and NSA, all of which worked feverishly to spy on the Trump campaign, proving, as the Steele Dossier said, that Trump was a Russian agent. New York Times ridicules Trump’s term, “Obamagate,” referring the Barack’s knowledge and participation in the FBI’s illegal counterintelligence investigation of Trump and his 2016 campaign. Times laughed at Trump ‘s suggestion that Obama should “testify about the biggest political crime and precedent in American history,” referring to Obama’s knowledge and participation in the spying operation against Trump, his 2016 presidential campaign and Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.
New York Times accuses Trump of diverting attention away from the novel coronavirus pandemic that infected 1,474,939 and killed 87,876 in the U.S., when, in fact, the Times diverts attention away from its culpability in spending over three years writing derogatory articles about Trump’s alleged Russian collusion. “This was all Obama, this was all Biden,” Trump told Fox Business’s Maria Bartiromo May 15. “These people were corrupt, the whole things was corrupt, and we caught them. We caught them,” Trump said. New York Times, at this point, can only say, “prove it.” But that’s what Barr and Durham will do when they release their investigation into the origin of Crossfire Hurricane and Crossfire Razer, the FBI counterintelligence investigations into Trump’s 2016 campaign and Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn. All the Times can do now is discredit Trump before Barr releases his report.
New York Times goes to any kindred spirit to parrot back their anti-Trump message. “What makes Trump’s attacks so egregious in contrast to his predecessors is how he simply concocts scandals out of thin air, cooking up conspiracies that have no relation to historical fact,” said Matthew Dallek, a George Washington University presidential historian. What’s so “egregious” is the Times propaganda, that gives one side of the story to defend itself against the most biased reporting in U.S. history. What’s Dallek saying that things are made up “out of thin air?” Does he really think that what happened to Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn didn’t happen? Barr let St. Louis U.S. Atty. Jeff Jensen review the Flynn file and found Flynn’s case was not properly predicated, meaning, the FBI used Hillary’s paid fake Dossier to justify Crossfire Razor, unmasking Flynn’s phone calls with former Russian Amb. Sergey Kislyak..
Dallek’s partisan remarks shows how the New York Times operates, finding any one-sided source to prove their points. What’s the “historical fact” that Dallek’s talking about? That Obama did not hold a Jan. 5, 2017 meeting discussing Flynn’s case with his Cabinet and key member of federal law enforcement and Justice Department. That members of Obama’s White House, including former Vice President Joe Biden, DOJ, FBI, NSA, etc. did not ask to have Flynn’s conversations with Kislyak unmasked? Why isn’t Dallek asking the Times why they published hundreds of anonymously-sourced stories for over three years about Trump’s alleged Russian collusion. Should a fair reporter of presidential history, like Dallek, want to know about Hillary’s fake dossier, how it was used by the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) to retaliate against Trump for a petty squabble about his Vietnam War days.
