It has been very well established at this point that there are some serious issues at the top of our national intelligence and security agencies. CIA and NSA have both acknowledged perjured testimony to Congress. CIA has acknowledged spying on Congress. Those two seem to have played contributing roles in the FBI led Cross-fire Hurricane fiasco in which Democratic oppo research pulled from Russia-associated sources was used as the illegal basis for spying on American citizens and on the Trump 2016 campaign.
We know that there is a problem which needs addressing and it is astonishing that it has taken this long to get around to it. However, powerful bureaucratic enemies can't simply be dismissed. Sometimes it does require staging.
Despite the failure of the Mueller investigation to find grounds that there was collusion between Trump and Russia, despite the impeachment effort to find such evidence, and despite the increasing public record that "collusion" was only ever a domestic political weapon and not a real event, the New York Time keeps returning like a dog to its vomit.
Last week they had yet another go, trying to interpret intelligence agencies as having uncovered new evidence of Russian influence in the 2020 election, reporting this was provided in a briefing to the White House. This time the NYT claims the influence is on behalf of Sanders and Trump, two NYT favorite bête noire. No sooner did the NYT report this than there were a flood of denials on the part of participants and briefers that this was not the message. It is like the NYT is on auto-pilot and, insensate, cannot learn from the past. They need there to be Russian collusion so that is what they report regardless of what actually happened or what was actually said.
And now this in the morning paper. Trump has appointed a new acting National Intelligence Agency director. How does NYT frame this?
The ouster of Mr. Hallman and exit of Mr. Maguire, who also oversaw the National Counterterrorism Center, allowed Mr. Grenell to install his own leadership team.Fascinating, the deliberate construction. The Patel/Nunes memo was "politically charged" and there were widespread criticisms from the left.
One of his first hires was Kashyap Patel, a senior National Security Council staff member and former key aide to Representative Devin Nunes, Republican of California and the former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. Mr. Patel will have a mandate to “clean house,” CBS News reported, citing a person close to the matter.
Mr. Patel was best known as the lead author of a politically charged memo two years ago that accused F.B.I. and Justice Department leaders of abusing their surveillance powers to spy on a former Trump campaign adviser. The memo was widely criticized as misleading, though an inspector general later found other problems with aspects of the surveillance.
However, while politically charged and subject to widespread criticism, its content has been pretty thoroughly established as accurate. A fact which the New York Times omits.
This article says that @RichardGrenell just hired “an expert on Trump conspiracy theories.”
— James Hasson (@JamesHasson20) February 22, 2020
The evidence? The aide wrote “a politically charged memo” that “was widely criticized as misleading.”
That was the Nunes memo, which turned out to be accurate.https://t.co/7l3Kyp4lER
This feels like the New York Times is desperate - there was a large pool of Democratic allies in the intelligence agencies who ended up undertaking bad actions during the 2016 campaign. They are slowly being fired and/or replaced, leaving the NYT with fewer and fewer allies in high places. It appears that that is the "partisanship" the NYT fears.
But to deliberately suppress facts known to be true?
The alternative rendering based on the full record (and not just on how things were characterized back when), is "Grenell hires former Nunes aide who helped uncover intelligence agency failings and FISA court abuse two years before Muller and Impeachment."
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment