Changes

Adam Schiff (view source)

Revision as of 00:04, November 14, 2019

No change in size , 00:04, November 14, 2019

Line 36: Line 36:

Journalist Glenn Greenwald wrote:

{{Quotebox|[[File:Mifsud and Theresa May.jpg|right|300px|thumb|[[Joseph Mifsud]] with [[UK]] [[Prime Minister]] [[Theresa May]]. Schiff claimed Mifsud was "an agent of the Kremlin." Schiff is an indefatigable proponent of the most [[extreme]] and lunatic [[conspiracy theory|conspiracy theories]].]]

−

"Friday was one of the most embarrassing days for the U.S. media in quite a long time. The humiliation orgy was kicked off by CNN, with MSNBC and CBS close behind, and countless pundits, commentators, and operatives joining the party throughout the day...the Most Trusted Name in News™ spent 12 straight minutes on air flamboyantly hyping an exclusive bombshell report that seemed to prove that WikiLeaks, last September, had secretly offered the Trump campaign, even Donald Trump himself, special access to the [[Democratic National Committee]] emails before they were published on the internet. As CNN sees the world, this would prove [[collusion]] between the Trump family and WikiLeaks and, more importantly, between Trump and Russia, since the U.S. [[intelligence community]] regards WikiLeaks as an “arm of Russian intelligence,” and therefore, so does the U.S. media. This entire revelation was based on an email that CNN strongly implied it had exclusively obtained and had in its possession. The email was sent by someone named “Michael J. Erickson” — someone nobody had heard of previously and whom CNN could not identify — to Donald Trump Jr., offering a decryption key and access to DNC emails that WikiLeaks had “uploaded.” The email was a smoking gun, in CNN’s extremely excited mind, because it was dated September 4 [2016] — 10 days before WikiLeaks began promoting access to those emails online — and thus proved that the Trump family was being offered special, unique access to the DNC archive: likely by WikiLeaks and the [[Kremlin]]. It’s impossible to convey with words what a spectacularly devastating scoop CNN believed it had...There was just one small problem with this story: It was fundamentally false, in the most embarrassing way possible... The email was not dated September 4, as CNN claimed, but rather September 14 — which means it was sent after WikiLeaks had already published access to the DNC emails online. Thus, rather than offering some sort of special access to Trump, “Michael J. Erickson” was simply some random person from the public encouraging the Trump family to look at the publicly available DNC emails that WikiLeaks — as everyone by then already knew — had publicly promoted. In other words, the email was the exact opposite of what CNN presented it as being. ...[[Democratic Party]] pundits, operatives, and journalists with huge [[social media]] platforms predictably jumped on the story immediately, announcing that it proved collusion between Trump and Russia (through WikiLeaks). One tweet from Democratic Rep. [[Ted Lieu]], claiming that this proved evidence of criminal collusion, was retweeted thousands and thousands of times in just a few hours (Lieu quietly deleted the tweet after I noted its falsity, and long after it went very viral, without ever telling his followers that the CNN story, and therefore his accusation, had been debunked). [[Brookings Institution]]’s [[Benjamin Wittes]], whose star has risen as he has promoted himself as a friend of disgraced former FBI Director [[Jim Comey]], not only promoted the CNN story in the morning, but did so with the word “boom” — which he uses to signal that a major blow has been delivered to Trump on the Russia story — along with a GIF of a cannon being detonated. Incredibly, to this very moment — almost 24 hours after CNN’s story was debunked — Wittes has never noted to his more than 200,000 followers that the story he so excitedly promoted turned out to be utterly false, even though he returned to [[Twitter]] long after the story was debunked to tweet about other matters. He just left his false and inflammatory claims uncorrected. Talking Points Memo’s Josh Marshall believed the story was so significant that he used an image of an atomic bomb detonating at the top of his article discussing its implications, an article he tweeted to his roughly 250,000 followers. Only at night was an editor’s note finally added noting that the whole thing was false. It’s hard to quantify exactly how many people were deceived — filled with false news and [[propaganda]] — by the CNN story. But thanks to Democratic-loyal journalists and operatives who decree every Trump-Russia claim to be true without seeing any evidence, it’s certainly safe to say that many hundreds of thousands of people, almost certainly millions, were exposed to these false claims. ...[[CBS News]] claimed that it had independently “confirmed” CNN’s story about the email and published its own breathless article discussing the grave implications of this discovered collusion. Most embarrassing of all was what [[MSNBC]] did. You just have to watch this report from its “intelligence and national security correspondent” [[Ken Dilanian]] to believe it. Like CBS, Dilanian also claimed that he had independently “confirmed” the false CNN report from “two sources with direct knowledge of this.” Dilanian, whose career in the U.S. media continues to flourish the more he is exposed as someone who faithfully parrots what the [[CIA]] tells him to say (since that is one of the most coveted and valued attributes in U.S. journalism), spent three minutes mixing evidence-free CIA claims as fact with totally false assertions about what his multiple “sources with direct knowledge” told him about all this. Please watch this — again, not just the content but the tenor and tone of how they “report” — as it is Baghdad Bob-level embarrassing. Think about what this means. It means that at least two — and possibly more — sources, which these media outlets all assessed as credible in terms of having access to sensitive information, all fed the same false information to multiple news outlets at the same time. For multiple reasons, the probability is very high that these sources were Democratic members of the House Intelligence Committee or their high-level staff members [Adam Schiff later admitted to leaking the false information<ref>https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/02/25/adam-schiff-admits-to-december-2017-leak-of-false-information-during-intelligence-committee-hearing/#more-146275</ref>], which is the committee that obtained access to Trump Jr.’s emails, although it’s certainly possible that it’s someone else. We won’t know until these news outlets deign to report this crucial information to the public: Which “multiple sources” acted jointly to disseminate incredibly inflammatory, false information to the nation’s largest news outlets? ...Did these “multiple sources” who fed not just CNN, but also MSNBC and CBS completely false information do so deliberately and in bad faith? Until these news outlets provide an accounting of what happened — what one might call “minimal journalistic transparency” — it’s impossible to say for certain. But right now, it’s very difficult to imagine a scenario in which multiple sources all fed the wrong date to multiple media outlets innocently and in good faith... [[File:800px-Benjamin Wittes, 2013.jpg|175px|left|thumb|'''Benjamin Wittes''' of [[Lawfare]], associated with the Brookings Institution, has been in the forefront of the political weaponization of Law providing the sketchy legal framework under which both the 2017 [[Deep State coup]] and the 2019 [[impeachment inquiry]] were carried out.]]No matter your views on those political controversies, no matter how much you hate Trump or regard Russia as a grave villain and threat to our cherished democracy and freedoms, it has to be acknowledged that when the U.S. media is spewing constant false news about all of this, that, too, is a grave threat to our democracy and cherished freedom. So numerous are the false stories about Russia and Trump over the last year that I literally cannot list them all. Just consider the ones from the last week alone: [[ABC News]] suspended a star reporter, [[Brian Ross]], after an inaccurate report that Donald Trump had instructed [[Michael T. Flynn]], the former [[national security adviser]], to contact Russian officials during the presidential race. The report fueled theories about coordination between the Trump campaign and a foreign power, and stocks dropped after the news. In fact, Mr. Trump’s instruction to Mr. Flynn came after he was president-elect. Several news outlets, including ''[[Bloomberg]]'' and The ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'', also inaccurately reported this week that Deutsche Bank had received a subpoena from the special counsel, [[Robert S. Mueller III]], for President Trump’s financial records. ...Here is just a sample of incredibly inflammatory claims that traveled all over the internet before having to be corrected, walked back, or retracted — often long after the initial false claims spread, and where the corrections receive only a tiny fraction of the attention with which the initial false stories are lavished: *Russia hacked into the U.S. electric grid to deprive Americans of heat during winter ([[Wash Post]]) *An anonymous group (PropOrNot) documented how major U.S. political sites are Kremlin agents (Wash Post) *WikiLeaks has a long, documented relationship with Putin ([[The Guardian|Guardian]]) *A secret server between Trump and a Russian bank has been discovered ([[Slate]]) *[[RT]] hacked [[C-SPAN]] and caused disruption in its broadcast ([[Fortune]]) *Russians hacked into a [[Ukrainian]] artillery app ([[Crowdstrike]])...

+

"Friday was one of the most embarrassing days for the U.S. media in quite a long time. The humiliation orgy was kicked off by CNN, with MSNBC and CBS close behind, and countless pundits, commentators, and operatives joining the party throughout the day...the Most Trusted Name in News™ spent 12 straight minutes on air flamboyantly hyping an exclusive bombshell report that seemed to prove that WikiLeaks, last September, had secretly offered the Trump campaign, even Donald Trump himself, special access to the [[Democratic National Committee]] emails before they were published on the internet. As CNN sees the world, this would prove [[collusion]] between the Trump family and WikiLeaks and, more importantly, between Trump and Russia, since the U.S. [[intelligence community]] regards WikiLeaks as an “arm of Russian intelligence,” and therefore, so does the U.S. media. This entire revelation was based on an email that CNN strongly implied it had exclusively obtained and had in its possession. The email was sent by someone named “Michael J. Erickson” — someone nobody had heard of previously and whom CNN could not identify — to Donald Trump Jr., offering a decryption key and access to DNC emails that WikiLeaks had “uploaded.” The email was a smoking gun, in CNN’s extremely excited mind, because it was dated September 4 [2016] — 10 days before WikiLeaks began promoting access to those emails online — and thus proved that the Trump family was being offered special, unique access to the DNC archive: likely by WikiLeaks and the [[Kremlin]]. It’s impossible to convey with words what a spectacularly devastating scoop CNN believed it had...There was just one small problem with this story: It was fundamentally false, in the most embarrassing way possible... The email was not dated September 4, as CNN claimed, but rather September 14 — which means it was sent after WikiLeaks had already published access to the DNC emails online. Thus, rather than offering some sort of special access to Trump, “Michael J. Erickson” was simply some random person from the public encouraging the Trump family to look at the publicly available DNC emails that WikiLeaks — as everyone by then already knew — had publicly promoted. In other words, the email was the exact opposite of what CNN presented it as being. ...[[Democratic Party]] pundits, operatives, and journalists with huge [[social media]] platforms predictably jumped on the story immediately, announcing that it proved collusion between Trump and Russia (through WikiLeaks). One tweet from Democratic Rep. [[Ted Lieu]], claiming that this proved evidence of criminal collusion, was retweeted thousands and thousands of times in just a few hours (Lieu quietly deleted the tweet after I noted its falsity, and long after it went very viral, without ever telling his followers that the CNN story, and therefore his accusation, had been debunked). [[File:800px-Benjamin Wittes, 2013.jpg|175px|left|thumb|'''Benjamin Wittes''' of [[Lawfare]], associated with the Brookings Institution, has been in the forefront of the political weaponization of Law providing the sketchy legal framework under which both the 2017 [[Deep State coup]] and the 2019 [[impeachment inquiry]] were carried out.]][[Brookings Institution]]’s [[Benjamin Wittes]], whose star has risen as he has promoted himself as a friend of disgraced former FBI Director [[Jim Comey]], not only promoted the CNN story in the morning, but did so with the word “boom” — which he uses to signal that a major blow has been delivered to Trump on the Russia story — along with a GIF of a cannon being detonated. Incredibly, to this very moment — almost 24 hours after CNN’s story was debunked — Wittes has never noted to his more than 200,000 followers that the story he so excitedly promoted turned out to be utterly false, even though he returned to [[Twitter]] long after the story was debunked to tweet about other matters. He just left his false and inflammatory claims uncorrected. Talking Points Memo’s Josh Marshall believed the story was so significant that he used an image of an atomic bomb detonating at the top of his article discussing its implications, an article he tweeted to his roughly 250,000 followers. Only at night was an editor’s note finally added noting that the whole thing was false. It’s hard to quantify exactly how many people were deceived — filled with false news and [[propaganda]] — by the CNN story. But thanks to Democratic-loyal journalists and operatives who decree every Trump-Russia claim to be true without seeing any evidence, it’s certainly safe to say that many hundreds of thousands of people, almost certainly millions, were exposed to these false claims. ...[[CBS News]] claimed that it had independently “confirmed” CNN’s story about the email and published its own breathless article discussing the grave implications of this discovered collusion. Most embarrassing of all was what [[MSNBC]] did. You just have to watch this report from its “intelligence and national security correspondent” [[Ken Dilanian]] to believe it. Like CBS, Dilanian also claimed that he had independently “confirmed” the false CNN report from “two sources with direct knowledge of this.” Dilanian, whose career in the U.S. media continues to flourish the more he is exposed as someone who faithfully parrots what the [[CIA]] tells him to say (since that is one of the most coveted and valued attributes in U.S. journalism), spent three minutes mixing evidence-free CIA claims as fact with totally false assertions about what his multiple “sources with direct knowledge” told him about all this. Please watch this — again, not just the content but the tenor and tone of how they “report” — as it is Baghdad Bob-level embarrassing. Think about what this means. It means that at least two — and possibly more — sources, which these media outlets all assessed as credible in terms of having access to sensitive information, all fed the same false information to multiple news outlets at the same time. For multiple reasons, the probability is very high that these sources were Democratic members of the House Intelligence Committee or their high-level staff members [Adam Schiff later admitted to leaking the false information<ref>https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/02/25/adam-schiff-admits-to-december-2017-leak-of-false-information-during-intelligence-committee-hearing/#more-146275</ref>], which is the committee that obtained access to Trump Jr.’s emails, although it’s certainly possible that it’s someone else. We won’t know until these news outlets deign to report this crucial information to the public: Which “multiple sources” acted jointly to disseminate incredibly inflammatory, false information to the nation’s largest news outlets? ...Did these “multiple sources” who fed not just CNN, but also MSNBC and CBS completely false information do so deliberately and in bad faith? Until these news outlets provide an accounting of what happened — what one might call “minimal journalistic transparency” — it’s impossible to say for certain. But right now, it’s very difficult to imagine a scenario in which multiple sources all fed the wrong date to multiple media outlets innocently and in good faith... No matter your views on those political controversies, no matter how much you hate Trump or regard Russia as a grave villain and threat to our cherished democracy and freedoms, it has to be acknowledged that when the U.S. media is spewing constant false news about all of this, that, too, is a grave threat to our democracy and cherished freedom. So numerous are the false stories about Russia and Trump over the last year that I literally cannot list them all. Just consider the ones from the last week alone: [[ABC News]] suspended a star reporter, [[Brian Ross]], after an inaccurate report that Donald Trump had instructed [[Michael T. Flynn]], the former [[national security adviser]], to contact Russian officials during the presidential race. The report fueled theories about coordination between the Trump campaign and a foreign power, and stocks dropped after the news. In fact, Mr. Trump’s instruction to Mr. Flynn came after he was president-elect. Several news outlets, including ''[[Bloomberg]]'' and The ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'', also inaccurately reported this week that Deutsche Bank had received a subpoena from the special counsel, [[Robert S. Mueller III]], for President Trump’s financial records. ...Here is just a sample of incredibly inflammatory claims that traveled all over the internet before having to be corrected, walked back, or retracted — often long after the initial false claims spread, and where the corrections receive only a tiny fraction of the attention with which the initial false stories are lavished: *Russia hacked into the U.S. electric grid to deprive Americans of heat during winter ([[Wash Post]]) *An anonymous group (PropOrNot) documented how major U.S. political sites are Kremlin agents (Wash Post) *WikiLeaks has a long, documented relationship with Putin ([[The Guardian|Guardian]]) *A secret server between Trump and a Russian bank has been discovered ([[Slate]]) *[[RT]] hacked [[C-SPAN]] and caused disruption in its broadcast ([[Fortune]]) *Russians hacked into a [[Ukrainian]] artillery app ([[Crowdstrike]])...

*Links have been found between Trump ally [[Anthony Scaramucci]] and a Russian investment fund under investigation (CNN) That really is just a small sample. So continually awful and misleading has this reporting been that even Vladimir Putin’s most devoted critics — such as Russian expatriate Masha Gessen, oppositional Russian journalists, and anti-Kremlin liberal activists in Moscow — are constantly warning that the U.S. media’s unhinged, ignorant, paranoid reporting on Russia is harming their cause in all sorts of ways, in the process destroying the credibility of the U.S. media in the eyes of Putin’s opposition... At minimum, these networks — CNN, MSNBC, and CBS — have to either identify who purposely fed them this blatantly false information or explain how it’s possible that “multiple sources” all got the same information wrong in innocence and good faith. Until they do that, their cries and protests the next time they’re attacked as “Fake News” should fall on deaf ears, since the real author of those attacks — the reason those attacks resonate — is themselves and their own conduct."<ref>https://theintercept.com/2017/12/09/the-u-s-media-yesterday-suffered-its-most-humiliating-debacle-in-ages-now-refuses-all-transparency-over-what-happened/</ref>}}

RobSmith

Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template

293,094

edits

Changes

Adam Schiff (view source)

Revision as of 00:04, November 14, 2019

Navigation menu

Search