Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
The New York Times’ very fishy article about Trump and Russia
A story that might be too good to be true for James Comey.
According to Martin, the circumstances of this article’s publication are suspicious and the information leaked to the New York Times raises more questions than answers.
‘Someone inside the government leaked this information to the New York Times. Did James Comey authorize this leak?’
The New York Times attributes the leaks about the FBI’s thinking to “law enforcement officials,” which suggests — but does not definitively establish — that the leaks came from the FBI. Martin says this raises the question as to whether Comey himself authorized the leak. If he did, it could be evidence that he is seeking to influence the election through selective leaks favorable to Trump.
‘If Comey did not authorize the leak, is he investigating who leaked the information?’
Leaking conclusion about a preliminary investigation, Martin says, violates the protocols of the FBI. If Comey is not investigating the source of the leak — and seeking to discipline those responsible — it suggests he tacitly approved of the leak, even if he did not directly authorize it.
‘The New York Times reported that ‘investigators’ have concluded the motive of the Russian government was just to create chaos, not to help Trump. Which agencies have reached that conclusion?’
The story is vague about who concluded the Russians were not trying to help Trump and how people came to such a conclusion. Martin notes the report attributes that view to “investigators,” but does not say what agency made this conclusion. So it’s not entirely clear even the FBI, institutionally, believes it to be true.
https://thinkprogress.org/the-new-york-times-very-fishy-article-about-trump-and-russia-979914ac9a86#.7cvud0a25
‘Someone inside the government leaked this information to the New York Times. Did James Comey authorize this leak?’
The New York Times attributes the leaks about the FBI’s thinking to “law enforcement officials,” which suggests — but does not definitively establish — that the leaks came from the FBI. Martin says this raises the question as to whether Comey himself authorized the leak. If he did, it could be evidence that he is seeking to influence the election through selective leaks favorable to Trump.
‘If Comey did not authorize the leak, is he investigating who leaked the information?’
Leaking conclusion about a preliminary investigation, Martin says, violates the protocols of the FBI. If Comey is not investigating the source of the leak — and seeking to discipline those responsible — it suggests he tacitly approved of the leak, even if he did not directly authorize it.
‘The New York Times reported that ‘investigators’ have concluded the motive of the Russian government was just to create chaos, not to help Trump. Which agencies have reached that conclusion?’
The story is vague about who concluded the Russians were not trying to help Trump and how people came to such a conclusion. Martin notes the report attributes that view to “investigators,” but does not say what agency made this conclusion. So it’s not entirely clear even the FBI, institutionally, believes it to be true.
https://thinkprogress.org/the-new-york-times-very-fishy-article-about-trump-and-russia-979914ac9a86#.7cvud0a25
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
