HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » New evidence suggests the...

Mon Feb 11, 2019, 04:54 PM

New evidence suggests the New York Times was tricked into retracting a major Mueller probe bombshell

AlterNet

written by Cody Fenwick February 11, 2019
Last week, the court published an in-depth and partially redacted transcript of a hearing between Special Counsel Robert Mueller and lawyers for Paul Manafort, President Donald Trumpís former campaign chair.

This trove of information provided a fresh glimpse inside the workings of Muellerís team, revealing new details about the case that look increasingly bad for the president. And as reporter Marcy Wheeler noted, it also appears to significantly contradict previous reporting from the New York Times about a major development in the Russia investigation.

That development came when Manafortís lawyers accidentally filed an improperly redacted document addressing allegations that their client lied to the special counsel about material facts in the investigation. Most strikingly, investigators believe Manafort lied about a meeting with Russian-born political consultant Konstantin Kilimnik, who the government believes has ties to Russian intelligence, where the campaign chair handed over polling data on the 2016 campaign.

When the New York Times first reported on this fact, it contained a stunning revelation: Manafort had given the polling data to Kilimnik to pass it along to Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch close to the Kremlin. This was significant for many reasons. First, of course, it ties the campaign directly to Moscow, which had been working on efforts to help secure Trumpís victory. Second, previous reports of emails from Manafort during the campaign showed that he had offered private briefings to Deripaska to use his position close to Trump to fulfill his debts to the oligarch. And third, it makes the Trump administrationís recent decision to lift sanctions on Deripaska specifically in a particularly generous fashion look even more suspicious.

More: https://www.alternet.org/2019/02/new-evidence-suggests-the-new-york-times-was-tricked-into-retracting-a-major-russia-probe-bombshell/

4 replies, 1415 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 4 replies Author Time Post
Reply New evidence suggests the New York Times was tricked into retracting a major Mueller probe bombshell (Original post)
Quixote1818 Feb 2019 OP
triron Feb 2019 #1
saidsimplesimon Feb 2019 #2
manor321 Feb 2019 #3
FakeNoose Feb 2019 #4

Response to Quixote1818 (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2019, 04:56 PM

1. Were they? Or were they complicit?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Quixote1818 (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2019, 04:59 PM

2. "smoke and mirrors" a NYT staple of distraction?

Is it all about getting the scoop and maximizing the ratings? How could I become so cynical?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Quixote1818 (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2019, 05:02 PM

3. Yes, this comes from analysis from the great Marcy Wheeler

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Quixote1818 (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2019, 05:31 PM

4. K &R bookmarked to read later

Thanks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread