The New York Times is out for blood.
Only slightly less transparent about their intention to remove Trump from office than CNN, the legacy media outlet has rehabilitated its once dwindling readership numbers by becoming the less the paper of record and more the political opposition of the president.
Even the executive editor was caught scolding the staff over the “far left wing” editorial page, so behind closed doors even the activist journalists of the Times can admit the truth to themselves.
The latest edition of the Times stirring the pot of the Russian collusion delusion is the revelation that Trump talked to Mueller investigators, twice. It even knows the substance of those two conversations via Special Counsel Robert Mueller and related them for their readers on Wednesday.
“In one episode, the president told an aide that the White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, should issue a statement denying a New York Times article in January,” the Times reported, somewhat ironically.
“The article said Mr. McGahn told investigators that the president once asked him to fire the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III. Mr. McGahn never released a statement and later had to remind the president that he had indeed asked Mr. McGahn to see that Mr. Mueller was dismissed, the people said.”
The NY Times then proceeded to divulge the details of the second episode.
“In the other episode, Mr. Trump asked his former chief of staff, Reince Priebus, how his interview had gone with the special counsel’s investigators and whether they had been “nice,” according to two people familiar with the discussion.”
You get that? President Trump asked Priebus if investigators had been “nice.” That’s as poignant a picture as you’re going to get about how substantive a president’s exchange with an interlocutor went.
While stipulating that the president was ignoring the advice of his legal team, the Times had a big letdown for readers who are all aboard the impeachment train.
“Legal experts said Mr. Trump’s contact with the men most likely did not rise to the level of witness tampering. But witnesses and lawyers who learned about the conversations viewed them as potentially a problem and shared them with Mr. Mueller,” the Times admitted.
“Potentially a problem.”
We’ve been seeing this language out of the U.S. media for over a year of the Trump administration. When is the investigation going to wrap up so that the White House can proceed with doing the business of the people?
All eyes are on you, Mr. Mueller.
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
- Denver sheriff defies ICE detainment request for illegal immigrant arrested in fatal hit-and-run - March 10, 2018
- Another porn star named in Stormy Daniels NDA and she accuses Trump of inappropriate ‘sexual touching’ - March 10, 2018
- Pardoned Navy sailor speaks out: Obama used me as scapegoat to take heat off Hillary Clinton - March 10, 2018
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.