New York Times Inadvertently Trashes the Credibility of its Own Reporting

The New York Times is suffering from the tangled web it weaved when first it practiced to deceive. In this remarkable bit of reporting they are slamming the wiretapping story when in fact they reported the Obama wiretapping of Trump back in January. That’s the problem with the Internet, all your gaffes are on full display. They are embarrassed and exposed by their own print.

As Written By Ezra Dulis for Breitbart: 

The New York Times has inadvertently attacked the credibility of its own reporting on the Obama Administration’s investigation of Russia and now-President Donald Trump.

Times reporters Michael Schmidt and Michael Shear write that Trump believes the “deep state” intelligence community, staffed with holdovers from the Obama Administration, wiretapped several of his campaign associates because of a spurious article from Breitbart News:

On Sunday, the president demanded a congressional inquiry into whether Mr. Obama had abused the power of federal law enforcement agencies before the 2016 presidential election. In a statement from his spokesman, Mr. Trump called “reports” about the wiretapping “very troubling” and said that Congress should examine them as part of its investigations into Russia’s meddling in the election.

Mr. Trump’s demand for a congressional investigation appears to be based, at least in part, on unproved claims by Breitbart News and conservative talk radio hosts that………


New York Times Trashes Its Own Reporting on Obama Admin Wiretapping



Sign up for our daily email and get the stories everyone is talking about.

EmailNational SecurityPolitics

Previous post

Milo Yiannopoulos has a champion and defender

Next post

While You Weren't Looking the Democrat-Media-Russian-Hacking Story Just Collapsed

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.