In case you somehow missed it, the New York Times managed to fully jump the shark.

In an article containing a who’s who of leakers attempting to get in front of the pending Inspector General Report, Times authors Matt Apuzzo, Adam Goldman and Nicholas Fandos destroyed any remaining semblance of independence from the DNC/Obama Administration.

Code Name Hurricane Crossfire: The Secret Origin of the Trump Investigation goes beyond a mere propaganda piece.

Its a compilation of carefully crafted lies.

It’s that bad.

The Times provided an unfettered platform for the implicated to shape their side of the story.

Just as copies of the Inspector General’s Phase One Report are being given for review by the lawyers of those named in the IG Report.

For a great primer on how this review process will work see this article by the Conservative Treehouse.

Consider the following paragraphs:

The F.B.I. obtained phone records and other documents using national security letters — a secret type of subpoena — officials said. And at least one government informant met several times with Mr. Page and Mr. Papadopoulos, current and former officials said. That has become a politically contentious point, with Mr. Trump’s allies questioning whether the F.B.I. was spying on the Trump campaign or trying to entrap campaign officials.

Everything the FBI and the leaders of the IC denied, they now admit.

[Officials] said Ms. Page and others advocated a slower, circumspect pace, especially because polls predicted Mr. Trump’s defeat. They said that anything the F.B.I. did publicly would only give fodder to Mr. Trump’s claims on the campaign trail that the election was rigged.

But they had to lie because if they told the truth it would have backed Trump’s claims.

Here’s the crux their argument.

The FBI could not admit to spying on the Trump Campaign…because it would lend credence to President Trump’s claims of FBI spying…

I’m traveling at the moment, so here’s a few great summations of the article.

Chuck Ross of the Daily Caller made this observation:

Amazing. FBI tells me it will not provide comment or guidance on some of the claims made in this NYT article which appears to be based on comment and guidance from the FBI. https://t.co/8SN96EbBDE — Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) May 16, 2018

Dan Bongino’s take is slightly more direct:

Make absolutely NO MISTAKE, today’s NY Times story on #CrossfireHurricane is a timed leak through the NY Times propaganda machine to head off the damaging information about to come out in the IG report. The NY Times is a disgrace, no better than Pravda. — Dan Bongino (@dbongino) May 16, 2018

But Kimberley Strassel nailed it:

1. So a few important points on that new NYT “Hurricane Crossfire” piece. A story that, BTW, all of us following this knew had to be coming. This is DOJ/FBI leakers’ attempt to get in front of the facts Nunes is forcing out, to make it not sound so bad. Don’t buy it. It’s bad. — Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) May 17, 2018

2. Biggest takeaway: Govt “sources” admit that, indeed, the Obama DOJ and FBI spied on the Trump campaign. Spied. (Tho NYT kindly calls spy an “informant.”) NYT slips in confirmation far down in story, and makes it out like it isn’t a big deal. It is a very big deal. — Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) May 17, 2018

3. In self-serving desire to get a sympathetic story about its actions, DOJ/FBI leakers are willing to provide yet more details about that “top secret” source (namely, that spying was aimed at Page/Papadopoulos)–making all more likely/certain source will be outed. That’s on them — Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) May 17, 2018

4. DOJ/FBI (and its leakers) have shredded what little credibility they have in claiming they cannot comply with subpoena. They are willing to provide details to friendly media, but not Congress? Willing to risk very source they claim to need to protect? — Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) May 17, 2018

5. Back in Dec., NYT assured us it was the Papadopoulos-Downer convo that inspired FBI to launch official counterintelligence operation on July 31, 2016. Which was convenient, since it diminished the role of the dossier. However . . . — Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) May 17, 2018

6. Now NYT tells us FBI didn’t debrief downer until August 2nd. And Nunes says no “official intelligence” from allies was delivered to FBI about that convo prior to July 31. So how did FBI get Downer details? (Political actors?) And what really did inspire the CI investigation? — Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) May 17, 2018

7. As for whether to believe line that FBI operated soberly/carefully/judiciously in 2016, a main source for this judgment is, um . . .uh . . . Sally Yates. Who was in middle of it all. A bit like asking Putin to reassure that Russia didn’t meddle in our election. — Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) May 17, 2018

8. On that, if u r wondering who narrated this story, note paragraphs that assure everybody that hardly anybody in DOJ knew about probe. Oh, and Comey also was given few details. Nobody knew nothin’! (Cuz when u require whole story saying u behaved, it means u know you didn’t.) — Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) May 17, 2018

The New York Times article is an utter disgrace.

newer post The FBI’s Outside Contractors, DNC Servers & Crowdstrike

older post The Steele Dossier & the Intelligence Community Assessment