Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: All

The absurd ‘Russiagate’ Pulitzer awards to the NY Times and Washington Post

By Post Editorial Board
Published Feb. 20, 2022

Trump claims win as Florida court rejects Pulitzer Board bid to pause defamation case

“For deeply sourced, relentlessly reported coverage in the public interest,” the citation from the Pulitzer Prize board begins, “that dramatically furthered the nation’s understanding of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and its connections to the Trump campaign, the president-elect’s transition team and his eventual administration.”

Except the journalism that the Pulitzers honored — a 2018 National Reporting prize shared by the Washington Post and the New York Times for reporting on Russiagate — did no such thing.

It led to a dramatic misunderstanding, suggesting that Donald Trump colluded with Vladimir Putin to help sway the 2016 election — a grand conspiracy that we now know never existed.

Oh, it was “deeply sourced,” in that deep-state Democratic bureaucrats, furious that Trump had won the White House, were falling over themselves to talk anonymously to reporters.

And it was “relentlessly reported,” or at least just relentless, as the newspapers were obsessed with taking down the Trump administration.

Yet reading these pieces four years later, one is struck not only by how irrelevant they are, but how shlocky — tinged with a McCarthyist alarmism of a red under every bed. Two major newspapers that hold themselves up as the pinnacle of press freedom, the “truth dies in darkness” brigade and all that, pushed a conspiracy theory.

As a lesson in mass delusion, it’s worth going through the 20 stories that make up the Post and the Times’ award-winning series to show just how damaging they were: to the truth, to the newspapers’ reputations — and to America itself.

snip


5 posted on 10/03/2025 7:57:34 AM PDT by Liz (May you be in Heaven half an hour before the devil knows you're dead (Irish blessing))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: Liz

Maybe no one paid attention at the time. But 99% of the “proof and evidence” against Trump during the impeachment trials came from hearsay “opinion” pieces in the media.

They should not have even been inadmissible. Without them they would have had nothing worth even talking about.


9 posted on 10/03/2025 8:05:02 AM PDT by Openurmind (AI - An Illusion for Aptitude Intrusion to Alter Intellect. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson