[keat]

Not even going to read it.

[Hugin]

“Political crosshairs”? How about “may have broken the law”? It’s all just politics when Dems get caught.

[Helicondelta]

“tarred for doing her job”

Here we go again. But spying on political opponents without a court order is not in her job description.

[Zathras]

Team Obama never does goes all in trying to block a story unless someone is in danger of going to prison.
If it made to the NYT, they are in serious trouble.

Time for McCain to ride to the rescue again.

[Brad from Tennessee]

The Times can see that an illegal Obama White House political operation is being exposed—bit by bit—every day by Congress, whistleblowers, and alternative news media. Democrat conspirators Evelyn Farkas and Susan Rice have both unwittingly added pieces to the puzzle. Unlike CNN’s nightly dimwit, the editors at the Times know they can't lie by omission indefinitely and maintain a semblance of being a newspaper.

[KC_Conspirator]

From the paper that had the story, but tried to sit on it and hide the truth from the American people.

[a fool in paradise]

A proper headline would point out she’s been caught lying twice about different international scandals.

[Zeppo]

After the 2012 attack on an American diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya, Susan E. Rice was at the center of conflict, her statements scrutinized and criticized.

Note the utter falsity and deception carefully crafted into NYT White House Correspondent Peter Baker's article.

He focuses on the scrutiny and criticism of Rice's statements, rather than describing in detail how Rice, acting under Obama's direct orders, deliberately lied to the nation about how the Benghazi attack was motivated by some video that nobody had ever seen, rather than the terrorist attack that the Obama regime knew it was from the start.

People who get their news from the liars at the New York Times are either uninformed or misinformed, due to deliberate omissions and deceptions such as this one.

[Zeppo]

After the 2012 attack on an American diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya, Susan E. Rice was at the center of conflict, her statements scrutinized and criticized.

Note the utter falsity and deception carefully crafted into NYT White House Correspondent Peter Baker's article.

Baker focuses on the scrutiny and criticism of Rice's statements, rather than describing in detail how Rice, acting under Obama's direct orders, deliberately lied to the nation about how the Benghazi attack was motivated by some video that nobody had ever seen, rather than the terrorist attack that the Obama regime knew it was from the start.

The intent of propaganda such as this is to deliberately distract the reader in order to shield Obama and his agents from culpability. The slant of the article is "as usual, it's those terrible Republicans and Trumpists who are making a lot of noise and false accusations about our Dear Leader and Savior Barack Obama."

People who get their news from the liars at the New York Times such as Peter Baker end up being either uninformed or misinformed, due to deliberate omissions and deceptions such as this one.

[cymbeline]

I think the “Russian meddling in our election” theme has been played for months in an attempt to avert attention from the meddling done by the Obama administration and Hillary campaign.

My scorecard reads:
1. no Russian meddling
2. widespread corruption by Obama and Hillary

[Bon mots]