The Media Perpetuated A Clinton Lie For 9 Months. What It Means For The Russia Narrative

dailycaller.com ^ | July 9, 2017 | by Rachel Stoltzfoos

[Jim Robinson]

When Hillary Clinton claimed “17 intelligence agencies” agree on Russian meddling in the third presidential debate, a host of media outlets including The New York Times rated the claim as 100 percent true. Nine months later, those same outlets say the stat is obviously false, and there’s been a “simple” explanation as to why all along.

A closer look at how the claim survived and thrived over those nine months reveals a startling lack of skepticism in the press when it comes to the Russia narrative. The truth is the great majority of the 17 agencies that make up the U.S. intelligence community had nothing to do with the investigation and made no judgments about the matter.

“The reason the views of only those four intelligence agencies, not all 17, were included in the assessment is simple: They were the ones tracking and analyzing the Russian campaign,” The New York Times now reports. “The rest were doing other work.”

Strange admission for the paper, since its star political reporter recently reiterated the false claim as she was in the middle of writing an article characterizing President Trump as stubbornly foolish.

“The latest presidential tweets were proof to dismayed members of Mr. Trump’s party that he still refuses to acknowledge a basic fact agreed upon by 17 American intelligence agencies that he now oversees: Russia orchestrated the attacks, and did it to help him get elected,” Maggie Haberman wrote. Her story was later corrected to reflect the — basic fact — that only three agencies working under the Director of National Intelligence contributed to the intelligence community’s conclusion.

A few days later, the Associated Press echoed that correction in a “clarification” bulletin acknowledging there’s no truth to the claim the wire service had repeatedly blasted out for publication to news...

[Buffalo Head]

"More proof that the lib media are in the tank for Democrats."

No, that is conventional wisdom from the past. Today, as Rush details, the Democrat party is a wing of the Main Stream Media. The MSM established the narratives and distributes the talking points. The Dems simply follow their controllers.

[SoCal Pubbie]

With sadness I stopped listening to Medved about a month or two before the election. The daily criticism of Trump was just too much.

[robroys woman]

And yesterday he was making the argument that this Trump JR thing IS troubling and has legs. He has jumped many sharks in the last few years.

I turned him off.

And yes, it is with sadness in my case as well. I used to think he was the smartest of the hosts, including Limbaugh. I no longer believe that. He’s missed so much stuff, and gotten so much stuff wrong, while trying to humiliate those who it turns out had it right.