The Times walks the tightrope
I’m not going to write much more about the Trump “dossier” story today, because I think it’s been beaten to death by now.
I’ll simply add that it’s served its purpose. I would wager that most of the people I know are aware of the story and think the allegations are true. That was the point, wasn’t it?
I also say that my hat is off to the NY Times, doing what they do best. What’s that? It’s a subtle and delicate thing, a way of writing about something that seems fair to most regular Times readers but contains twists and omissions and nuances that lead in the direction the Times intends.
Case in point, today’s article headlined “How a Sensational, Unverified Dossier Became a Crisis for Donald Trump.” Sounds a tiny bit Trump-friendly, doesn’t it? “Sensational, unverified”? On reflection, however, shouldn’t the title be “How a Sensational, Unverified Dossier Became a Crisis for the Media“? After all, Trump seems to have turned that “crisis” on its ear.
But that’s not the angle the Times takes in the story, because it’s not the angle they want their readers to take. I won’t bother to go through the text step by step, but if you read the article I think you’ll see what I mean. And although the Times takes pains to let its readers know that the dossier’s accusations are “unverified” (it repeats the word several times), “unverified” doesn’t mean “false”—because it also wants you to think those accusations (at least, some of them) might be true although as yet unverified.
During the early days of the Trump campaign, back in the summer and fall of 2015, Trump’s opponents learned to their sorrow that revelations about Trump, as well as supposed “gaffes” by the candidate—all of which were supposed to sink him for good—failed to do the trick. The MSM rejoiced, because they thought that a Trump nomination meant an inevitable Hillary Clinton victory (I thought that as well, by the way, although the prospect gave me deep grief rather than joy). They were wrong then, and I think they would be wise to stop the flailing around now to try to find the silver bullet to kill the Trump monster that threatens them.
It is devoutly to be hoped that they do not stop “flailing around”. The more unhinged they become the better for America. Exposing themselves is the very best outcome.
Note about accessing your website: The only way I can see your January 12th posts is via RSS feed. Even refreshing your homepage doesn’t work — doing that, the last one I can see is the CNN faux news one you did yesterday.
Could it be a false story from the Trump camp? It seems to have distracted us from the other more important news like Obama’s farewell speech, Trump putting his empire into a trust run by his family, and all of the confirmation hearings in addition to congressional votes, especially on Obamacare. Makes me think “look shiny object” type of distraction.
” I would wager that most of the people I know are aware of the story and think the allegations are true.” You need to meet new people.
While this particular story is obviously bogus, it doesn’t mean that other allegations concerning Trump and the Russians are necessarily false. Maybe because I still harbor doubts about the man and loathe his personality, I’m willing to believe the worst. For instance, it would not surprise me to learn that he’s had financial dealings with Russian oligarchs in the past. What was he doing in Moscow several years ago trying to meet with Putin, or did he actually meet with him as he claimed in 2014? If the man lied about that, is he now lying that he’s never had financial dealing with the Russians?
Trump so reminds me of another lying SOB:
I want you to listen to me. I’m going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.
I wonder if the NYT supports “teaching the controversy” about evolution in public schools? I mean, that’s what they’re doing in this article, right? The story isn’t that Trump did these things, the story is that the story is that Trump did these things.
Yeah, everyone needs to be worried about whether Trump had any business dealings with “oligarchs” in Russia … whoever that refers to. But when the late Senator Kennedy actually contacted Russian government officials for help beating Regan, that was not news and was okay. Right?
@Other Chuck – trump seems to ironically be the most open (e.g. twitter at 5am), yet least transparent elected president.
Still waiting for his promised release of his tax returns – not because they would lead to any great revelation, but because he promised to do so, and has been a practice since the 1970s.
That he doesn’t says more about him than whatever info those returns might provide.
Maybe by 2020, after his audits are “finished”.
Right! /sk
.
He’d like us to think he is an angel for refusing the $2B Dubai development offer over the weekend, but who knows the terms – maybe it was just a rotten deal to him, especially now that he is going to be president.
No doubt hundreds (thousands?) of deal proposals cross his desk every year – a smart businessman would be choosy and turning down the majority. Ethics may well have nothing to do with turning any of them down.
No way is this one example meaningful, especially given how trump lies on things big and small.
Remains to be seen, but his “arm’s length” trust, with his sons at the helm of his empire, leaves a lot to be desired.
Many here will no doubt complain at some future point about how the msm will “unfairly” treat him on incidents that might be (or even reek of) a potential for conflict of interest, but why should they use kid gloves, when trump leaves it up for question, and seems very comfortable doing so?
.
Many here argued about how all this opposition from the msm will keep him straight, so to speak.
Initially had much doubt about that proposition, and haven’t seen much reason to change that position.
Ike says: Yeah, everyone needs to be worried about whether Trump had any business dealings with “oligarchs” in Russia…
Only if the details that could come out are being withheld by the Russians as leverage and potential blackmail. As to the oligarchs, do you remember the huge sums of money they had stashed in Cyprus when that country went belly up? Would it surprise you to learn that they had financial interests in this country that included silent ownership of old brick and mortar manufacturing as well as casinos? Do you know how much money the Russian oil sector generates and how much of it is skimmed off and invested outside Russia?
And finally, are you really comfortable with a President who praises a KGB trained man who invades neighboring countries, kills his political opponents with radiation laced food, sells nuclear material and weapons to Iran, and is in turn praised by that same autocrat?
Big Maq,
Prior to its recent behavior, there was some expectation that the MsM still knew how to conduct responsible journalism.
In a recent tweet Trump says:
“I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH RUSSIA – NO DEALS, NO LOANS, NO NOTHING”
From the WP on July 29, 2016:
Q: Is it true that he has no investments in Russia?
A. We don’t really know. Trump has not released the financial documents that would shed light on the issue, particularly his tax returns. Breaking a tradition dating to Richard Nixon, he says he won’t make those documents public because he is being audited by the IRS.
Q: What about investments from Russia in Trump’s businesses?
A. There is strong evidence that Trump’s businesses have received significant funding from Russian investors. Most notably, Trump’s son Donald Trump Jr. made that very claim at a real estate conference in New York in 2008, saying “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets.” Donald Trump Jr. added, “we see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”
Trump also made millions when he agreed to bring the Miss Universe pageant to Moscow in 2013, a deal financed in part by the development company of a Russian billionaire Aras Agalarov. Agalarov is a Putin ally who is sometimes called the “Trump of Russia” because of his tendency to put his own name on his buildings. At the time, Trump mingled with the Russian business elite at a swanky after-party. “Almost all of the oligarchs were in the room,” Trump bragged on returning home.
As a sign of the importance of Russian investors, partners of one of Trump’s projects then under construction in Panama visited Moscow to sell condos at the building in 2006.
Trump also made significant money from one Russian oligarch in 2008, when he sold a mansion in Palm Beach for $95 million to Russian billionaire Dmitry Rybolovlev. Trump had bought the home at a bankruptcy auction less than four years earlier for $41.4 million.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/heres-what-we-know-about-donald-trump-and-his-ties-to-russia/2016/07/29/1268b5ec-54e7-11e6-88eb-7dda4e2f2aec_story.html?utm_term=.266f63b4e0f7
Other Chuck,
I too find much to dislike/distrust about djt. But I am willing to wait and see.
Anyone dealing with the oligarchs of Russia is dealing with corrupt thugs. But then anyone doing business in Chicago (for example) is dealing with corrupt thugs. My unsolicited advise is wait and see. Nothing could be worse than bho, unless reincarnation is real and a Stalin, Hitler, Mao, or Che has rebirthed in the form of Cory Booker.
parker,
Yes you are right. Wait and see. Or as the Russians say: “doveryai no proveryai” Trust, but verify.
I guess my problem at this point is lack of any trust based on the history of lies.
I encountered a couple of stories earlier this month that struck me as having the qualities you ascribe to the Times: not saying anything demonstrably untrue, but slanting the material in the way you want to direct the reader’s mind to ingest it. It’s not really spinning; its’ misdirection and the operation of un-spoken assumptions at work, plus the careful omission of any contrary information.
They are too long to fisk, but take a look — the tilting of the board is obvious fairly quickly.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/henry-kissinger-jimmy-carter-chile-214603
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/william-perry-nuclear-weapons-proliferation-214604
With regard to the substance of the dossiers, here is the analysis from an actual intel analyst, J. E. Dyer.
http://libertyunyielding.com/2017/01/12/bonfire-credibilities-trump-dossier-rings-false-falsely-convenient/
However, even if 99% of the dossier is false — and deliberately so — that doesn’t mean we should quit being wry of Trump’s Russian ties — which almost certainly do exist.
However, I don’t think he is a Russian agent in the same way Obama was an Iranian operative (I just really can’t see his actions any other way).
It did the job…
And as I said in the other post ppl reading comprehension is poor… Even people with good comprehension don’t get perfect score
The manipulative people get good at selecting writing that confuses the less able (who would refuse to accept their own imperfections), and gets the wrong but intended message through
If you think it’s hard convincing them about facts try to convince them what they read is really meaning something else!!!
Yesterday 2500 tanks and stuff to Ukraine after lithuanian border after Latvia.. Today not in Poland… And crazy over the various island that will require fights to remove Chinese military from Japanese and taiwan and other territories
It’s magic!!
The new rule is simple: When you attack Trump, he will hit back harder than you could have imagined. This is his personal style dealing with press as well with any other offender, in business, public relations and international affairs.
Other Chuck: My point was the double standard on blatant display. Trump was a business man and, as such, could reasonably be expected to do business with Russians, post-Soviet Russia. Ted Kennedy was a Democrat Senator, a politician, and had absolutely no business negotiating with the Soviet government for help in defeating Regan in the Presidential election. Yet, Trump’s business dealings are shouted about as being proof of his treason, while Ted Kennedy’s actual treason was buried and ignored and is still being ignored. Witness your response.
@Ike – right – brietbart vs buzzfeed – hannity vs maddow –
which is the better standard bearer for the truth?
In a red vs blue team world, each side can easily point to uncountable examples of how the others’ news sources are unfair / biased / hypocritical / etc..
It becomes a perpetual circle where one finds the same type of behavior on their own “side” as invisible / ignorable / acceptable / even, encouraged, while that on the other is outrageous.
.
This election cycle should have made this all more clear than ever, as “old”, long held, norms and philosophies were quickly given up and replaced by a great many.
It prompted commenter Bill to say, back in November after the election, that we are in a “post-truth culture” era now.
It seems a better fit to say “we are in a self selection society / culture”, as we are in a red vs blue world, where we define our own truth.
http://neoneocon.com/2016/11/17/so-who-do-you-think-will-be-the-next-secretary-of-state/#comment-1931212
.
We are far from Neo’s ideal (one that I share)…
“What philosophical thesis do you think it most important to combat?
> The idea that, because total and complete truth can’t be known on this earth, all truth is therefore relative and all truths personal and equal. “
http://normblog.typepad.com/normblog/2005/03/the_normblog_pr_3.html
This election has shown we’ve slid further into this abyss than we even dared imagine we were at.
The enemy, our real foe, may well be ourselves in what we are able to countenance and ignore.
.
Yes, wait and see.
If the GOP do not get much of their conservative agenda into law in this year, we may not ever get there in our life times.
Does trump have the wherewithal to back his GOP supporters, or even his cabinet picks, when times get tough, and public opinion turns on him, as it inevitably will?
A good, if not great, leader sets direction for his team. It is one thing to be “hands off”, but it is troubling to hear from Tillerson that trump and he “haven’t discussed Russian policy, telling the Senate panel “that has not yet occurred.”” – one of the hottest issues right now.
http://fox6now.com/2017/01/11/rex-tillerson-nominee-for-secretary-of-state-breaks-with-president-elect-trump-on-tpp-foreign-policy/
.
Not a good sign.
But, yes, we just have to wait and see.
Seems this last election was very much like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-05TLiiLU
@Big Maq: There is no equivalence between the buzzfeed and cnn handling of the patently false documentation about Trump and the written records of the KGB and other Soviet-era agencies recounting Ted Kennedy’s contacts with the Soviets seeking their help in defeating Regan in the election. The first is a fantasy, the second is demonstrable true. That there is no objective truth, whether we are able to perceive or understand it entirely or not, is simply foolishness in a tuxedo. There isn’t enough room here to debate that last with you. Either you believe there is a world which exists apart from you and your perception and/or understanding of it, or you do not. The second belief is the road to lunacy.
Ike:
Sorry but Hannity, Buzzfeed, Breitbart, Madcow are all part of the world and all distort, manipulate, and deceive.
You cite the Swimmers actions to undermine President Reagan as opposite to allegations regarding Trump and the Russians. As if you know what has happened with Trump. Must be from your own special, super secret sources of objective truthiness.
Calling those who disagree with you to be on the road to insanity make me wonder about your mental state? They may be but then again so may you. How does that sound to you?
Traditional Republicans don’t fight back the way Trump does. The leftwing media can’t rely on it’s old tricks and they’ve damaged their credibility too much to go back to doing their jobs the way they were supposed to.
I don’t think Trump will have the upper hand forever, though. Just wait until there’s a sour spot in the economy or the stock market, which there will be. Financial fears have a way of erasing political good will. Trump should play his cards carefully.
Yet, Trump’s business dealings are shouted about as being proof of his treason, while Ted Kennedy’s actual treason was buried and ignored and is still being ignored. Witness your response.
No one here is accusing Trump of treason whether he had or now has business dealings with Russian oligarchs. What I pointed out and documented was the disconnect between a bold statement he made denying any dealings whatsoever, and his son’s statements to the contrary. He made a big deal back in 2014 about knowing and meeting with Putin, yet now disavows ever meeting with him or knowing him. Which is it?
As to Ted Kennedy, his feeble attempt to sabotage an election pales in comparison to his felony manslaughter of Mary Joe Kopechne and the payoff it necessitated.
As Neo says above, Trump is a big boy and fully capable of defending himself. I actually hope he gets his act together, and will support him to the extent that he carries out conservative policies, appoints good judges, and defends the interests of this country and our allies.
What liberals do not want to accept is that their main problem is not Trump, but unpopularity of their own policies. And not only in USA, the same trend is clear in Europe, too. Present liberal orthodoxy is losing appeal everywhere. We may be at a turning point where all liberal humanist utopia beginning from French Enlightenment would be reexamined and eventually rejected as a failed project.