Backtalk: The New York Times

  • Home
  • Backtalk: The New York Times

Backtalk: The New York Times Commentary on articles in the New York Times (NYT).
(1)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zdolwgy8eu4
27/06/2023

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zdolwgy8eu4

Col Douglas Macgregor Straight Calls - Ukraine news today and in-depth discussion of current geopolitical events in the United States of America. Colonel Dou...

08/05/2022

Only If the News Fits, Do We Print
By Ray McGovern, May 7, 2022

Two years ago today (May 7, 2020) Adam Schiff (D, California), Chair of the House Intelligence Committee, was forced to perform what Nixon co-conspirator John Ehrlichman famously called a “modified limited hangout”.

On that day, Schiff released sworn testimony that there was zero technical evidence that Russia — or anyone else — hacked those DNC emails so prejudicial to Hillary Clinton (later published by WikiLeaks).

Now, please, before you put me in Putin’s or Trump’s pocket, read on: The testifier was Shawn Henry, the head of the cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike. For reasons former FBI Director James Comey would never really explain, he deferred to CrowdStrike to do the forensic work on the DNC computers that were supposedly “hacked”. Comey told Congress that CrowdStrike “would share with us what they saw”.

In June 2019, it was revealed that CrowdStrike never produced an un-redacted or final forensic report for the government because the FBI never required it to, according to the Justice Department.

Are you starting to smell a rat? What about the “modified limited hangout”?

Well, if some or all of this is news to you, it is because the NY Times and other major media have deep-sixed it for exactly two years now, and counting. It gets worse — much worse.

What Did Schiff Know & When Did He Know It?

Fasten your seatbelts: It was on December 5, 2017 that Shawn Henry gave sworn testimony to the House Intelligence Committee — see the official transcript athttps://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/sh21.pdf . Henry testified that there was no technical evidence that Russia, or any other entity, hacked the DNC emails that were published by WikiLeaks just before the Democratic Convention in July 2016. (The emails showed how the deck had been stacked against Bernie Sanders — in the primaries, for example.)

Shawn Henry is a longtime protege of former FBI Director Robert Mueller and headed Mueller’s FBI cyber investigation unit. After retiring from the FBI in 2012, he took a senior position at CrowdStrike. At his testimony on Dec. 5, 2017, he had Graham M. Wilson, a partner at Perkins Coie, as well as David C. Lashway of Baker & McKenzie in support.

Falling Silently in the Forest

Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, relying on (1) the extensive expertise and professional experience of two members who happened to have been Technical Directors at NSA, (2) the revelations of Edward Snowden, and (3) the immutable principles of physics, had already concluded that the accusation of that Russian hack on the DNC was phony. (That Brennan’s CIA “believed” it to be credible helped not a whit.)

Below is how we began “Allegations of Hacking are Baseless”, our Memorandum of December 12, 2016 (a year before Shawn Henry was forced to choose between telling the truth or perjuring himself). We wrote:

A New York Times report on Monday alluding to “overwhelming circumstantial evidence” leading the CIA to believe that Russian President Vladimir Putin “deployed computer hackers with the goal of tipping the election to Donald J. Trump” is, sadly, evidence-free. This is no surprise, because harder evidence of a technical nature points to an inside leak, not hacking – by Russians or anyone else. (See: https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/12/us-intel-vets-dispute-russia-hacking-claims/ )

We even included a brief tutorial on the difference between a “hack” and a leak, but we were already, in Dec. 2016 going up against deeply encrusted popular “belief” based on intelligence-corporate media connivance.

‘Modified Limited Hangout’

Schiff was able to hide Shawn Henry’s testimony for two and a half years. Under considerable pressure from a new Director of National Intelligence, who threatened to release the testimony himself, Schiff finally relented and released it (as mentioned above) on May 7, 2020. As for Establishment media, the transcript of Henry’s testimony fell like the proverbial tree in the forest with no one around to hear it.

Did the NY Times et al. get “The Memo” ordering all to avoid Henry’s testimony like the plague? Actually, in this particular case, corporate media had quite enough incentive of their own to hide from media consumers the fact that “Russian hacking”, the cornerstone of Russia-gate, was a crock, and that viewers and listeners had been had.

When I wrote about the released— well, sort of released — Shawn Henry transcript the following day, there was a wealth of background information to provide context to this sordid affair. I included a four-minute discussion I had had with Schiff just five days after Trump took office, a reminder that the Dems were well into “Russian hacking” as the centerpiece of Russia-gate from the very start. (That clip, and lots else, is embedded in: https://consortiumnews.com/2020/05/09/ray-mcgovern-new-house-documents-sow-further-doubt-that-russia-hacked-the-dnc/ )

So Schiff knew on Dec. 5, 2017 that “Russian hacking” of those DNC emails was bogus. I was recently asked, why do you suppose he did not tell Robert Mueller, the “Inspector Javert” in hot pursuit of “Russian election interference”, whose $32-million investigation of Russia-gate lasted from May 2017 till March 2019? Good question. Did Shawn Henry misplace the telephone number of Mueller, his old boss and mentor? Or did Mueller know, and despite knowing, continued his Javert-like chase until after the mid-terms in November 2018. (That worked for the Democrats; and, not incidentally, Schiff took back the reins of the Intelligence Committee.)

Most Americans have no idea how they’ve been had on Russia-gate. And the NYTimes et al. have every reason to keep them in the dark about “Russian hacking”. Most people have little idea as to how the steady drumming on Russian perfidy has conditioned them not only to distrust “the Russians”, but to hate them. (What, after all, could be more hateful than being responsible for giving us four years of Trump?) Sadly — and admittedly — it cannot be considered unreasonable to be convinced that everything out of Trump’s mouth is a lie and that he would never ever tell the truth about Russia — given what Obama and others call his “bromance” with Putin.

There are, of course, dangerous implications in all this for what Americans may be asked in terms of confronting Russia on Ukraine.

On wider Russia-gate issues over the past five years and my tree-falling-in-forest attempts to expose the malfeasance of our corporate-captive media, readers may wish to review this:
https://covertactionmagazine.com/2021/11/05/ray-mcgovern-the-man-who-got-russiagate-right-and-tried-to-warn-the-public-to-no-avail/

24/04/2022

Mainstream media outlets in the United States may have their disagreements, but on one issue they tend to speak in unison, and that is to support going to wa...

23/04/2022

For at least the past five years, The New York Times has put on display its total commitment to highlighting and exaggerating any story that appears, in any way, to implicate Russia in real or imaginary crimes against the United States, the Democratic party, CIA staff, members of prominent American....

22/04/2022

New Cold War Witch Hunt Targets Journalists Opposed to US Empire

The corporate media – including social media giants – are closing ranks to squeeze out anyone who dares speak up in opposition to the Pentagon’s narrative and against catastrophic confrontation between the United States and Russia.

WATCH / LISTEN: https://linktr.ee/TheSocialistProgram

20/04/2022

For at least the past five years, The New York Times has put on display its total commitment to highlighting and exaggerating any story that appears, in any way, to implicate Russia in real or imaginary crimes against the United States, the Democratic party, CIA staff, members of prominent American....

17/04/2022

It is an uncontroversial matter of public record that the U.S. government sponsored the 2014 coup in Ukraine, writes Ben Norton. By Ben Norton Multipolarista.com The New York Times published a ridiculous article smearing me with misleading claims, and even used an image of my face men

https://www.mintpressnews.com/279612-2/279612/
29/03/2022

https://www.mintpressnews.com/279612-2/279612/

This MintPress study reveals that ninety percent of recent opinion articles in The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal have taken a hawkish view on the Ukraine conflict written by pundits tied to the national security state promoting NATO as a defender of the free world &...

09/03/2022
"WASHINGTON – Amid tough talk from European and American leaders, a new MintPress study of our nation’s most influential...
16/02/2022

"WASHINGTON – Amid tough talk from European and American leaders, a new MintPress study of our nation’s most influential media outlets reveals that it is the press that is driving the charge towards war with Russia over Ukraine. Ninety percent of recent opinion articles in The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal have taken a hawkish view on conflict, with anti-war voices few and far between. Opinion columns have overwhelmingly expressed support for sending U.S. weapons and troops to the region. Russia has universally been presented as the aggressor in this dispute, with media glossing over NATO’s role in amping tensions while barely mentioning the U.S. collaboration with Neo-Nazi elements within the Ukrainian ruling coalition."

This MintPress study reveals that ninety percent of recent opinion articles in The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal have taken a hawkish view on the Ukraine conflict written by pundits tied to the national security state promoting NATO as a defender of the free world &...

16/02/2022

"’Foiled again!’ rose the cry from those expecting Russian President Vladimir Putin to step out of character and risk war, just as he finally - Ray McGovern for Antiwar.com Original

The NYT here attacks the "far-right" Republicans Tucker Carlson, Matt Rosendale of Montana, Lauren Boebert of Colorado, ...
27/01/2022

The NYT here attacks the "far-right" Republicans Tucker Carlson, Matt Rosendale of Montana, Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Paul Gosar of Arizona, Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia" for questioning "why the United States would side with Ukraine at all." Massie co-sponsoed a resolution with (Democrat) Tulsi Gabbard to drop the charges against Julian Assange, which makes him a good guy in my book. Ditto for Tucker Carlson.

I know nothing about their positions otherwise, but they are absolutely right about Ukraine, and in the case of Massie, about Assange. The NYT hates Assange, as Chris Hedges (who worked for them) has often said, because Assange shows them up to be the phony journalists they are.

The US "appeals to allies" to side with the N***s ruling Ukraine against the completely understandable Russian need to secure their border should not only be "undercut" but cut off at the knees.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/26/us/politics/republicans-ukraine.html

G.O.P. leaders are attacking President Biden for what they call a weak response to Russian aggression, but their far-right flank is questioning U.S. involvement, and even its alliance with Kyiv.

This disgusting opinion piece by the German editor of the NYT masquerading as "news" has everything wrong. Virtually eve...
27/01/2022

This disgusting opinion piece by the German editor of the NYT masquerading as "news" has everything wrong. Virtually every sentence reeks of ignorance and insanity. I hope that Germany strengthens its stance against the insanity of US/NATO policy.
https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2022%2F01%2F25%2Fworld%2Feurope%2Fgermany-russia-nato-ukraine.html%3Fsmid%3Dfb-share%26fbclid%3DIwAR2r4CZ4zWmMbds3MhLK9NhwREsW3vCVjSYzl5V25V8nLBKHFZtlDbP_ox8&h=AT2AsoB2NCHdufoHGLs9yqsNOyzjhtBHffc2sGdFPTnad65zTcueOw_lI50dO0AGbBEH5UzpriAONF0ItYUQVEj8GqxeQM0G0FWhsmm3GhhLiTpJCfTu8_LZn-QTCxcIBHgF6DmUpXqgn-hC1XPr&__tn__=%2CmH-R&c[0]=AT2e9a83ZccbufEut078vLQ4R5lGeYRe11ORZ5OrmJNICRg2WhmxGlrs444lS8Wq2b_Ri4Uc87RjERkVkuseZEeoLUnOdUbWt4oCOm8aSn1t8ypEAQZgrUIhkHrq-7gghexUeAu1VELzqlfBKgMoks2Cxw

Germany’s allies have begun to question what price Berlin is prepared to pay to deter Russia, and even its reliability as an ally, as it wavers on tough measures.

The NYT has yet to publish a word about this.
27/12/2021

The NYT has yet to publish a word about this.

I hope you know this by now, but on Christmas morning the Russian military announced a sizable troop withdrawal from Russian territory near Ukraine. The - Ray McGovern for Antiwar.com Original

This disgustingly milk-toast NYT editorial from Dec. 18 finally gets around to mentioning Julian Assange, after chastisi...
21/12/2021

This disgustingly milk-toast NYT editorial from Dec. 18 finally gets around to mentioning Julian Assange, after chastising China, Egypt, Vietnam, Belarus, Russia, Turkey, Saudi Arabia (the last two being a NATO partners and best buddy with the US, resp.). Here is all they have to say about Assange:

"It is most unfortunate that the U.S. government has chosen to continue to use a law as potent as the Espionage Act to pursue Mr. Assange. There is a debate about whether Mr. Assange is a journalist, but equating the publication of classified materials received from government sources with espionage strikes at the very foundations of a free press and should be rejected by Mr. Biden.

"Mr. Assange plans to appeal, and his legal odyssey could stretch out even longer than it already has. And the drawn-out effort by the United States to try Mr. Assange in an open court where he could contest the charges under the First Amendment’s protection of press freedoms is qualitatively different from the incarceration of journalists by authoritarian leaders who seek nothing more than unchallenged power.

"But if Mr. Assange’s and his colleagues’ methods and motives are sometimes murky — they released numerous documents leaked by an Army private without removing the names of confidential sources, putting lives in danger — his case could set dangerous precedents that could interfere with a free press monitoring the shenanigans of those in power. That should be inviolable."

"Most unfortunate"? How about "travesty of justice"? The cowardly NYT parrots the blatantly false accusations that have been conjured out of thin air against Assange -- that he is "not a journalist," "murky methods and motives," "putting lives in danger"? None of this is true and none of it is even part of the outlandish US indictment of Assange! Nevertheless, they say, the Assange case "could set dangerous precedents that could interfere with a free press monitoring the shenanigans of those in power."

Oh, how my teeth do grind when reading this cowardly drivel. The Assange case WILL set a precedent that WILL not only "interfere with" but KILL free press reporting of STATE CRIMES ("shenanigans"!) of the US and ANY OTHER STATE.
ihttps://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/18/opinion/free-press-journalists-jailed.html?action=click&module=Well&pgtype=Homepage§ion=Editorials"

Authoritarian leaders are waging a war against the free press.

The NYT article is here: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/12/18/us/airstrikes-pentagon-records-civilian-deaths.h...
21/12/2021

The NYT article is here: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/12/18/us/airstrikes-pentagon-records-civilian-deaths.html
My first reaction to this was that it could be used to exonerate Assange because here is the NYT (again) doing the same thing Assange did. However, NYT says "...the hidden Pentagon documents... were obtained through Freedom of Information requests beginning in March 2017 and lawsuits filed against the Defense Department and U.S. Central Command."

I am now wondering if this will be used as a "counterexample" to show how "legitimate" exposure of documents should work, i.e. through Freedom of Information requests and lawsuits, which can take years or forever, and is not the same as whistle-blowing since the government still has control of what eventually comes out.

Does the difference justify punishing the whistleblower with 175 years in prison and years of extraordinarily cruel and unusual punishment (torture) without a trial, namely all that Assange has been put through?

I will be watching to see which of these two outcomes prevail. In any case, the NYT should be saying this, not me. They should be saying there is no significant difference between what we are doing now -- and have done many times before, also with the Pentagon Papers -- and what Julian is being TORTURED TO DEATH for!

Newly released Pentagon documents confirm previous reports from whistleblowers like Chelsea Manning and Daniel Hale.

05/12/2021

A bizarre and abrupt reversal by scientists regarding COVID's origins, along with clear conflicts of interest, create serious doubts about their integrity. Yet major news outlets keep relying on them.

MORE NEWS UNFIT TO PRINT!
11/10/2021

MORE NEWS UNFIT TO PRINT!

Covert plans for the state-sanctioned murder on British soil of an award-winning journalist should attract wall-to-wall media coverage.

Comment from David Talbot -- I thought "sharing" it would include his comment but it didn't, so here it is:"Blood Money....
02/09/2021

Comment from David Talbot -- I thought "sharing" it would include his comment but it didn't, so here it is:

"Blood Money. Thanks to independent journalists like Matt Taibbi (whose newsletter "TK News" is an indispensable daily read -- subscribe today), the mainstream media has been shamed (to the extent that corporate media HAS any shame) into acknowledging the military-industrial connections of their Afghanistan national security "experts." Not only did favorite New York Times and Washington Post quote machines and TV talking heads like Meghan O'Sullivan and Jeh Johnson keep the U.S. in the forever war -- they're also profiting from the endless bloodletting in the region by sitting on the boards of weapons manufacturers like Raytheon.
"After helping pave the road to endless war with its false reporting on Saddam's nonexistent WMD (hell, let's go back to the 1950s, with its jingoistic reporting that helped the CIA overthrow democracy in Iran), does the New York Times have ANY conscience when it comes to the slaughterhouse of the Middle East? Um, the short answer is no. Just read the Times' daily drumbeat against President Biden for withdrawing AFTER 20 YEARS (!) from Afghanistan.
"It must be said: the New York Times is one of America's most shrill warmongers. I'd say "Shame on them" -- but their executive leadership has no shame."

Discussing the forever war and the prospects for a third party with old friends Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti

01/09/2021

A linguistic forensic analysis of the Intelligence Community Review of the origin of the COVID-19 virus and the New York Times article reporting on it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/27/us/politics/covid-origin-lab-leak.html?searchResultPosition=2The report summary itsel...
28/08/2021

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/27/us/politics/covid-origin-lab-leak.html?searchResultPosition=2
The report summary itself is here:https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Unclassified-Summary-of-Assessment-on-COVID-19-Origins.pdf

Neither the NYT article nor the IC Summary answers any of the questions raised by Nicholas Wade (a former NYT reporter) https://thebulletin.org/2021/08/how-covid-19s-origins-were-obscured-by-the-east-and-the-west/?fbclid=IwAR1dSHzmfb4VwfJD8J-nJM7_yEcAMMOJLwZXCAMTU8s5ozZklDwNYJS-HAs
or by the 24 members of Congress who published this, which remains UNREPORTED by the NYT: https://gop-foreignaffairs.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/ORIGINS-OF-COVID-19-REPORT.pdf.

For example, Barnes (NYT) says the FBI: probably (according to "current and former officials") believe "that the virus was created in the lab." The other 16 "elements" do not have a strong or even "moderate" opinion either way.

The House report concludes otherwise: "We conclude there is ample proof that the virus could have been genetically manipulated."

So who is more credible: the NYT and the "intelligence community," except for the FBI (!), who have published a 2-page summary of their findings, or 24 democratically elected members of the US Congress who published an 84-page carefully researched report that HAS NEVER EVEN BEEN MENTIONED BY THE NYT?

Declassified portions of a report presented to President Biden revealed divisions among federal agencies over whether the virus came from a lab leak or emerged more naturally.

Address


Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Backtalk: The New York Times posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

  • Address
  • Alerts
  • Claim ownership or report listing

  • Want your business to be the top-listed Media Company?

Share