The NYT is positive the Russian government & Putin are guilty, but there is no proof they are, says the NYT. If that's not insanity, what is?

The New York Times article is insane.

“What we now know with certainty: The Russians carried out a landmark intervention that will be examined for decades to come. Acting on the personal animus of Mr. Putin, public and private instruments of Russian power moved with daring and skill to harness the currents of American politics. Well-connected Russians worked aggressively to recruit or influence people inside the Trump campaign.”

But this schizoid approach leads to the admission that “no public evidence has emerged showing that [Trump’s] campaign conspired with Russia.”

The Times also adds: “There is a plausible case that Mr. Putin succeeded in delivering the presidency to his admirer, Mr. Trump, though it cannot be proved or disproved.”

I saw the title of the NYT article and deliberately chose to not read it, as I knew full well that it was nothing but a rehashing of all the already thoroughly debunked nonsense the NYT has been spewing from the beginning.

The NYT is positive the Russian government & Putin are guilty, but there is no proof they are, says the NYT. If that's not insanity, what is?

  • Subscribe
  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.