UNEXPECTEDLY: The New York Times Still Refuses To Admit Kash Patel Was Right About Russiagate.
In their lede, Charlie Savage, Adam Goldman, and Alan Feuer accuse Patel of having “repeatedly undercut the work of the very agency he is set to lead by making false statements” about the FBI’s sham investigation into Trump for supposed collusion with Russia. Lost on them is the reality that Patel’s understanding of the FBI’s corruption and willingness to “undercut” their partisan witch hunts make him the perfect candidate to clean house at the bureau.
* * * * * * * *
When FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith pled guilty to fabricating evidence in the FISA warrant application, it was Goldman who broke the news and made sure to soften the blow. They wrote sympathetically about Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, whom Durham would prosecute for spreading lies about Trump and Russia to the FBI. When Sussmann was indicted by Durham, Savage and Goldman even “gave Sussmann’s team an assist in getting ahead of the news,” as The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland noted.
If you’re still not convinced Savage and Goldman are deep state apologists, recall that Goldman was the one whom the FBI worked with to downplay the Hunter Biden investigation, and Savage downplayed Special Counsel Robert Hur’s findings about Joe Biden’s classified documents scandal, falsely claiming Hur found “insufficient evidence to charge Mr. Biden.”
(The third person in the hit piece’s byline, Alan Feuer, isn’t a Russia hoax veteran like the other two, and was presumably included to help with the non-Russiagate parts of the hit job. He is nonetheless on the record complaining that Biden’s DOJ was not going to succeed in dragging Trump into a courtroom before the 2024 election.)
There are few people who understand the magnitude of the abuses committed by the FBI during the Russia hoax as well as Kash Patel. That’s probably why Russia collusion hoaxers like Savage and Goldman don’t want him running it.
When the New York Times finds a hoax involving Russia, they never let it go! The New York Times can’t shake the cloud over a 90-year-old Pulitzer Prize.
The New York Times is looking to add to its list of 132 Pulitzer Prizes — by far the most of any news organization — when the 2022 recipients for journalism are announced on Monday.
Yet the war in Ukraine has renewed questions of whether the Times should return a Pulitzer awarded 90 years ago for work by Walter Duranty, its charismatic chief correspondent in the Soviet Union.
No need for anyone to hold their breath waiting.