NYT: Trump, Russia, and the News Story That Wasn't

[babylonsister]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/20/public-editor/trump-russia-fbi-liz-spayd-public-editor.html?_r=1

Trump, Russia, and the News Story That Wasn’t
Liz Spayd


LATE fall was a frantic period for New York Times reporters covering the country’s secretive national security apparatus. Working sources at the F.B.I., the C.I.A., Capitol Hill and various intelligence agencies, the team chased several bizarre but provocative leads that, if true, could upend the presidential race. The most serious question raised by the material was this: Did a covert connection exist between Donald Trump and Russian officials trying to influence an American election?

One vein of reporting centered on a possible channel of communication between a Trump organization computer server and a Russian bank with ties to Vladimir Putin. Another source was offering The Times salacious material describing an odd cross-continental dance between Trump and Moscow. The most damning claim was that Trump was aware of Russia’s efforts to hack Democratic computers, an allegation with implications of treason. Reporters Eric Lichtblau and Steven Lee Myers led the effort, aided by others.

Conversations over what to publish were prolonged and lively, involving Washington and New York, and often including the executive editor, Dean Baquet. If the allegations were true, it was a huge story. If false, they could damage The Times’s reputation. With doubts about the material and with the F.B.I. discouraging publication, editors decided to hold their fire.

But was that the right decision? Was there a way to write about some of these allegations using sound journalistic principles but still surfacing the investigation and important leads? Eventually, The Times did just that, but only after other news outlets had gone first.

snip//

In this cat-and-mouse game between government and press, the government won.

After-action insights are easier than in-the-moment decisions. Back then, the media still thought Trump was a weak challenger to Clinton, a mind-set that might have made taking the risk of publishing explosive allegations all the more fraught.

But it’s hard not to wonder what impact such information might have had on voters still evaluating the candidates, an issue I chided The Times for not pursuing enough in an earlier column. Would more sources have come forward? Would we already know the essential facts?

If the new president was in fact colluding with a foreign adversary, journalists and investigators should feel enormous pressure to conclusively establish that fact. If it is not true, both Trump and the country deserve to have this issue put to rest.

[samplegirl]

1. They said he was being investigating

Since early spring.

[brush]

2. What's your take on Rep. Cummings saying that details of the briefing by Comey...

Last edited Sat Jan 21, 2017, 11:31 AM - Edit history (1)

what was it, three or so weeks ago and way after the election—to him and other legislators will come out soon, maybe through a leak?

Rep. Maxine Waters was fuming when she exited the briefing, saying that "Director Comey has no credibility", clearly inferring that Comey sat on material purposely to influence the election, not hard to believe considering his Oct. 28th letter to Congress.

Another Rep., I can't recall his name, said that the info on trump was so devastating that if this had happened in another western democracy, a new election would have to occur.

[politicaljunkie41910]

6. I can't remember which Congressman or woman said it but, one of them made the comment that

Comey had evidence which could have been damning against two campaigns before the election, but chose to release that which applied to only one.

Obviously the evidence for treason was more impactful to this nation and to our national security, but Comey decided to keep this info under wraps and not to release that info until after the election and then to force the Congressional leadership into silence by keeping the data classified until after the inauguration of the 'treasonous' candidate.

Comey has to go. He also should be criminally prosecuted for violating the Hatch Act since there is no way that we can unring that bell, nor do we get a do-over.

[brush]

8. Agreed. He should be prosecuted. And I hope someone leaks the info asap...

before trump can do much damage., even if that means Pence.

The repugs will be so weakened by this, their agenda will suffer.

[delisen]

3. Chaffetz now intends to use power of the illegitimate gov't to crush Clinton and us

Trump and his Republican Party supporters know they are conducting a war against us and want to crush Clinton to crush us.

She is more threatening to them than any other political leader. This is truly a Love over Hate, Justice over Injustice, equality over inequality, Freedom over authoritarianism war.

We are in a majority but they hold the powers of government.

The N Y Times made a huge mistake.

[uponit7771]

4. I couldn't be more disappointed with the NYT, this is twice they've proper fucked the country

[Princess Turandot]

5. FYI, as an aside: An Eric Boehlart (MediaMatters) article on Ms Spayd

NY Times Public Editor Says Problem With Paper’s Election Coverage Is It Was Too Mean To Trump Supporters

Then in December, she blasted NY Times reporters (whilst appearing on Fox) for their tweets about that poor lamb Donald:
https://thinkprogress.org/liz-spayd-trump-tweets-outrageous-tucker-carlson-1e0e6ff06d6b#.5e4rqdyfz

[UTUSN]

7. Dear NYT: Thanks a big big bunch.