Wednesday, March 08, 2017 9:16:03 PM
The New York Times contradicted their 20 January 2017 report about wire tapping in an article entitled "Trump, Offering No Evidence, Says Obama Tapped His Phones."
RATING
ORIGIN
In March 2017, several web outlets circulated an image purportedly showing the front page of the 20 January 2017 print edition of the New York Times along with accusations that the newspaper’s reporting on President Trump’s claims that former President Obama had ordered the wiretapping of Trump Tower phones had been contradictory:
-
The front page of The New York Times way back on January 20, 2017… “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides”
But Two months later they are trashing their own reports!
Now the NY Times is reporting there is no evidence of a wiretap.
No wonder nobody trusts them!
-
The image is of the Times‘ front page and its “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides” is real. It’s also true that the New York Times reported .. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/04/us/politics/trump-obama-tap-phones.html .. about two months later that President Trump had offered no evidence to back up his claim that the Obama administration had tapped his phones. However, these two articles are not contradictory
In order for the New York Times 4 March 2017 report (“Trump, Offering No Evidence, Says Obama Tapped His Phones”) to contradict the newspaper’s 20 January 2017 report (“Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides”), the paper would have had to have provided evidence (or at least asserted) that the earlier article was based on an Obama administration wiretap of Trump’s phones. This, of course, was not the case.
Although the Janaury article did use the words “wiretapped” and “Trump” in its title, it did not state that Trump Tower telephones were specifically targeted by a wiretap initiated by the Obama administration. Rather, the article stated that intelligence agencies were monitoring Russian officials, and that some of the conversations they intercepted in the course of their investigations may have also involved Trump aides:
http://www.snopes.com/nytimes-wiretap-articles/
JimLur, you exhibit no consideration ever of the fact-wise value of your articles
.. how often is there any evidence of any integrity at all in your posting pattern?
Seriously. Stephanie's .. World NUT Daily? PLEASE!
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=129331903
is spot on .. and for the record i endorse F6's
-
I reserve the right to start bulk-removing your bulk-postings of such bullshit as off-topic
trolling/spam clearly intended to accomplish nothing other or more than to disrupt the
board .. and no more of your cracks presuming to instruct others what to do or pos
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=129338408
RATING
ORIGIN
In March 2017, several web outlets circulated an image purportedly showing the front page of the 20 January 2017 print edition of the New York Times along with accusations that the newspaper’s reporting on President Trump’s claims that former President Obama had ordered the wiretapping of Trump Tower phones had been contradictory:
-
The front page of The New York Times way back on January 20, 2017… “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides”
But Two months later they are trashing their own reports!
Now the NY Times is reporting there is no evidence of a wiretap.
No wonder nobody trusts them!
-
The image is of the Times‘ front page and its “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides” is real. It’s also true that the New York Times reported .. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/04/us/politics/trump-obama-tap-phones.html .. about two months later that President Trump had offered no evidence to back up his claim that the Obama administration had tapped his phones. However, these two articles are not contradictory
In order for the New York Times 4 March 2017 report (“Trump, Offering No Evidence, Says Obama Tapped His Phones”) to contradict the newspaper’s 20 January 2017 report (“Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides”), the paper would have had to have provided evidence (or at least asserted) that the earlier article was based on an Obama administration wiretap of Trump’s phones. This, of course, was not the case.
Although the Janaury article did use the words “wiretapped” and “Trump” in its title, it did not state that Trump Tower telephones were specifically targeted by a wiretap initiated by the Obama administration. Rather, the article stated that intelligence agencies were monitoring Russian officials, and that some of the conversations they intercepted in the course of their investigations may have also involved Trump aides:
http://www.snopes.com/nytimes-wiretap-articles/
JimLur, you exhibit no consideration ever of the fact-wise value of your articles
.. how often is there any evidence of any integrity at all in your posting pattern?
Seriously. Stephanie's .. World NUT Daily? PLEASE!
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=129331903
is spot on .. and for the record i endorse F6's
-
I reserve the right to start bulk-removing your bulk-postings of such bullshit as off-topic
trolling/spam clearly intended to accomplish nothing other or more than to disrupt the
board .. and no more of your cracks presuming to instruct others what to do or pos
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=129338408
It was Plato who said, “He, O men, is the wisest, who like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing”
Join the InvestorsHub Community
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
