Debate Info

Yes, they're that fake You got super duper duped
Debate Score:4
Total Votes:4
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 Yes, they're that fake (1)
 You got super duper duped (1)

Debate Creator

BRONT(419) pic

New York Times lied on Russia collusion. Caught red handed

Claim in NYT article: "Phone records and intercepted calls show that members of Donald J. Trump's presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election, according to four current and former American officials." 

Note by Strzok: "This statement is misleading and inaccurate as written. We have not seen evidence of any individuals in contact with Russians (both Governmental and non-Governmental)" and "There is no known intel affiliation, and little if any [government of Russia] affiliation[.] FBI investigation has shown past contact between [Trump campaign volunteer Carter] Page and the SVR [Foreign Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation], but not during his association with the Trump campaign." 

Claim in NYT article: "... one of the advisers picked up on the [intercepted] calls was Paul Manafort, who was Mr. Trump's campaign chairman for several months ..." 

Note by Strzok: "We are unaware of any calls with any Russian government official in which Manafort was a party." Claim in 

NYT article: "The FBI has obtained banking and travel records ..." 

Note by Strzok: "We do not yet have detailed banking records." 

Claim in NYT article: "Officials would not disclose many details, including what was discussed on the calls, and how many of Trump's advisers were talking to the Russians." 

Note by Strzok: "Again, we are unaware of ANY Trump advisers engaging in conversations with Russian intel officials" and "Our coverage has not revealed contact between Russian intelligence officers and the Trump team." 

Claim in NYT article: "The FBI asked the NSA to collect as much information as possible about the Russian operatives on the phone calls ..." 

Note by Strzok: "If they did we are not awar

Yes, they're that fake

Side Score: 2

You got super duper duped

Side Score: 2
2 points

Claim in NYT article: "The FBI has closely examined at least four other people close to Mr. Trump ... Carter Page ... Roger Stone... and Mr. Flynn."

Note by Strzok: "We have not investigated Roger Stone."

Claim by NYT: "Senior FBI officials believe ... Christopher Steele ... has a credible track record."

Note by Strzok: "Recent interviews and investigation, however, reveal Steele may not be in a position to judge the reliability of subsource network."

Claim by NYT: "The FBI's investigation into Mr. Manafort began last spring [2016]."

Note by Strzok: "This is inaccurate ... our investigation of Manafort was opened in August 2016."

Claim by NYT: "The bureau did not have enough evidence to obtain a warrant for a wiretap of Mr. Manafort's communications, but it had the NSA closely scrutinize the communications of Ukrainian officials he had met."

Note by Strzok: "This is inaccurate ..." There is as yet no explanation in the documents or from the New York Times as to the identities of the four "American officials" who apparently provided the misleading and false information; or what their motivation was. However, it is clear that inaccurate reporting such as that in the Times had a significant influence on the trajectory of the Trump-Russia collusion probe, which ultimately concluded there had been no collusion on the part of Trump, anyone in the Trump campaign, or any U.S. person.

Side: Yes, they're that fake
2 points

The NYTs have long since been regarded, and accepted as purveyors of fake news and far left anti-American propaganda.

In any court case the acceptance of this publisher's lies and deceit would be cited as its well established custom and practice within the American media circus.

In this context any litigation would flounder in the tangled web of the shambolic left-wing dominated legal system.

Side: You got super duper duped
HighFalutin(3169) Clarified
1 point

Did they publish this after he won or before? As a candidate, was he still considered a private person or a public figure?

Side: Yes, they're that fake