On Friday morning a story broke from a prominent left-wing media outlet, McClatchy DC, claiming that the special counsel Robert Mueller and company had uncovered evidence that puts President Trump’s personal attorney Michael Cohen in Prague, Czech Republic. Thus confirming a significant claim made within the infamous Steele dossier and bolstering accusations of “Trump/Russia collusion.” Cohen immediately tweeted a response denying the story, “Bad reporting, bad information and bad story by same reporter Peter Stone. No matter how many times or ways they write it, I have never been to Prague. I was in LA with my son. Proven!”
The story went so far as to suggest Cohen was in Prague in August of 2016 in order to meet with aides of Vladimir Putin to conspire to conceal Russian hacking into the DNC computers during the 2016 presidential election season. The only problem with the story is that was a complete work of fiction, and the special counsel seems to agree.
On Monday, the special counsel’s office told the New York Times that many of the stories surrounding their investigation have been outright false. “What I have been telling all reporters is that many stories about our investigation have been inaccurate,” a spokesperson for the special counsel said. “Be very cautious about any source that claims to have knowledge about our investigation and dig deep into what they claim before reporting on it,” they said on behalf of the special counsel. “If another outlet reports something, don’t run with it unless you have your own sourcing to back it up,” the spokesperson added.
The special counsel seemed to have tailored their statement to rebut the McClatchy story specifically since many mainstream media outlets ran with it without any attempts to verify the claims therein. The rare statement made on behalf of the special counsel underscores the media’s insatiable desire to write their own conclusion to this investigation before Mueller finishes his work.
The claims made within the story were even taken to task by anti-Trump writer Benjamin Wittes, as reported by the Daily Caller. Wittes believes the story is “too good to be true” and claims the “sourcing is relatively thin.” “It is sourced to two sources familiar with the matter, who are presumably not Mueller shop folks, Wittes says. “It’s not clear to me what the universe of people who know this sort of thing from a distance looks like,” adds Wittes.
“The story does not, actually, say that Michael Cohen was, in fact, in Prague at the relevant time,” says Wittes. He continues, “It says that Mueller’s investigation has developed some evidence that he was in Prague. It gives no sense of how much evidence or what type of evidence – or how credible it is,” says Benjamin Wittes.
Wittes closed his critique of the McClatchy story over Twitter, “Note how the story here hedges on this point, describing the confirmation of Cohen’s presence in Prague only in hypothetical terms. The reporters are being very careful not to say that Cohen was actually in Prague – merely that Mueller has developed reason to doubt his denial.”
The story essentially outlines a hypothetical way to get into Prague without the use of a passport, since we all remember when the dossier’s claim of Cohen taking a trip to Prague in August of 2016 was debunked by examining his passport. The “journalists” who wrote this story seemed to have discovered a possible way into Prague without the use of a passport and attempted to suggest that Cohen entered Prague the same way.
You see, these “journalists” believe they are part of the Mueller investigation and attempted to steer the Mueller team to investigate their “discovery” of getting into Prague without a passport. The McClatchy story finds a way into Prague and tries to trace that back to Cohen. They are attempting to come to a conclusion and work backwards from there. In their mind, Trump is guilty of colluding with Russia in order to “steal” the Presidency from Hillary Clinton, it’s just a matter of obtaining the evidence to “prove” it. Regardless of how flimsy the evidence maybe, they believe they can get their readers to believe anything.
The end justifies the means for many of the so called, “journalists.” They do not care for the truth or getting the American people to have confidence in the electorate system, it’s all about impeaching the Presdient, that’s it. They don’t care how he is to be impeached, just that he is and that it happens soon.
The mainstream media has had a record amount of stories discredited this year as it pertains to the Trump/Russia investigation. Some of the biggest stories of the year have surrounded around various mainstream media outlets getting stories completely wrong and having to walk them back as a result. From ABC’s Brian Ross, to Bloomberg, to CNN. They have been delivering fake news and in the process of doing so, have become the story numerous times this past year.
The fact that there have been so many stories alleging Trump’s ties to Russia but so few that exonerate Trump from conspiring with Russia is rather telling. Especially when it comes to an investigation that offers no evidence to support the underlying claim that, Donald Trump colluded with Russia in order to secure the 2016 Presidential election. In fact, the latest indictment that the special counsel announced in February exonerated the President from colluding with the Russian government’s trolling operation, but still they persist.
One likely possibility to ponder, what will ensue once the investigation closes without discovering collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia? What will the backlash be by the alt-left who has been promised a President Trump impeachment? Will they take to the streets and scream at the sky or will they be more violent such as the domestic terror group known as Antifa? When it comes to this crowd it is wise to hope for the best, but remiss not to expect the worst.