Posted on Jan 18, 2019
Mueller's office disputes BuzzFeed report that Trump directed Michael Cohen to lie to Congress
735
17
17
5
5
0
This is why I have been a little cautious about the recent Buzzfeed article. So far Mueller's investigation has been reasonably leak free so the story seemed a little strange. It doesn't mean there isn't any there, there ... but things are likely somewhat different than presented in the Buzzfeed article.
Mueller's office disputes BuzzFeed report that Trump directed Michael Cohen to lie to Congress
Posted from cnn.com
Office of the President (POTUS)
Congress
Republicans
Democrats
Posted 6 y ago
Responses: 6
2
2
0
“BuzzFeed's description of specific statements to the Special Counsel's Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen's Congressional testimony are not accurate," said Peter Carr, a spokesman for Mueller's office, in a statement.”
(2)
(0)
SPC Kevin Ford
MCPO Roger Collins
You have to admire Mueller's office's reply and what an awesome operator he is. I was thinking he must be angry with the article, true or false. It gives out information about what he is looking out and if he outright denied it that would give out information too. Instead he simply stated that it isn't accurate. Does that mean it's entirely wrong and Mueller isn't looking into anything like that? Could be. Does that mean it was mostly correct but there were some small details wrong? Could be. The end effect is nothing in the article can be trusted and gives out no information about what Mueller's office are and are not looking at. He reset us back to where we were before the article came out, just as in the dark as we were before. Now that was an impressively worded reply.
You have to admire Mueller's office's reply and what an awesome operator he is. I was thinking he must be angry with the article, true or false. It gives out information about what he is looking out and if he outright denied it that would give out information too. Instead he simply stated that it isn't accurate. Does that mean it's entirely wrong and Mueller isn't looking into anything like that? Could be. Does that mean it was mostly correct but there were some small details wrong? Could be. The end effect is nothing in the article can be trusted and gives out no information about what Mueller's office are and are not looking at. He reset us back to where we were before the article came out, just as in the dark as we were before. Now that was an impressively worded reply.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
SSgt Christopher Brose
SPC Kevin Ford - Responsible news agencies wouldn't have touched it at all. In fact, some knew about the story and walked away.
(0)
(0)
SPC Kevin Ford
SSgt Christopher Brose - The fact that it was reported was pretty clearly news in the public interest.
Edit to add: to some extent I blame the 24 hour news cycle. It was news worthy and worth reporting. The problem is they have to have something to keep talking about, and talking and talking and talking.
Edit to add: to some extent I blame the 24 hour news cycle. It was news worthy and worth reporting. The problem is they have to have something to keep talking about, and talking and talking and talking.
(0)
(0)
SSgt Christopher Brose
SPC Kevin Ford - Good point about the 24 hour news cycle, but the people propagating the story are still supposedly journalists. But the vast majority of them are extremely biased, hate Trump, and will gladly drop any semblance of journalistic standards if it means getting a chance to try to make Trump look bad. And that's exactly what this was.
(0)
(0)
SPC Kevin Ford
SSgt Christopher Brose - Oh they were certainly hoping it was true. They being the left leaning media. The right leaning media had their own spin.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
SFC Casey O'Mally
Well........ Ummm..... Yeah.
I don't think he is among the brightest crayons in the Presidential box
I don't think he is among the brightest crayons in the Presidential box
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google