Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Sunday, May 02, 2021

The New York Times, Washington Post, and NBC News issued corrections on Saturday to clarify that Rudy Giuliani did not receive advance warning from the FBI that he was the target of a Russian influence campaign.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

More from the article...

...Why it matters: The corrections, which follow extensive reporting from the outlets to outline Giuliani's dealings in Ukraine, come after federal investigators searched Giuliani's apartment last week as part of a probe on whether his Ukraine lobbying on behalf of former President Trump broke federal law.

State of play: "An earlier version of this story, published Thursday, incorrectly reported that One America News was warned by the FBI that it was the target of a Russian influence operation," read the Post's correction.

- "That version also said the FBI had provided a similar warning to Rudolph W. Giuliani, which he has since disputed. This version has been corrected to remove assertions that OAN and Giuliani received the warnings."

According to CNN, NBC said its story "was based on a source familiar with the matter, but a second source now says the briefing was only prepared for Giuliani and not delivered to him, in part over concerns it might complicate the criminal investigation of Giuliani."...



#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-05-02 10:47 AM | Reply

Is this the difference between:

receive advance warning from the FBI
vs
receive advance warning from someone in the FBI

#2 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-05-02 02:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Is this the difference between:
receive advance warning from the FBI
vs
receive advance warning from someone in the FBI"

Even when Liberal outlets finally retract false news, they STILL get exonerated by their base. If I facepalm any harder, I'd knock myself out.

#3 | Posted by humtake at 2021-05-03 11:31 AM | Reply

@#2 ... Is this the difference between: ...

From the cited article...

...According to CNN, NBC said its story "was based on a source familiar with the matter, but a second source now says the briefing was only prepared for Giuliani and not delivered to him, in part over concerns it might complicate the criminal investigation of Giuliani."...

#4 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-05-03 11:31 AM | Reply

"Is this the difference between:
receive advance warning from the FBI
vs
receive advance warning from someone in the FBI"
Even when Liberal outlets finally retract false news, they STILL get exonerated by their base. If I facepalm any harder, I'd knock myself out.

#3 | POSTED BY HUMTAKE

You act like THIS is a huge part of the story.

#5 | Posted by Sycophant at 2021-05-03 11:39 AM | Reply

@#3 ... Even when Liberal outlets finally retract false news ...

Worth noting is that they did not need to have billion-dollar lawsuits filed against them in order for them to realize their error and correct it reasonably quickly.

#6 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-05-03 11:40 AM | Reply

Even when Liberal outlets finally retract false news, they STILL get exonerated by their base. If I facepalm any harder, I'd knock myself out.
#3 | POSTED BY HUMTAKE

All journalists sometimes make mistakes. All journalists sometimes don't get the full story. Good journalists quickly acknowledge when this happens and issue retractions or corrections.

Meanwhile GOP congresscriminals still have tweets up spreading NYPost's fabricated attack on the Vice President.

#7 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2021-05-03 12:17 PM | Reply

Even when Liberal outlets finally retract false news, they STILL get exonerated by their base. If I facepalm any harder, I'd knock myself out.

#3 | Posted by humtake

Finally? This took 2 days.

How many republicans are saying covid is no worse than the flu, a year later?

How many republicans are still talking about bengazi 10 years later?

How many are still saying climate change is a hoax 40 years later?

#8 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-05-03 01:29 PM | Reply

How many ELECTED republicans and tv propagandists are still talking about "meat bans" EVEN AFTER they were debunked?

#9 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-05-03 01:30 PM | Reply

Liberals make an effort to get the facts correct, and make retractions when they do not. Rightwingers don't even try. For them, Truth is a suckers game.

#10 | Posted by moder8 at 2021-05-03 02:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The news that came out of this retraction is far worse for Ghouliani than the fact that WP, NYT, and NBC all had a misinformed source. The fact that the FBI created a defensive briefing and then DID NOT provide it because it might mess up the criminal investigation into Rudy Colludy means that THE BARR DOJ was criminally investigating the President's Lawyer as early as last year. The fact that Barr meddled in the investigation by blocking search warrants is also significant, and might just get him disbarred or worse for obstruction of justice.

#11 | Posted by _Gunslinger_ at 2021-05-04 01:25 PM | Reply

Oh, and for you MAGAts trying to dunk over this retraction? The three news organizations retracted the story very publically within two days, with zero suggestion by anybody that they maliciously misquoted or misconstrued the facts. Compare that to the NY Post, which retracted a work of complete fiction AFTER the reporter who was forced by her bosses to write that lie resigned very publically and blew the whistle on this practice. That's the difference between a legitimate news organization, which owns their mistakes, and Reichwing media, which shamelessly lies for no apparent reason other than to create some outrage among the MAGAts on Faux Spews and Twitter.

#12 | Posted by _Gunslinger_ at 2021-05-04 01:31 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2021 World Readable

Drudge Retort