This time it comes from CNN, the most flustered name in news:
Headline: Right-wing media obsesses over FBI text message story; hours later it's debunked
A good way to tell how serious the lie Trump is exposing is how shrill the denials are from the CIA/MSM, lets review how Operation Mockingbird works from Wikipedia:
In 1951, Allen Dulles persuaded Cord Meyer to join the CIA. According to Deborah Davis, Meyer became Mockingbird's "principal operative."[4]
After 1953, the media network was overseen by CIA Director Allen Dulles, by which time Operation Mockingbird had major influence over 25 newspapers and wire agencies.[5] Its usual modus operandi was to place reports, developed from CIA-provided intelligence, with cooperating or unwitting reporters. Those reports would be repeated or cited by the recipient reporters and would then, in turn, be cited throughout the media wire services. These networks were run by people with well-known liberal, but pro-American-big-business and anti-Soviet views, such as William S. Paley (CBS), Henry Luce (Time and Life), Arthur Hays Sulzberger (The New York Times), Alfred Friendly (managing editor of The Washington Post), Jerry O'Leary (The Washington Star), Hal Hendrix (Miami News), Barry Bingham, Sr. (Louisville Courier-Journal), James S. Copley (Copley News Services) and Joseph Harrison (The Christian Science Monitor).[5]
(emphasis mine)
Mostly the same people doing the same shit today! So lets have a look at today's example:
Members of the pro-Trump media acted like they hit the goldmine on Wednesday morning. Led by Fox News, these outlets went into a frenzy over what they presented as an explosive story that not only cast former President Obama and Hillary Clinton in a negative light, but simultaneously helped vindicate claims then-candidate Donald Trump made about the investigation into Clinton's private email server being "rigged."
Interesting, did CNN just call themselves "the Anti-Trump media"? "the pro-Trump media" is that anyone not on the CIA payroll? "went into a frenzy" like CNN is doing in this article right here? interesting projection.
But*** a CNN review*** of the story's premise indicates that key text messages the story relied on were taken out of context, and portrayed as meaning something entirely different than what they actually meant.
CNN has the ability to mind meld with text messages and determine their true meaning! And of course CNN would never take anything out of context and portray it as meaning something entirely different from what it actually meant.
In the early hours of the morning, Fox News published an article on its website based on newly-released communications between senior FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page. The text messages were released Tuesday in a report produced by the office of Republican Sen. Ron Johnson.
In one September 2, 2016, text message, Page wrote that there was a meeting at the bureau setup because Obama wanted "to know everything we are doing."
This is what you call "damage control", Obama was clearly interfering in investigations for political reasons.
Johnson, in his report, said the text message raised questions about Obama's involvement in the FBI's investigation into Clinton's use of a private email server. In fact, the message more likely indicated that Obama wanted to be kept informed of an investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Note the use of the phrase "in fact" in the same sentence as "more likely" and that they don't have any source for that claim. Is the likelihood a fact?
In its story, Fox News reiterated Johnson's claim without scrutiny. In fact, it's not clear if Fox News even reached out to Obama's office prior to publishing to see if there were any other explanation for what Page said in her text. The story makes no note of the reporter having sought comment. In an email to CNN, Fox News spokeswoman Carly Shanahan declined to answer whether Fox's reporter had contacted Obama's office. "It's clear you're getting your talking points from a partisan analysis by Think Progress," Shanahan said, referring to a liberal news website.
"In fact" combined with the phrase "it's not clear"!
LOL, they didn't even ask Obama?! Gosh they could have just asked his office and gotten the truth! Clearly they are not professionals like CNN
Before other media outlets could provide the proper context for the text message, the narrative ricocheted through the pro-Trump media universe in what has become a pattern for stories that seem to call the investigation into Trump into question, or suggest that the investigation into Clinton wasn't thorough. The misleading messaging was delivered to millions of people through Fox News' airwaves and through other pro-Trump media, which went into overdrive. Articles about the text led websites from the Drudge Report and Breitbart to InfoWars and the Gateway Pundit.
"the proper context" AKA CIA spin! There is a pattern for stories that seem to call the investigation into Trump into question, or suggest that the investigation into Clinton wasn't thorough because the investigation into Trump is utter bullshit and because the investigation into Clinton was not only not thorough, the FBI went out of its way not to prosecute her or find evidence against her! This is them gas lighting everyone. The problem was not that the reporting on the text messages was misleading, their problem is that it was not misleading enough!
The story eventually made its way to the president himself, who amplified it further when he tweeted, "NEW FBI TEXTS ARE BOMBSHELLS!"
He is usually right in those tweets, clearly he is this time, given the shrillness of their denials and them feeling the need to write this damage control piece, now let's see some real good CIA anonymous source fakery:
People familiar with the matter strongly dispute the assertion that the text message referenced the Clinton email probe. The text message, they say, was actually referencing Obama's desire to be kept abreast on the FBI's investigation into Russian election meddling.
Oh? They do, do they? Who are these people?
One former Obama official told CNN that the idea the text message was about the Clinton email investigation was "total nonsense," noting that the theory did not conform with the timeline of events.
Gosh, I wonder which one, why won't they go on the record? Anyone know?
Indeed, the text message was sent on September 2, 2016, months after the bureau had closed its investigation into Clinton, and before it reopened that investigation. But September 2, 2016 was just days before Obama confronted Russian President Vladimir Putin over Russia's meddling in the presidential election.
There it is! The Russians! The Russians must be behind this!! Ironic that Obama would confront someone else about that which he was doing. But what am I thinking, I must be a crazy conspiracy theorist, sure the courts have found that Obama's IRS was turned into a tool to suppress his political rivals, millions were paid out in damages, but they would never ever do that with the FBI, never.
A person familiar with Strzok's thinking reiterated this account, telling CNN that the text referred to Obama's broader interests in issues of potential Russian interference in the election more generally. The idea that Obama was micromanaging the FBI's investigation does not match reality, the person said.
"The person" said that, they didn't want to attach their name to it so it must be true! Who could it be?
hey look, it's Lisa Page
In a footnote in his report, Johnson even seemed to concede that the idea the text message referred to the Clinton email investigation was only speculation. The report said the Justice Department said it redacted "text messages that were personal in nature or relating to other investigations." Because this message was not redacted, Johnson's report said, it could be presumed that the Justice Department "believes it may relate to the FBI's investigation of classified information on Secretary Clinton's private server."
"Seemed to concede" now who is speculating? They contacted Ron Johnson's office for a statement before printing this, right?
This is not the first time a claim pushed by Johnson and Fox News has fallen apart in recent weeks. In late January, the Wisconsin senator backed off a claim -- similarly amplified by Fox News -- that text messages between Strzok and Page indicated there was a "secret society" at the FBI. Johnson did so after*** people familiar with the exchange*** said the text message referenced a gag gift of Putin-themed calendars that one of the employees purchased for those working on the early stage of the Russia investigation.
clearly this man would never be in a secret society
Don't push fake news, CNN hates competition! Gaslighting again, Clearly Struck and Page and Andy were a secret society and actively trying to influence the US election, that claim has done anything but fall apart.
Fox News continued to discuss the story on its air Wednesday afternoon, even after multiple outlets -- including the Wall Street Journal, which is controlled by Fox head Rupert Murdoch -- had reported contrary information.
-- CNN's Dan Merica contributed reporting.
Merica!! Well if someone else reported contrary information then their reports can't be true, right? Because CNN has confirmed that in fact more likely that CNNs super secret sources say it's not true! How dare they contradict anonymous sources, the best sources of all?
if you liked this check out some of my other recent posts:
Orwellian Propaganda Deconstructed: "California police worked with neo-Nazis to pursue 'anti-racist' activists, documents show "
More Anonymous Source Fake News From Operation Mockingbird 2018
The Transgender Agenda Exposed- "How Camps Welcome Transgender Youth"
The Transgender Agenda Exposed #2 "Raising a Transgender Child: The First Steps" and final solution
and hit me with some votes and resteems and if for some reason you have not yet hit the follow button you best to follow 