Without any proof, The New York Times and Washington
Post run “Russia helping Sanders” stories, and
Sanders responds by bashing Russia, writes Joe
Lauria.
By Joe Lauria
February 22, 2020 "Information
Clearing House" -
With
Democratic frontrunner Bernie Sanders spooking the
Democratic establishment, The Washington Post
Friday reported damaging information from
intelligence sources against Sanders by saying that
Russia is trying to help his campaign.
If the story is true
and if intelligence agencies are truly committed to
protecting U.S. citizens, the Sanders campaign would
have been quietly informed and shown evidence to
back up the claims.
Instead the story wound
up on the front page of the Post,
“according to people familiar with the matter.” Zero
evidence was produced to back up the intelligence
agencies’ assertion.
“It is not clear what
form that Russian assistance has taken,” the
Post reported. That would tell any traditional
news editor that there was no story until it is
known.
Instead major U.S.
media are again playing the role of laundering
totally unverified “information” just because it
comes from an intelligence source. Reporting such
assertions without proof amounts to an abdication of
journalistic responsibility. It shows total trust in
U.S. intelligence despite decades of deception and
skullduggery from these agencies.
Centrist Democratic
Party leaders have expressed extreme unease with
Sanders leading the Democratic pack. Politico
reported
Friday that former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg’s
entry into the race is explicitly to stop Sanders
from winning on the first ballot at the party
convention.
A day after The New
York Times
reported,
also without evidence, that Russia is again trying
to help Donald Trump win in November, the Post
reports Moscow is trying to help Sanders too, again
without substance. Both candidates whom the
establishment loathes were smeared on successive
days.
Are You Tired Of
The Lies And
Non-Stop Propaganda?
|
In a
Tough Spot
The Times
followed the Post report Friday by making
it appear that Sanders himself had chosen to make
public the intelligence assessment about “Russian
interference” in his campaign.
But Sanders had known
for a month about this assessment and only issued a
statement after the Post asked him for
comment before publishing its uncorroborated story
based on anonymous sources.
Sanders was put in a
difficult spot. If he said, “Show me the proof that
Russia is trying to help me,” he ran the risk of
being attacked for disbelieving (even disloyalty to)
U.S. intelligence, and, by default, defending the
Kremlin.
So politician that he
is, and one who is trying to win the White House,
Sanders told the Post:
“I don’t care,
frankly, who Putin wants to be president. My
message to Putin is clear: Stay out of American
elections, and as president I will make sure
that you do. In 2016, Russia used Internet
propaganda to sow division in our country, and
my understanding is that they are doing it again
in 2020.”
The Times
quoted Sanders as calling Russian President Vladimir
Putin an “autocratic thug.” The paper reported
Sanders saying in a statement: “Let’s be clear, the
Russians want to undermine American democracy by
dividing us up and, unlike the current president, I
stand firmly against their efforts and any other
foreign power that wants to interfere in our
election.”
Responding to a
cacophony of criticism that Sanders’ supporters are
especially vicious online, as opposed to the
millions of other vicious people online, Sanders
attempted to use Russia as a scapegoat, the way the
Clinton campaign did in 2016. He said: “Some of the
ugly stuff on the Internet attributed to our
campaign may well not be coming from real
supporters.”
But no matter how
strong Sander’s denunciations of Russia, his
opponents will now target him as being a tool of the
Kremlin.
Mission accomplished.
Joe Lauria is
editor-in-chief of Consortium News
and a former correspondent for The
Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe, Sunday Times of
London and numerous other newspapers. He can be
reached at joelauria@consortiumnews.com and
followed on Twitter @unjoe .
This article was
published by "Consortium
News"
Do you agree or disagree? Post
your comment here