« Tim Pool Daily Show

Buzzfeed's Report on Trump And Russia Has NO EVIDENCE

2019-01-18 | 🔗

Buzzfeed dropped a "bombshell" report claiming that Donald Trump ordered Michael Cohen to lie to congress about a Russian Trump tower meeting. However this isn't the first bombshell report we have seen or heard about and the others were mostly retracted and found to be false.One of the reporters from Buzzfeed actually said on CNN they have NOT seen any evidence but trust their sources. How many times do we have to hear this without any evidence to back it up?

Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Last night, Buzzfeed NEWS dropped a bombshell report, claiming that Donald Trump instructed Michael calling to lie to Congress about the Trump Tower Moscow Project. They claim that two official sources were involved in the matter have stated. This is true, however, on CNN one of the reporters claimed they haven't actually seen any evidence, and forgive me I'm don't be a bit sceptical because we keep hearing about these mass bomb bombshell reports. Claiming Trump has direct ties to collusion with Russia, and then they retract people get fired, apologies and it happens time and time again. In fact, I've got six examples for today where this happened today take a look at exactly what they're claiming in this story and then take a look at some of the scrutiny people have brought up as to why they think this may actually not be true before get started. Please head over to timcast dot com, slash donate. If you'd like to support my work as a play donation option. I have crypto currency options, I have a physical address and there's even
app where you can buy clothing. I've designed myself from Buzzfeed NEWS President Trump directed his attorney Michael Cohen, to lie to Congress about the Moscou Tower Project Trump receives ten personal updates for Michael Cohen and encouraged
and meeting with Vladimir Putin. President Donald Trump directed his long time attorney Michael coming to lie to Congress about negotiations to build a Trump tower in Moscow. According to two federal law enforcement officials involved in an investigation of the matter, Trump also supported a plan set up by coming to visit Russia during the presidential campaign. In order to personally meet President Vladimir Putin and jump start, the tower negotiations quote, make it happen. The sources said Trump told Cullen and even as Trump told the public, he had no business deals with Russia. The sources said Trump and his children, Ivanka Donald Trump Junior, receive regular, detailed updates about the real estate development from calling whom they put in charge of the project. The first and most important bit of criticism I have is that the Buzzfeed NEWS headline is a statement of fact Trump did this it's definitive, however, in,
the story. They then open it by saying, according to federal law enforcement sources, now I'm not saying the stories wrong, but it would be particularly important if, in the headline they said it sources allege. Many critics of the story said Michael coming can't be trusted and in fact the story does make mention that Michael Cohen has testified. The special count however, the reporters at Buzzfeed said their sources are not Michael Cohen, but law enforcement officials, but forgive me are still citing Michael Cohen down the line, so it actually makes things a bit harder to believe there been so stories of the past year that made these claims and unfortunately, they keep getting retracted. More importantly, however, this morning on CNN one of the reporters told Allison Camerota. They haven't actually seen any evidence from Mediaite Buzzfeed NEWS bomb. Shell reporter no, we have not seen,
the evidence supporting our report host Allison Camerota, open the interview by asking Cormier. If you had seen the evidence to which Cormier replied not personally, he then clarified the folks. We have talked to two officials we have spoken to are fully one hundred percent, read into that aspect of the special counsel's investigation. Upon hearing that one of the reporters hadn't actually seen evidence, I became much more skeptical, as I mentioned, how many stories you have to have where they claim Trump was connected to Russia or something happened. I try to be for yes, and now. What Buzzfeed is asking us to do is to trust them as they trust to sources who then trust their witnesses. It's such an absurdly long line without evidence. I'm sorry, I'm going to be very skeptical of this. I would like to see you publish some actual documents. Even if Buzzfeed had documents from the law enforcement agents they published, it would still be the agents interviewing witnesses
and not hard proof, and this is why it's so damn hard to prove any of these things, because what evidence could they really have? I mean if Trump sent an email or a text message sure that would be proof, but it was an in person conversation it's going to be very, very difficult to prove. I have to wonder why, then this becomes such a big. Bomb shell, but then we have another bit of contradicting information, because now the all the report on the story, Jason Leopold- is claiming they have seen documents which makes me wonder why they don't have their story straight. Did they see evidence or not Amazon, B C treated? We have seen documents, we have been briefed on documents. We are very confident in our reporting, Buzzfeed,
news. Reporter Jason Leopold who CO wrote, Bombshell new report says now. He said we saw documents, he didn't say we saw proof. He didn't say what we saw proves anything he didn't say: we saw the documents. So once again, I'm left skeptical is he trying to say he did see evidence, or is he just saying that they looked over things that make them believe their sources once again they haven't, provided us with evidence. Now. Look I actually like Buzz feed news Buzzfeed is very different from Buzzfeed. They will get some scrutiny because they are still somewhat part of the same organization, but I do believe that different companies, but, but we know, there's been the most responsive when it comes to news and I've seen them do a relatively decent job on covering very contentious political issues. However, at this point the New York Times as a get my trust
because they've had a crack stories. Many other outlets, like ABC News, have have had to correct their stories. Buzzfeed is not going to be above established, mainstream press when it comes to these issues without hard evidence. I'm sorry I'm just not going to believe this. First, we can go back one week to this New York Times story FBI opened inquiry into whether to up was secretly working on behalf of Russia. Halfway down the story, it says, no evidence has emerged publicly that Mr Trump was secretly in contact with or took direction from russian government officials and FBI spokeswoman and spokesman for the special counsel's office both declined to comment. We then have this story just about a week ago, as well metaphor accused of sharing Trump Polling data with russian associate. This was another bombshell report, unfortunately, for the
our times they issued a correction a day later, a previous version of this article misidentified, the people to whom Paul man a fort, wanted a russian associates to send polling data. Mr metaphor: wanted the data center to to ukrainian oligarchs, not all like Vidar Posco, a Russian all that are close to the Kremlin. We can go back to last July, ABC Parts ways with investigative reporter Brian Ross, Brian Ross, the chief investigative correspondent for ABC News is leaving the network seven months after he botched a report involving president Trump and the Russia Investigation, a mistake that leads to rebuke from White House and concern about self inflicted damage by news organizations already facing scrutiny. He came under fire in December after ABC News, retracted and apologized for his errant report that Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser, had been directed by Donald J Trump to make contact with russian officials
in the twenty sixteen campaign. Abc news suspended Mister Ross for four weeks without pay when he returned the network barred him from covering the president and the Russia Investigation assigning him instead to longer term project that he worked on from an office several blocks away from the news division's headquarters. He was also kept from hearing on live broadcasts. We can go back to twenty seventeen. This story from political, three CNN staffers resigned over retracted Scaramucci Russia story, three scene,
have resigned following the publication and subsequent retraction a story linking a trump transition team member to the rush of related investigations. We can go back to August from the intercept CNN credibly, accused of lying to its audience about a key claim, and its blockbuster Colin story refuses to comment CNN's blockbuster July. Twenty six story that Michael Kamen intended to tell special counsel Robert Muller that he was present when Donald Trump was told in advance about his son's Trump tower. Meeting with various Russians includes a key statement about its sourcing. That credible reporting now suggests was designed to have misled. It's all yes get CNN. It simply refuses to address the serious ethical and journalistic questions raised about its conduct. The substance of the CNN story itself regarding Coen, which made headline news all over the world and which CNN hyped as a bomb. Shell has now been retracted by other news outlets that originally four hundred and forty to confirm CNN story as the anonymous source. For this confirmation calling lawyer,
he Davis now admits that in essence, his confirmation was false. As a result, both the Washington Post and the New York Post, how did Davis as their anonymous source and then affectively retracted their stories confirming parts CNN's reports CNN, however, has retracted. Nothing. All increase to the network are directed to a corporate spokesperson, who simply says we stand by our story and are confident in our reporting of a newsletter sent Sunday night from C n N's to media reports. Brian Stelter and Oliver Darcy contained the same corporate language, but addressed none of the questions raised about c n N's report and once again, in the past couple weeks. Five weeks after the guardians viral blockbuster signage metaphor, scoop no evidence has emerged just stonewalling. Five weeks ago the guardian published one of the most extraordinary and significant bomb shells, and now two plus year old
Trump Russia saga, Donald Trump's, former campaign manager, Paul man, a fort held secret talks to join us on inside the ecuadorian embassy in London and visited around the same time he joins. Trump's campaign claimed reporter and best selling collusion author Luke, Harding Dan Collins and a very sketchy third person whose name was bizarrely scrub from the guardian's byline for its online version, but appeared in the print version. Those were just the stories I pulled up off the top of my head. There are probably others and they probably go back several years. It is hard for me to believe. Any of this is true at this point, because the media has cried Wolf so many times at some point you say: listen unless you have hard evidence, I'm not
going to listen to this anymore and typically, I don't like to do things like this, but it still needs to be brought up. Columbia. Journalism review has questioned Jason Leopold in the past. Now again, Leopold is one of the authors of the story. This is from two thousand and six Jason Leopold caught Sourceless again. We wonder if the folks over at truth, dot org, are rethinking their affiliation with reporter and cereal fabulous Jason Leopold. Leopold, you may recall, is the freelance reporter who was caught making stuff up in two thousand and two salon- article self, admittedly getting it completely wrong in pieces for DOW Jones and had his own memoir cancelled because of concerns over the accuracy of his reporting. I believe I briefly worked with Jason Leopold, advice news though I don't think we ever actually work on anything together more just like in passing, and my understanding is that over the past several years he's produced some pretty respectable reporting sending out freedom of information requests. So I'm not one to go back thirteen years and try and impute.
The honesty or integrity of a reporter, but I've got to say if I can read through all of these stories that presented no evidence were either retracted. People were fired now we're hearing from one of the reporters. They haven't seen any evidence the other reporters coming. They have seen documents, I'm to say you know what of course, this story, go viral, of course is going. It always does. How many times does this need to happen? it's like people, the media, no, it's probably not true or No real evidence to back this up, but they want to be true because of the Trump bump. That's when they get ratings, they get clicks. They get views because
of the salacious sensational nature of the content they publish. Everybody wants to speculate yet here I am trying to figure out what is true and what isn't, and I can't because must be presented. No evidence they're simply saying trust us as we trust these guys who trusted their witnesses. That's a game of telephone. As far as I'm concerned. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the story is false. I just don't know it may as well be false as far as I'm concerned, because it's interesting to hear yes, we've heard over the past several years. Trump has been involved in this, but no one has presented any evidence. Like the New York Times just said a few days ago, there has been no evidence showing Trump is working for war with the Russians and even now, what they're, claiming about Trump Tower, isn't even a direct tie to russian collusion they're, simply stating that Trump may have lied.
I got to say I find this whole thing kind of weird. For another reason, Michael Cole is Trump's lawyer. Why would trump be advising calling on what to do? You hire a lawyer to advise you on what to do now. I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm just saying the whole thing sounds very weird. That Trump would tell his lawyer what to be lying about you hire a lawyer to tell you what is or isn't legal or illegal and to act on your behalf in certain regards so calling should already know what he should or shouldn't be saying. Why would trump need to tell his lawyer what to do? That's a pretty bad lawyer now a lot of people are going to point out. Cohen is a pretty bad lawyer, but that's Another issue, this whole thing just sounds absolutely ridiculous. Once again, here we are talking about Trump shop and no evidence has been presented just another. He said she said, trust us as we trust them, and you know what I'm sorry I'm not going to do it, I'm going to sit back and wait for you to publish documents, I'm going to wait for something hard and definitive, so I can see that this actually happened, but for the time being, you've never presented that no one has so. Let me know
the comments below keep the conversation going. Do you think this is another ridiculous nonsense story? I know most a lot of people who are on you to park in a trust, but I actually think must be to ok. For the most part, I'm sure Buzzfeed Is the story is true, I'm sure actually trust their sources. But how am I supposed to know your sources are telling the truth? I don't know who they are. Look I get it. Sources can be very important, but without ever from your sources. This story should never have been published. So anyway, comment below keep the conversation going. You can follow me on twitter at him. Just stay tuned new videos. Every day, four hundred pm love more videos on my second channel Youtube com. Tim cast news at six hundred pm thanks for hanging out, and I will see next time.
Transcript generated on 2019-10-24.