As mentioned in a previous post the BBC is pretty much ignoring evidence, or rather the lack of it, and has decided Trump jr is guilty of collaborating with the Russian government to install Trump sr as their puppet in Washington.
Anthony Zurcher confirms this is the BBC’s conclusion as he passes judgement on Trump jr and sentences him and Trump sr to a future in which they have ‘only themselves to blame’. Guilty!!!!
Analysis: A grim situation for Trump Jr
Anthony Zurcher, BBC North America reporter
Whether by plan or happenstance, Donald Trump Jr is stumbling into an increasingly dire situation.
The pattern has been set. The New York Times runs a story, Trump Jr issues his response, then the noose tightens.
The presidential son says he was conducting routine opposition research. Then the Times reports that he was told it was the Russian government itself that was coming to his father’s aid.
Now it appears the president’s own family, and his presidency itself, could be in peril. They have only themselves to blame.
Really? Trump jr was told he was meeting with the Russian government? Where exactly did Zurcher get that gem from? Out of his own backside one suspects…ooh no…it was that other source of s**t journalism, the NYT…
Zurcher doubles up on his ‘analysis’ and reports confidently that Trump jr is guilty…
Is this a smoking gun?
What is a gun? What is smoke? Is anything real anymore? The media could discover a metaphorical .357 Magnum on the floor, still warm to the touch, and it would probably be dismissed by many as just another bit of fake news.
For the first time there’s confirmation of a meeting between Mr Trump’s inner circle and someone with ties to the Russian government where campaign issues were discussed.
More than that, Trump Jr seems to have walked into the meeting with the impression that the Russian government wanted to help his father – and there’s email evidence that supports this.
I’m sorry what? There’s email evidence to support this story? OK…show me the email. No…not got it? Three blokes come to the NYT and spin them a tale about Trump jr and the NYT splashes it as headline news…the BBC then reports that Trump jr has been caught bang to rights collaborating with the Russkies…just a little inconveniently there is no actual evidence…but hey, the BBC is not one to let the facts get in the way of a good story trashing Trump.
Note Zurcher’s opening line…that this will all be dismissed as fake news…getting his defence in early…but perhaps there is good reason to dismiss it as fake news…because so far it is….and the BBC is quite happy to peddle it as fact….the BBC using the term ‘Russians’ to confuse the issue….’Russians’ could be any individual Russian…no law against meeting such people, but the BBC is using it slyly to suggest ‘Russian government’….when they say Trump jr met ‘Russians’ the BBC want you to believe, without them stating it plainly, it was a Russian government inspired meeting and Trump jr knew this…which he didn’t.
BBC…quality journalism you can trust. Snigger.
One of the classic fake news tricks is to say ‘it was reported in the New York Times . . .’ so as to anchor what could well be fiction in a semblance of verisimilitude. Yet they all sniff each others’ bottoms and are staffed by similar people – the former director general of the BBC now runs the NYT! No collusion likely there!
Just posted this on the Open Thread, but it’s perhaps more relevant here:
BBC seems to think it has found collusion between Russia and Donald Trump Jr.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/40574564
“US President Donald Trump’s son has released an email chain showing he was offered “sensitive” information on Hillary Clinton by a Russian national.”
Well, time will tell but already I catch a whiff of bullshit.
The article goes on to say
Don’t know about anyone else, but if someone offered me something from the Russian “crown prosecutor” I’d say, “aye, right”. I think most of us know what happened to the Russian crown and would treat it as a hoax. I’d imagine young Trump would too. The article acknowledges that there’s no such thing but doesn’t seem to connect any dots. Well, why would it when there’s a Trump to bash?
Yep…thanks for that. The emails have finally surfaced….all before has been pure speculation based on hearsay….however it certainly doesn’t look good for Trump Jr as presumably these emails are accurate as Trump Jr released them himself. Extraordinary that Trump Jr would go along with such a meeting when notified it was part of the Russian government’s ‘help’ towards his father. Still, Zurcher and co jumped the gun not having seen the emails and reported unknown sources’ material as fact.
Interesting to see if Trump can escape this one.
Note that Natalia Veselnitskaya is the wife of a Moscow prosecutor not one herself…and where did Goldstone get the idea that this was ‘official’ Russian government business? There is no such position as ‘crown prosecutor’ in Russia…there of course being no royal family. Why would the Russians use such a balatantly open and obvious route to send information to Trump when they would know it would be illegal and highly damaging?
Also…if Trump Jr is guilty of appearing to want to accept such information how is it that the MI6 ‘dodgy dossier’ producer and any who dealt with him, as he got his information from Russian intelligence agencies, ie ‘The Russian Govenrment’, are not similarly in the frame?
Oh c’mon Alan, you concede too easily! You should double down and double down again.
Clearly it was patriotic of Trump Jnr to collude with the Russians as he was doing it to keep Clinton out of the Whitehouse! And it was just as patriotic for all the major players in the Trump campaign to lie about it consistently, after all the country just can’t afford another scandal.
Besides, what about Hillary’s emails!?!
The US MSM is calling Donald Jr email revelation as tantamount to treason.
Either Donald Jr is an idiot, or he knows exactly what he is doing- sending the salivating Pavlovian MSM hounds on yet another chase.
What next? Next week Melania will reveal she was contacted by a Russian fashion designer connected with Putin, with the real drop on Hillary. Emails to be released.
It is utterly contemptible, and brings the BBC, if it were possible, into further disrepute.
The Russian lady in question has denied any links to the Kremlin, and Don Jr said all she seemed to want to talk about was the Magnitsky case. In short, nothing came of the meeting, and it was a waste of time.
The New York Times claims that it has been told different, by three unnamed sources who claim to have seen an email which has now disappeared. How very convenient.
The desire of the left wing media, led by the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN and of course the BBC, to topple President Trump is so obvious now, and it is absolutely unhinged. There were numerous dodgy (by which I mean criminal) acts by the Obama administration, such as the Fast & Furious gun running operation into Mexico, but the MSM covered it up on his behalf. Just as He could do no wrong, Trump can do no right. It is demented.
The MSM seem to think people believe their crap. I have to tell them that it’s not 1973 any more, and they are not going to bring this President down.
I hope the MSM carry on. Sooner or later they will get themselves in a law suit for hundreds of millions. It would be really amusing if Donald Trump Jr ends up owning CNN.
There could also be a case of the MSM colluding with China, according to unnamed informed sources, of a coup against the lawful president of USA. Real treason.
I think the BBC must be full of Racists:
(1) They are Racist against Russians because they rejected Marxist Philosophy.
(2) They are Racist against Jews because Israel does not support Islamic Philosophy .
(3) They are Racist against the Commonwealth, because its not as hideously white as the European Union.
(4) They are Racist against the English because Mummy, Daddy and their Siblings called them the family idiot. Proved by the fact that they could only obtain a Mickey mouse degree like Philosophy. Which meant they could only get a job with the BBC.
I wonder if I am to blame:
I posted this a few weeks ago, and some Russian citizen could have read my post on biasedbbc. And then talked about it with Trumps son?
With regard to the Russians and the unconstitutional investigation (similar to the police persecution of Tommy Robinson) of a possible connection between Donald Trump and the Russians. It is all based upon an unsupported assertion by the DNC that the Russians hacked the DNC servers. This claim was made by the DNC when it became clear that WikiLeaks had come into possession of DNC emails showing that the DNC had rigged their own primaries against Bernie Sanders. In order to deflect attention from the content of the emails, the DNC (with the help of the MSM) made claims that the emails were hacked by the Russians in order to help the Trump campaign. However, the DNC refused to give the FBI access to the DNC servers and told the FBI that they would just have to take their word for it that the Russians had hacked the servers.
But then, Kim Dotcom claimed that WikiLeaks would be releasing information very damaging to the DNC. He said he got this information from an Internet colleague who went by the pseudonym of Panda. It was eventually revealed that Panda was Seth Rich, who worked for the DNC as their Voter Expansion Data Director. Seth Rich was also a Bernie Sanders supporter and the leaked emails revealed how the DNC had been rigging their primary elections against Sanders.
On the morning of July 10, 2016, Seth Rich was shot twice (or three times) in the back and killed. Although WikiLeaks NEVER reveals their sources, WikiLeaks offered a $20,000 reward for information leading to the killers of Seth Rich. This is something WikiLeaks has never done before.
Kim Dotcom is willing to testify under oath and deliver proof that Seth Rich was the leaker.
Also, a private detective who was previously a homicide detective for the Washington D.C. Police, named Rod Wheeler claims that his sources inside the D.C. Police Department were told to `stand down’ on the Seth Rich investigation. Additionally, even though the officers who arrived at the scene after Seth Rich was shot each had body-cams running, the police department claims that all of the body-cam footage from all of the officers, has mysteriously become lost. Also, in one of the leaked DNC emails, John Podesta writes, “I’m definitely for making an example of a suspected leaker whether or not we have any real basis for it.” It was also revealed that Seth Rich was going to meet with the FBI later in the morning on the day he was killed, to discuss the email leaks.
Political influence in this case is very strongly evident by the fact that a Crisis PR Consultant (damage control), who ONLY works for Democrats, named Brad Bauman was “assigned” to the Rich family by the DNC.
So, instead of trying to help find who killed their son, instead of offering a reward (as others have) for information leading to the identity of the killers, instead of any effort to get to the truth of what happened to Seth Rich, the DNC assigns a damage-control expert to represent the Rich family and to protect the reputation of the DNC. The immediate actions by this damage control expert, hired by the DNC, were to attempt to halt the private investigation and try to suppress all discussion of the Seth Rich murder.
Richard Pinder
I would have given your comment much more credibility if you had listed several anonymous sources.
Please attend Journalism 101 at your nearest Community and Diversity Education Centre.
Regards etc /sarcasm
NCBBC
I read that when you posted it awhile back.
The left do not have whistle-blowers, they are always hacked.
And vice versa the right, as they are so awful they have loads of disgruntled W-B’s.
In Ban Blue Conservatism land.
Its an excuse to focus on some mythical illegal act by some dr evil, instead of the actual unlawful acts depicted in the documents.
Does anyone have Anthony Zurcher’s biography, cv? Has anyone been following his facebook page, tweeter feed etc?
I have noticed this guy has been producing a constant stream of sheet since I have been paying a close eye on the BBC website from February 2017 onwards. He is a so-called BBC expert on North American news.
Funny you should say that.
Zurcher is going to play a leading role in my forthcoming book about the BBC, ‘Brainwashing Britain.’ A pathological Trump-hater, as far as my book is concerned Zurcher is the gift that keeps giving. Has a strange habit of mentioning white-men in his Twitter feed.
I look forward to it.
I have read recently “Can We Trust the BBC?”, Robin Aitken, 2007 – which I found in my local library. It was a real eye opener and probably a good starter for further research. One thing that emerged from reading that book – there have been hardly any independent studies of BBC bias. The very few studies that the BBC themselves have allowed – the results have been suppressed (unpublished).
To understand how idiotic the BBC story is, I have just found out that there is no more information available other than that already provided previously to Wikileaks by Seth Rich or by Freedom of Information. Information which cannot now be kept secret from any Russian who may read this post and then talk to Mr Trump’s son about it.
Just media contortions of censorship were censorship of Hilary Clinton’s wrong doing is necessary, but needs not to have existed, if it had influenced the vote against Clinton.
This is what remains censored by the BBC:
While Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, she received one hundred and fifty million dollars from Russian investors at the same time that these investors were seeking approval from the State Department for the Uranium One deal in which Russians gained control of 20% of the U.S. uranium supply. We also know that she received about one hundred million dollars from foreign governments at the same time that the State Department approved $165 billion weapons sales to Algeria, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, U.A.E. and Kuwait. Its illegal for a US government officer to receive monies from foreign governments and entities. She also allowed classified information to be received by unauthorized persons. She destroyed classified information, failed to return classified information and failed to declare possession of classified information. Each one of these actions is a felony.
It is perfectly legal for a Democrat to receive gadzillions of dollars in bribes, oops, sorry, donations, from anyone, anywhere, anytime.
It is despicable, illegal and immoral for a Republican to be in the same room as anyone else, ever.
Just stay on message, will you?
It seems the Investigative Organisation which fed the NYT this story is also the same one which fed them the Fake News story about Trump’s supposedly disgusting behaviour in a Russian hotel room.
You remember the one, it’s the story which nobody could find anything at all, despite digging and digging for months, to support it but which ran and ran and ran until it collapsed on it’s feet of exhaustion.
Oh, and that same Organisation apparently had very close ties, surprise surprise, with the Clinton Foundation.
Tom Fritton will have her, you cannot buy or shake him off, in conjunction with Trey Gowdey they will have her.
Both are tenacious.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/
Alan,
“I’m sorry what? There’s email evidence to support this story? OK…show me the email. No…not got it?… snigger.”
Ahh, bless…
Russian Crown Prosecutor? I bet the BBC staff regularly send money to Nigeria in the hope of getting some of that corrupt oil money the minister has squirreled away and needs a little financial help to release !
It is an op-ed, but this from the Washington Post :-
“The media’s mass hysteria over ‘collusion’ is out of control”
Is the Washington Post cooling on Trump/Russia? Or is their editorial position hostile? Are they just jealous of the New York Times “scoop”? Will it temper the BBC’s hysteria? Will the BBC take heed of this from the article?
“Anyway, Trump Jr. took the one-off meeting, and nothing happened. Is that not proof of non-collusion in and of itself? If you choose to believe otherwise, your disdain for President Trump is getting the best of you and you need help.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2017/07/11/the-medias-mass-hysteria-over-collusion-is-out-of-control/?utm_term=.b15f5b1c48e0
Please excuse this off-topic post, I am trying to find out how to post a comment which includes an image/screenshot (something which other posters seem to be able to do quite effortlessly!)
Here goes (the following pix of the G20 summit is from The Express):
The link to the article is here: http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/825971/G20-summit-gipfel-news-live-Angela-Merkel-talk-Donald-Trump
The para below the pix reads: “The US President is seen looking down at his political rival with confusion and concern, while other politicians stand around without a reaction.”
Nah, The Donald is never ever confused! I am sure my own version is more accurate:
Merkel: Herr President … sniff … you were right, I was wrong … sniffle … Germany needs you … please don’t withdraw your forces … sob … [thinking: if this doesn’t break his heart, it will prove he has no heart].
Trump [thinking]: Blast! I should have asked Melania how to say “you are fired!” in German …
“Peek-a-boo, Mr President!”
Shush, I’ve asked the immigrants to play hide and seek. I’ve counted to ten … have they all gone yet?
“We can do it” … but don’t mention at what cost and who will pay and who are the ‘we’ (politicians excluded?).
“I sometimes think this phrase (wir schaffen das) was a little overstated, that too much store was set by it — to the extent that I’d prefer not to repeat it,” Merkel said. “It’s become a simple slogan, an almost meaningless formula.” {politico.eu sep2016}
What a storm in a teacup. Someone approaches your presidential campaign claiming that they have information about your competitor colluding with a foreign government. Who wouldn’t go along?
I mean if the information had been correct, would that have been deemed okay? I mean didn’t Obama pardon Chelsea/Bradley Manning for releasing all that information. Isn’t that treason?
I see nothing wrong with this. Someone offers a tempting new weapon, you naturally investigate, decide it’s nothing and then move on. How come the MSM aren’t concentrating on this individual offering absolutely nothing of interest.
There was information available right through the election on Wikileaks, that showed definitively Clinton was involved in all sorts of crooked machinations with Saudi Arabia and other countries: yet the MSM b@st@rds wouldn’t report a word of it; however they will clutch at the evidence-free nothing burger, which is the “Russian interference” like a roll of toilet paper thrown out to a drowning man.
If the MSM were so concerned about the subversion of the electoral process in the US, then why aren’t they looking into the massive voter fraud which took place? Oh! I know why: it favoured the Dems.
I passed peak Trump months ago.
Is Trump a Russian agent? No.
Am interested in ceaseless stories about Trump and Russia? No
Clearly Tony cannot blame the peroxide that fries the organ lurking somewhere under Katty’s barnet, but she still at least claims to ‘think’, which is surely almost as good as ‘reporting’?