NYT's and WaPo dropped minutes after Trump got on to a plane that doesn't land for quite awhile. Brutal
— Dusty (@DustinGiebel) May 19, 2017
As Twitchy told you, the New York Times dropped yet another “bombshell” this afternoon, this time reporting that Trump told Russia’s Sergey Lavrov and Sergey Kislyak he felt relieved after firing “nut job” James Comey because he no longer felt “great pressure.” The White House did not dispute the report.
Within minutes of the NYT’s story going out, the Washington Post dropped a bombshell of their own:
New WaPo: Russia probe reaches current White House official, people familiar with the case say https://t.co/xRy40eEQ9r
— Ali Vitali (@alivitali) May 19, 2017
Russia probe has identified a senior White House adviser as a "significant person of interest," per @DevlinBarrett https://t.co/ArNUn6lvtA
— Rebecca Ballhaus (@rebeccaballhaus) May 19, 2017
??? https://t.co/F4gggZKDZo pic.twitter.com/xzjf6a0Wq1
— Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) May 19, 2017
As was the case with the NYT’s story, this report is already generating a lot of chatter. Though for what it’s worth, here’s attorney Ken White’s, aka @Popehat, take:
So today's WaPo story about a "person of interest" in the White House is a little odd. /1
— IWantNothingHat (@Popehat) May 19, 2017
"Person of interest" is a deliberately ambiguous term, evasive. WaPo reporters are smart and know that. Yet they don't comment on it. /2
— IWantNothingHat (@Popehat) May 19, 2017
"Subject" or "target" would be far more precise terms, suggesting that the source has more knowledge and credibility. /3
— IWantNothingHat (@Popehat) May 19, 2017
/4 [I've explained before what those terms mean: https://t.co/JWb4Hox0Hj]
— IWantNothingHat (@Popehat) May 19, 2017
But it's odd and a bit disappointing that WaPo writers don't highlight that their source is using notoriously wobbly language with them. /5
— IWantNothingHat (@Popehat) May 19, 2017
Because "person of interest" could mean "target" or "subject" or could mean "person mentioned once speculatively" /6
— IWantNothingHat (@Popehat) May 19, 2017
And no, adding "significant" doesn't make it less ambiguous. That's like saying "no, I STRENUOUSLY object!" /7
— IWantNothingHat (@Popehat) May 19, 2017
Also:
https://twitter.com/BecketAdams/status/865660494480154626
https://twitter.com/NoahCRothman/status/865661556293476354
The White House quickly issued a statement:
BREAKING: White House on Washington Post report: "No collusion between the campaign and any foreign entity." https://t.co/gPnG25rp6P
— NBC Nightly News with Lester Holt (@NBCNightlyNews) May 19, 2017
White House has statements out on both scoops pic.twitter.com/VwORKh23xf
— Ben Jacobs (@Bencjacobs) May 19, 2017
The NYT and WaPo seem to be doing a pretty good job of keeping the White House busy.
Two scoops at once, just like the President, reportedly, prefers
— Michael Del Moro (@MikeDelMoro) May 19, 2017
Today’s been a good day for the two media outlets:
Our columnist @JamesStewartNYT on becoming a @WashingtonPost subscriber after Monday's Russia scoop https://t.co/0wS9EM9lbi
— The New York Times (@nytimes) May 19, 2017
— The New York Times (@nytimes) May 19, 2017
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) May 19, 2017
At least somebody’s having a good Friday …
NYT: “No, you hang up first”
WaPo: “No, you hang up”
NYT: “No, you first”
WaPo: “No, you first”
NYT: “No, you…”https://t.co/aoc9zKpiI7
— Bradd Jaffy (@BraddJaffy) May 19, 2017
Adorable.
I wonder why people think you have a common mission to destroy Trump. https://t.co/GC3rD7g66s
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) May 19, 2017
Can't imagine why people think the media are out to get Trump https://t.co/8QcKqYocPg
— Ben McDonald (@Bmac0507) May 19, 2017
Editor’s note: This post has been updated with additional tweets.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member