Some people have memories so short they don’t even seem to remember the “protest” by “mourners” who tried to breach the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and kill everyone inside (fortunately there were no U.S. casualties this time around). They’re literally asking on Twitter what Iran did to provoke such a response as the killing of the dapper-bearded bodybuilder Qasem Soleimani, as if an attack on an embassy weren’t enough.
New York Times correspondent Rukmini Callimachi let rip Saturday morning with a tweetstorm that started with tips from sources and ended with the suggestion that President Trump had ordered the strike to draw attention away from his impeachment.
17. Before I go back to the pool let me just say the obvious: No one’s trying to downplay Suleimani’s crimes. The question is why now? His whereabouts have been known before. His resume of killing-by-proxy is not a secret. Hard to decouple his killing from the impeachment saga.
— Rukmini Callimachi (@rcallimachi) January 4, 2020
Why now? Because they had the shot and a Commander-in-Chief who told them to take it? Oh, and according to her sources, the chance of another imminent attack was “razor-thin.”
1. I’ve had a chance to check in with sources, including two US officials who had intelligence briefings after the strike on Suleimani. Here is what I’ve learned. According to them, the evidence suggesting there was to be an imminent attack on American targets is “razor thin”.
— Rukmini Callimachi (@rcallimachi) January 4, 2020
Ambassador Richard Grenell gave Callimachi some advice:
If they exist, you should never listen to your anonymous sources again. They don’t know. https://t.co/GvC9reSQPz
— Richard Grenell (@RichardGrenell) January 4, 2020
— Jerhad (@jerhad) January 4, 2020
Yeah, we’ve never seen “sources” leak information supposedly damaging to Trump to the media. That would be a first.
She's spreading propaganda!
— American KAG ?Baby (@kag_baby) January 4, 2020
I’m guessing that “intelligence briefings” is a very elastic term in her reporting and refers here to a couple of millennial GS 1s messaging their fantasies to each other.
— Austere Legal Scholar (@NakatomiXmas) January 4, 2020
75% chance her sources are the voices in her head.
— Geaux Crash Letalien (@Coach_Crash) January 4, 2020
I'd say it's closer to 100%.
— Greg Collins (@GregWestTexas) January 4, 2020
I've reached the point where if I read something that is attributed to "sources", I just assume there's mostly made up stuff in what follows.
Doesn't matter which side, I treat them the same.
If you are a "reporter" you need to report facts.
— Paul Dzielinski (@Pdzielinski) January 4, 2020
The press: TRUMP MUST GET CONGRESS APPROVAL BEFORE EXECUTING TOP SECRET MISSIONS!
Also the press: I have multiple US officials who will give me top secret information so I can post it to my 1,549 Twitter followers.
— Bob Baumann (@BobBaumannJr) January 4, 2020
I’m sure the officials exist and I’m also sure the are part of the disgraceful deep state resistance. If the can’t do their job and support the President they should resign
— james penrod (@james_penrod) January 4, 2020
— MikeyLikesIt (@dougree) January 4, 2020
And aren't those 'sources' probably revealing classified information? And even if some of that information is true, that is probably not the entire story.
— Derek R (@DRBoiler007) January 4, 2020
NYT explains it all…
– more anonymous sources
– more unnamed officials
– more Deep State spies or leaks
NYT meh ?
— GaryTap (@tap_gary) January 4, 2020
My twelve nameless high U.S. official sources assure me that Ol' Suli was planning something bad when he got hit.
So I see your two sources and raise you ten.
This is easy.
— Steve BRITT (@colonelbritt) January 4, 2020
I talked to my anonymous source at the local grocery store, who knows someone, who knows someone that may live in Iran. And I was told that NYTimes works for the Iranian Government. Just saying. Libs and their ridiculous anonymous sources. I guess I can now work for the NYT.
— AlGBelow (@below_al) January 4, 2020
Is she seriously calling the attack on pure Embassy "the protest outside the Embassy "? I mean, I know she did. I just read it. ?
— DawnR (@MyHome3298) January 4, 2020
I am skeptical of any sources that don't consider the embassy attack as significantly changing the equation.
— Michael Bruner (@MichaelBruner) January 4, 2020
Razor thin is enough for me.
— Bhai_Reddy (@Bhai_Reddy) January 4, 2020
Razor thin is enough for me. Likely it's thicker than that. If nothing they would have said nothing.
— George Cumbee (@GCumbee50) January 4, 2020
Once I saw NY Times in her profile, I took everything she with a HUGE pile of salt-always going to be the negative side when it comes to this administration.
— Gregory Siegelman (@GregSiegelman) January 4, 2020
My thoughts exactly. The media bias has never been so obvious.
— Ken Wesolowski (@AlpineKen) January 4, 2020
What she is doing is striking fear into a already unstable group of misinformed people that war is eminent. She needs to be removed from her position. Careless reporting now is disastrous
— Nina friesen (@N_Friesen) January 4, 2020
I’m sure she found the source who told her everything she wanted to hear. There’s no reason why anyone might want to spread this propaganda, right? #JournalismIsDead
— Ann Woods (@annwoodshive) January 4, 2020
She's with the NY Times, enough said!
— Sandy Button (@sandybutton0418) January 4, 2020
Come on man he was a bad actor and deserved to die
— Thomas Gerosolina (@tomgeroso) January 4, 2020
Richard, #Soleimani was an austere accomplished general that wrote poetry and enjoyed long walks on the beach.
— jon w (@jonwins) January 4, 2020
No one should put any credence in anonymous sources ever again.
— James from Cary, NC (@JimTynen) January 4, 2020
This one still doesnt believe that we have figured out "anonymous sources" is a slang term for "imaginary friends"
— mike holton (@xarmynsdq) January 4, 2020
The last sentence in Ms. Callimachi’s peice: “His resume of killing-by-proxy is not a secret. Hard to decouple his killing from the impeachment saga.” Question for Callimachi: Does the DNC pay you directly or do they run it through NYT payroll?
— Larry Clarke (@larryclarke18) January 4, 2020
Summary: He was 1) following a known operational pattern, 2) headed to Tehran for final planning and approval, 3) following strident anti-US threats.
Sounds like Trump took him out at the right time. If you wait for specific imminent threat you’ll probably be reacting.
— submandave (@submandave) January 4, 2020
Forget ‘austere religious scholar’: Check out the New Yorker’s dreamy obituary of ‘flamboyant’ Qasem Soleimani https://t.co/0RE1GR1ySo
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) January 4, 2020