As Twitchy reported earlier Tuesday, the editor of the WikiLeaks Twitter account was wagering “a million dollars and its editor’s head” that former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort had never met Julian Assange at the Ecuadorian embassy in London, despite reporting by the Guardian.
WikiLeaks has kept up the pressure all day, and now it looks like the Guardian has softened some of the language in its report. Using a site called newssniffer.co.uk, WikiLeaks tracked some stealth-edits to the Guardian’s story.
The Guardian has weakened some of the language in their Manafort/Assange story: https://t.co/QbgnvpHNiX pic.twitter.com/bgm8fvQGxF
— Betsy Woodruff (@woodruffbets) November 27, 2018
Some? Like every key part.
— Chris Moreno (@TheChrisMoreno) November 27, 2018
That screenshot’s probably tough to see, but for one, the Guardian added “sources say” to its headline about Manafort holding secret talks with Assange. It also changed, “It is unclear why Manafort wanted to see Assange” to “would have wanted to see Assange,” and changed “the last meeting” to “the last apparent meeting.”
They’re little changes, but the fact that the Guardian made them at all suggests the paper might not be as certain of its reporting as it was earlier.
This is language to protect them from the threatened lawsuit, that's all
— kathleen (@baad_kittee) November 27, 2018
Sounds like attorneys caution.
— itzme2 (@itzme2) November 27, 2018
Looks like someone could be getting into a bit of trouble
— johnboy (@john8oy76) November 27, 2018
Because the story is libelous garbage and they know it.
— Dock Currie☭☭☭☭ (@DockCurrie) November 27, 2018
That's because @wikileaks called them out on their bogus, completely false story. Guardian will continue gradually backing off the story. Manafort just released statement saying he's never met with or had any contacts with Assange or anyone from WikiLeaks.
— T-Covfefe (@MyPlace4U) November 27, 2018
And let’s walk it back… https://t.co/HALcMAL70V
— Michael Walsh (@dkahanerules) November 27, 2018
Fake fake fake news.
— Gabriel Sterling (@Sterling_NJ) November 27, 2018
Somebody tell @CNN and @Acosta so they can stop spreading #FakeNews
— Twinkletoes (@LINDATRAVELguru) November 27, 2018
It’s careful editing; the essential facts are reported remain. Why is everyone so critical of The Guardian? They remain an excellent, objective news source with no ax to grind.
— leon pascucci (@LPeterP) November 27, 2018
I don't really see it as weaker. But I do think it is strange they didn't use an attribution in the headline at first – something we are required to do at Reuters. The rest seems minor.
— Sarah N. Lynch (@SarahNLynch) November 27, 2018
There should be a video to validate the story. No video, no proof, no story.
— Alamo_on_the_rise (@AlamoOnTheRise) November 27, 2018
BREAKING: @WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange has instructed his lawyers to sue the Guardian for libel over fabricated Manafort story and launched a legal fund to boost the action https://t.co/VaoMESN5RO
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) November 27, 2018
All we know for sure right now is that WikiLeaks threw down the challenge and the Guardian blinked.
How bad do you have to be when Wikileaks is the comparative less bad guy? https://t.co/WkkChRx75K
— Kurt Schlichter (@KurtSchlichter) November 27, 2018
So, collusion comes down to an elderly nut and a gadfly gossiping to each other.
This is a freaking joke.— Kurt Schlichter (@KurtSchlichter) November 27, 2018
Related:
FAKE NEWS? WikiLeaks tweets that the Guardian story on a Manafort-Assange secret meeting is untrue https://t.co/2XZ9uIhFM2
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) November 27, 2018
Join the conversation as a VIP Member