Tag: nyt

Pentagon Denies New York Times Report with Anonymous Sources Accusing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth of Leaking Yemen Strike Details in Second Private Signal Chat with Wife, Brother, and Lawyer

In yet another desperate attempt to undermine President Trump’s administration, The New York Times published a baseless report accusing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth of leaking sensitive Yemen strike details in a private Signal chat.

The Pentagon has swiftly and forcefully denied these allegations, with Chief Spokesman Sean Parnell labeling the story as “fake news” driven by disgruntled former employees with clear motives to sabotage Hegseth and Trump’s agenda.

This latest attack comes on the heels of the firing of three former Pentagon officials—Dan Caldwell, Darin Selnick, and Colin Carroll—accused of leaking unauthorized information.

The Times claims Hegseth shared details of a March 15 Yemen strike in a Signal group chat named “Defense | Team Huddle,” which included his wife, Jennifer, his brother, Phil, and his personal lawyer, Tim Parlatore.

The article further alleges that Hegseth shared similar details in another chat that mistakenly included The Atlantic’s editor, Jeffrey Goldberg.

These accusations, sourced from four anonymous individuals, lack any concrete evidence and reek of political vendetta.

The New York Times reported:

Unlike the chat in which The Atlantic was mistakenly included, the newly revealed one was created by Mr. Hegseth. It included his wife and about a dozen other people from his personal and professional inner circle in January, before his confirmation as defense secretary, and was named “Defense | Team Huddle,” the people familiar with the chat said. He used his private phone, rather than his government one, to access the Signal chat.

The continued inclusion following Mr. Hegseth’s confirmation of his wife, brother and personal lawyer, none of whom had any apparent reason to be briefed on operational details of a military operation as it was getting underway, is sure to raise further questions about his adherence to security protocols.

[…]

Mr. Hegseth created the separate Signal group initially as a forum for discussing routine administrative or scheduling information, two of the people familiar with the chat said. The people said Mr. Hegseth typically did not use the chat to discuss sensitive military operations and said it did not include other cabinet-level officials.

Mr. Hegseth shared information about the Yemen strikes in the “Defense | Team Huddle” chat at roughly the same time he was putting the same details in the other Signal chat group that included senior U.S. officials and The Atlantic, the people familiar with Mr. Hegseth’s chat group said.

[…]

In the case of Mr. Hegseth’s Signal group, a U.S. official declined to comment on whether Mr. Hegseth shared detailed targeting information but maintained that there was no national security breach.

But according to the Pentagon, the entire narrative is nothing more than a politically motivated smear campaign aimed at derailing the Trump administration’s bold military leadership and undermining Secretary Hegseth’s credibility as he continues to clean house at the Department of Defense.

Keep reading

New York Times Lies About Why Kash Patel Suspended Analyst Key To FBI Corruption

The New York Times continues to cover up government corruption, on April 11 hitting FBI Director Kash Patel for suspending analyst Brian Auten nearly a decade after Auten helped Democrats frame Donald Trump as a Russian asset. The NYT headline reads, “F.B.I. Suspends Employee on Patel’s So-Called Enemies List,” not something accurate such as “FBI Suspends Employee Who Illegally Abused Government Power To Protect Democrat Presidential Candidates.”

Predictably, other corporate media outlets took the same corrupt angle, notably an April 12 NBC article by “Fusion Ken” Dilanian and Alexandra Marquez.

Dilanian is known as a Democrat propaganda mouthpiece, particularly for spreading lies created by the Hillary Clinton campaign to smear Trump as a Russian asset. Those lies came from probable Russian assets such as Christopher Steele dossier source Igor Danchenko, meaning Clinton and Dilanian may have used actual Russian propaganda to falsely accuse their political enemies of … spreading Russian propaganda. Dilanian once described the now widely discredited Steele, whom the FBI paid for information, as “James Bond.”

The Clinton campaign paid Steele to fabricate lies about Trump in a “dossier” that Democrat operatives in the government helped launder through U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies, including the FBI. Auten was the top FBI “analyst” assigned to verify the dossier. His team, he testified to Congress in 2020, could not verify any of its salacious allegations that included the infamous “golden showers” nonsense.

So Auten knew the “dossier” was full of lies as early as 2017. Yet Auten’s “Crossfire Hurricane” FBI team still used the unverifiable, false material to back secret warrants to spy on the Trump campaign, fueling further leaks of false information that saddled Trump’s first term with investigations and clouds of public suspicion.

Keep reading

New York Times Blockbuster Article Prepares Americans for Defeat in Ukraine

A March 29 article on America’s involvement in the war in Ukraine in The New York Times by Adam Entous “reveals that America was woven into the war far more intimately and broadly than previously understood.” “Understood” is a euphemism. It means the American and global public were lied to.

The article reveals that the war in Ukraine truly was, as former British prime minister Boris Johnson and U.S. secretary of state Marco Rubio have already said, a proxy war against Russia. U.S. military and intelligence were involved in every stage of the war, including supplying the weapons, the training, the planning, the war-gaming, the intelligence and the targeting. They were involved in everything from the big picture to the minute detail: “A vast American intelligence-collection effort both guided big-picture battle strategy and funneled precise targeting information down to Ukrainian soldiers in the field.”

American military and intelligence provided “intelligence about Russian battlefield positions, movements and intentions.” “Every morning, officers recalled, the Ukrainians and Americans gathered to survey Russian weapons systems and ground forces and determine the ripest, highest-value targets.” When a “European intelligence chief” discovered how “deeply enmeshed” NATO was in the battlefield operations, he marveled that “They are part of the kill chain now.”

But none of this is really new. For those paying attention to the news, and not the propaganda and repeated assurances and talking points, this information was readily available. Even The New York Times had already reported much of it. The Entous piece adds many names and significant details, but it is not a revelation that the U.S. was not only supplying the Ukrainian armed forces the weapons but that it was feeding them the intelligence.

But beneath the supposed bombshell, important nuggets are exposed that deserve more attention. Though, again, not entirely new, the piece opens with the revelation – intended as dramatic narrative and not investigative journalism–that from early in the war, NATO troops were on the ground in Ukraine. In the dramatic description of a clandestine convoy that smuggled two Ukrainian generals across the Polish border to meet with American intelligence and military officials to “forge what would become one of the most closely guarded secrets of the war in Ukraine,” The Times reveals that the convoy was “manned by British commandos, out of uniform but heavily armed.”

Keep reading

The New York Times Drops a Massive Truth Bomb on the Democrats

The New York Times editorial board just discovered what conservatives have been saying for years: the Democratic Party is completely out of touch with everyday Americans. 

It’s a stunning rebuke from a paper that typically carries the water for Dems. The Times finally admitted the obvious: Democrats’ obsession with identity politics and their “scolding, censorious posture” have driven voters straight into Republicans’ arms.

“In the aftermath of this comprehensive defeat, many party leaders have decided that they do not need to make significant changes to their policies or their message,” the editorial board writes. “They have instead settled on a convenient explanation for their plight.”

They then point out that Democrats are in denial about their electoral struggles, clinging to the idea that they are merely victims of post-pandemic inflation and poor messaging rather than deeper political failures. Party leaders insist their policies are popular but that voter apathy—rather than a genuine shift toward Trump—led to their losses. DNC Chairman Ken Martin claims Democrats simply need to “connect” their message better, while Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz dismisses the idea of winning over Trump voters, instead focusing on mobilizing those who stayed home.

“As comforting as these explanations may feel to Democrats, they are a form of denial that will make it harder for the Democratic Party to win future elections,” they warn.

Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders and AOC are doubling down on socialism with their “Fighting Oligarchy” tour. Because nothing says “we’ve learned our lesson” like pushing failed far-left policies that voters already rejected.

The numbers don’t lie. A measly 27% of Americans view the Democratic Party favorably—its worst showing in decades. They lost everything in 2024: the White House, the House, the Senate, and most state-level races. But are they doing any soul-searching? Of course not! 

“We’re now at a point where the more people vote, the better Republicans do,” David Shor, a Democrat data scientist, said recently.

That quote has to sting for a party that spent years claiming voter suppression was behind their losses. Turns out, when more Americans vote, they vote Republican.

Keep reading

Key Takeaways From NYT’s Secret History Detailing US ‘Shocking’ Involvement In Ukraine War

It is years too late and alternative and independent media had already done so much work on exposing the reality, including 600+ page books which have been published, but the New York Times on Sunday is out with a lengthy report on The Partnership: The Secret History of America’s Role in the Ukraine War.

Up until very recently, mainstream media gatekeepers wouldn’t so much as admit that a proxy war has been unfolding from the very start of the conflict in Ukraine. This even after the so-called paper of record had earlier in Feb. 2024 acknowledged that the CIA had built 12 “secret spy bases” in Ukraine to wage a shadow war against Russia going back to 2014. 

Again, it comes much too belatedly, but now with Ukrainian forces clearly losing the fight, the Times admits that the prior Biden administration was far more involved in being embedded on a military and intelligence level with Ukraine than was previously made public by official sources.

The report is a deep dive into the “extraordinary partnership of intelligence, strategy, planning and technology” that became Zelensky’s “secret weapon” in countering Russia. It begins by describing that within two months of Putin sending his army across the border, Ukrainian generals in civilians clothes were being secretly whisked away for high-level war planning sessions at US bases in Germany.

“The passengers were top Ukrainian generals,” NY Times describes of men taken by a convoy of unmarked cars from the Ukrainian capital to Western Europe. “Their destination was Clay Kaserne, the headquarters of U.S. Army Europe and Africa in Wiesbaden, Germany. Their mission was to help forge what would become one of the most closely guarded secrets of the war in Ukraine.”

The report makes clear that US commanders were much more inter-woven into Ukrainian operations than known, to the point of ‘shocking’ some NATO allies. In essence many counter-Russia operations happening on Ukraine’s battlefields were simply run from the base in Germany. 

“But a New York Times investigation reveals that America was woven into the war far more intimately and broadly than previously understood,” the report continues. “At critical moments, the partnership was the backbone of Ukrainian military operations that, by U.S. counts, have killed or wounded more than 700,000 Russian soldiers. (Ukraine has put its casualty toll at 435,000.) Side by side in Wiesbaden’s mission command center, American and Ukrainian officers planned Kyiv’s counteroffensives. A vast American intelligence-collection effort both guided big-picture battle strategy and funneled precise targeting information down to Ukrainian soldiers in the field.”

Notably, this is essentially US officials and the NY Times also admitting that the Kremlin has all along been right when it insisted this was never really simply about Moscow vs. Kiev – but that NATO countries have militarized Ukraine and weaponized it against Russia. President Putin and Kremlin officials have been fiercely complaining about US intervention all along, but this was dismissed in the West as merely ‘propaganda’.

Keep reading

Trump’s DOJ Launches Criminal Probe Into Deep State’s NYT Leak Undermining Trump’s Crackdown on Tren de Aragua Terrorists

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche revealed Friday that the Department of Justice has launched a criminal investigation into a leak of classified intelligence aimed at discrediting Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to swiftly deport members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua (TDA).

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche criticized the leak as a politically motivated attempt by the “Deep State” to undermine President Trump’s agenda, particularly his recent crackdown on the gang.

“The Justice Department is opening a criminal investigation relating to the selective leak of inaccurate, but nevertheless classified, information from the Intelligence Community relating to Tren de Aragua (TDA),” Blanche said in a statement.

He continued, “We will not tolerate politically motivated efforts by the Deep State to undercut President Trump’s agenda by leaking false information onto the pages of their allies at the New York Times. The Alien Enemies Proclamation is supported by fact, law, and common sense, which we will establish in court and then expel the TDA terrorists from this country.”

Keep reading

Why Is The NYT Admitting the Covid Lab-Leak Theory Now?

Yesterday the New York Times, the written order-of-the-day for the old school left, put out an op-ed admitting, in so many words, the covid lab-leak theory. Check the revealing title: “We Were Badly Misled About the Event That Changed Our Lives“. Some were surprised about this.

I am not. I’ll tell you exactly why these prevaricating no-good slime-pushing would-be tyrants are admitting what the rest of us have been saying for years. Because they are scared for their jobs, their funding, their money, their slipping prestige.

Good. Be afraid. We should take it all away. All of it.

Now you’ve heard me many times call for the ending of government having a direct, and the direct, hand in funding science. But it sounds strange to hear. It doesn’t sound sensible. It sounds impossible. But let the NYT itself convince you.

Gain-of-function is the euphemism. Gain-of-lethality is the truth. Scientists, funded by you, dear reader, monkey with bugs to see if they can make them deadlier. To you. Which you pay for. They do this out of morbid curiosity, from the fiction that having created Frankenstein bugs they’ll be able to find cures for their own creations, cures which they wouldn’t need if they didn’t invent Accelerated Death, and because they have money to spend and prestige to seek. Your money.

They made the covid bug in a Chinese lab, which you partly paid for, and they were sloppy and it got out. That story has been told so many times you’re sick of it. But one item I don’t always emphasize. Why did they panic, when it was obvious to the sober there wasn’t any need?

Keep reading

NYT: We Were ‘Badly Misled’ on Covid Lab Leak. But Guess Who’s to Blame?

An Opinion piece in the New York Times by Zeynep Tufekdi made a shocking admission: “We Were Badly Misled About the Event That Changed Our Lives.”

Actually, it’s not shocking at all to anyone who has been paying attention for the last five years. 

Tufekdi, a professor of sociology and public affairs at Princeton University and a New York Times Opinion columnist, wrote on Sunday: 

Yet in 2020, when people started speculating that a laboratory accident might have been the spark that started the Covid-19 pandemic, they were treated like kooks and cranks. Many public health officials and prominent scientists dismissed the idea as a conspiracy theory, insisting that the virus had emerged from animals in a seafood market in Wuhan, China.

She goes on to detail how scientists and public health officials went to extraordinary Orwellian lengths to cover up any information that pointed to a leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology as the cause of the global pandemic that shut down schools, social lives, and the economies of the worlds most powerful countries, including the United States. 

We have since learned, however, that to promote the appearance of consensus, some officials and scientists hid or understated crucial facts, misled at least one reporter, orchestrated campaigns of supposedly independent voices and even compared notes about how to hide their communications in order to keep the public from hearing the whole story. And as for that Wuhan laboratory’s research, the details that have since emerged show that safety precautions might have been terrifyingly lax.

Tufekdi describes high-ranking members of the scientific community using burner phones and making “emails disappear” to keep the bat soup narrative going. Scientists discussed on Slack how they believed the lab leak theory to be plausible even while endorsing the infected bat theory publicly. Evolutionary biologist Kristian Andersen exclaimed in one message, “The lab escape version of this is so friggin’ likely to have happened because they were already doing this type of work and the molecular data is fully consistent with that scenario.” 

This wasn’t just a case of reporters being tricked into dismissing the lab leak theory — it was a combination of willful blindness and disinformation. 

Keep reading

Oops! I Think the NYT Just Said the Quiet Part About Deportation Out Loud

Tell me you’re out of touch without telling me you’re out of touch. 

I wasn’t planning on writing anything today as I’m knee-deep in a house cleaning project, but I took a little break to peruse the news and saw an article in the New York Times that had me wondering if I’d accidentally stumbled upon a satire site like the Babylon Bee. It was about how deporting illegal migrants would have a negative impact on the wealthy people who have homes in the Hamptons. You know, the real victims in all of this.  

The article is entitled “They Help Make the Hamptons the Hamptons, and Now They’re Living in Fear.” The subtitle reads “Latino immigrants care for some of America’s most lavish beachside mansions. Their disappearance would affect the wealthy, too.” But wait, it gets better. The article begins: 

The party dresses must be double-pressed, the hedges shaved into sharp rectangles. The hand soap and lotion dispensers must be formed into neat lines along bathroom sinks. Caterers need to slip out of view as soon as the oysters and cocktails are served.

Wealthy residents of the Hamptons demand perfection. Now, many of the people who make it so — Latino immigrants, some of them undocumented — are panicking about President Trump’s deportation orders.

It goes on with great quotes like this one: “Some of the wealthy are quietly beginning to make calculations about what it would mean if their undocumented workers were deported. Who would mow the lawn?”

(Note: their undocumented workers)

Or this one from Marit Molan, director of Hamptons Community Outreach: “Everyone relies on housekeepers and carpenters and tree cutters and grass cutters. People come to the Hamptons to enjoy their houses, and who is going to take care of their houses?”

Keep reading

Trump Blames Ukraine: What The New York Times Gets Right and What The New York Times Gets Wrong

On February 18, for the first time since the war in Ukraine began, high ranking U.S. and Russian officials met to begin talks on ending the war. The U.S. delegation included Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Trump’s envoy to the Middle East and a favorite negotiator Steve Witkoff and National Security Advisor Mike Waltz. The Russian delegation included Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Putin’s foreign policy advisor, Yury Ushakov.

Following the meeting, U.S. President Donald Trump stunned reporters at a press conference by blaming Ukraine, and not Russia, for the war in what The New York Times called “Trump’s Pivot Toward Putin’s Russia.” In its cross examination of Trump’s case, The Times gets some things very right. But they got some things very wrong.

As he walked out of the talks, Sergey Lavrov said, “We weren’t just listening to each other, but we heard each other. I have reason to believe that the American side started to better understand our positions.”

The position that the American side seems to have better understood is the Russian narrative that the war did not start on February 24, 2022 and that Russia did not start it. Russia has long insisted that the war began with the U.S. supported coup of 2014 and the failure to protect the linguistic, religious and cultural rights of the ethnic Russian Ukrainian citizens who felt abandoned and threatened by that coup.

Lavrov has consistently argued that Russia is not demanding preconditions but that they are demanding that the West fulfil its previous agreement not to expand NATO eastward to Russia’s border and its previous commitment to settle the crisis in Ukraine based on the UN Charter that stipulates the principle of equal rights and self-determination. The first was broken with the promise that Ukraine was on an irreversible path to NATO; the second was broken with Kiev’s “extermination of everything Russian, including language, mass media, culture, and even the use of the Russian language in everyday life.” Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, according to this narrative that the Americans now “better understand,” was intended to prevent the first and protect the second.

So, The New York Times complains that “[a]s far as Mr. Trump is concerned, Russia is not responsible for the war that has devastated its neighbor. Instead, he suggests that Ukraine is to blame for Russia’s invasion of it.” Following the meeting of the American and Russian delegations, The Times complains that “American officials did not dwell on Russia’s violation of international law in attacking Ukraine.”

About this, The Times is right. Trump is wrong more for what he did not say than for what he did. “By contrast,” The Times says, “Mr. Trump uttered not one word of reproach for Mr. Putin or for Russia.” Putin is to blame for the illegal invasion of Ukraine, and the discussions on ending the war must put this on the record and address it, at least in security guarantees for Ukraine.

Keep reading