The New York Times just came out with an extremely long, but substance-free retelling of the two year trail of nonsense called Russia-gate by some.
It amounts entirely to accusations and hearsay and shows no connection between Trump and Russia’s meddling in U.S. politics.
Because most people won’t read a 10,000 word article from start to finish, they’ll never notice that the article contradicts itself in two different paragraphs…
First they claim that public is beyond comprehension on Trump’s denials because of a “mountain of evidence.”
Later they go on to say that there is “no public evidence” that has shown Trump colluded with Russia.
OF course, many people are still hoping, after two years, that Muller is going to pull some real evidence of collusion out, and isn’t just stalling until the midterms.
Most of us see this for what it is: A two year long smear campaign to try to overturn an election that didn’t go the way they wanted.
Articles like this are pointed to as evidence by many low information propaganda victims because the New York Times is supposed to be the “paper of record,” but how many of them have actually read the article and can actually point to any evidence presented?
We should understand that the New York Times, owned by Carlos Slim, is a globalist/CIA propaganda rag. Of course they hate Trump and they hate the alternative media and the truth and freedom movements… because they’re all competition to the business, power and profit interests of the New York Times investors and controllers.