The article alleges that GRU, a top-secret unit of Russian military intelligence, offered the bounty in payment for every U.S. soldier killed in Afghanistan, and that at least one member of the U.S. military was alleged to have been killed in exchange for the bounties.
White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany followed Trump's blanket denial with a statement that the intelligence concerning Russian bounty information was "Unconfirmed." She didn't say the intelligence wasn't credible, like Trump had said the day before, only that there was "No consensus" and that the "Veracity of the underlying allegations continue to be evaluated," which happens to almost completely match the Sunday night statement from the White House's National Security Council.
Instead of saying that the sources for the Russian bounty story were not credible and the story was false, or likely false, McEnany then said that Trump had "Not been briefed on the matter."
The Times article repeatedly cites unnamed "American intelligence officials." The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal articles "Confirming" the original Times story merely restate the allegations of the anonymous officials, along with caveats like "If true" or "If confirmed."
The Taliban denies it accepted bounties from Russian intelligence.
"These kinds of deals with the Russian intelligence agency are baseless-our target killings and assassinations were ongoing in years before, and we did it on our own resources," Zabihullah Mujahid, a spokesman for the Taliban, told The New York Times.
The NYT story serves to bolster the narrative that Trump sides with Russia, and against our intelligence community estimates and our own soldiers lives.
White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany followed Trump's blanket denial with a statement that the intelligence concerning Russian bounty information was "Unconfirmed." She didn't say the intelligence wasn't credible, like Trump had said the day before, only that there was "No consensus" and that the "Veracity of the underlying allegations continue to be evaluated," which happens to almost completely match the Sunday night statement from the White House's National Security Council.
Instead of saying that the sources for the Russian bounty story were not credible and the story was false, or likely false, McEnany then said that Trump had "Not been briefed on the matter."
The Times article repeatedly cites unnamed "American intelligence officials." The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal articles "Confirming" the original Times story merely restate the allegations of the anonymous officials, along with caveats like "If true" or "If confirmed."
The Taliban denies it accepted bounties from Russian intelligence.
"These kinds of deals with the Russian intelligence agency are baseless-our target killings and assassinations were ongoing in years before, and we did it on our own resources," Zabihullah Mujahid, a spokesman for the Taliban, told The New York Times.
The NYT story serves to bolster the narrative that Trump sides with Russia, and against our intelligence community estimates and our own soldiers lives.
No comments:
Post a Comment