By publishing another lie to cover up Obama spin, the New York Times points out that Nunes, if a conspiracist, was an accurate one.
Was Congressman Devin Nunes a conspiracist for doubting intelligence reports in 2013 that backed President Obama’s claim that Al Quaeda had been seriously weakened? A more important question is Was he right? And the answer from multiple sources, including The New York Times’ own past reporting and analysis, is that Yes, he was right.
So Jason Zengerle’s hit piece on Devin Nunes, published (and allegedly fact-checked) by the New York Times, is an amazing act of pointless lying. It discounts the fact that the Obama Administration was fiddling with the intelligence to fit its preconceived narrative in order to damage the reputation of Devin Nunes according to the Left’s preconceived narrative.
But what Zengerle ends up doing is reminding us that Devin Nunes has been penetrating Deep State lies long before Trump came into office. If he’s a conspiracist, he became one by finding a conspiracy and exposing it.
Mollie Hemingway writes at the Federalist, “The New York Times’ Hatchet Job On Devin Nunes Is Riddled With Errors.”
The only problem is the case he attempts to make is riddled with errors and full of embarrassing and deliberate material omissions.
For example, Zengerle writes that a “suspicious” Nunes was wrong to believe that “Obama administration officials were ignoring evidence in a cache of documents collected from Osama bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, showing that Al Qaeda was much stronger than the administration publicly contended.” Zengerle says Nunes’ predecessor as chairman of the intel committee, Rep. Mike Rogers, agreed with Obama officials’ assessment and told Nunes the documents Defense Intelligence Agency officials were analyzing at Central Command headquarters in Tampa, Fla., showed nothing significant on that score.
“But Nunes wasn’t convinced. On a Saturday in May 2013, he flew from Washington to Tampa and paid a visit to Centcom headquarters himself, where he demanded to meet with the analysts reviewing the documents, in the hope of uncovering evidence of Al Qaeda’s strength—and an Obama administration cover-up,” Zengerle writes. “But after a meeting with the Army major general who headed Centcom’s intelligence wing, Nunes came back to Washington empty-handed.”
There are multiple problems with this supposed example of Nunes being a conspiracy theorist who chases after illusory and meaningless things. Primarily, it was Rogers and the intelligence officials who were wrong, and Nunes, Mike Pompeo, independent analysts, and others pushing for transparency who were right.
The cache did, in fact, dispute the public claims of the Barack Obama administration, which had overtly political reasons for claiming al-Qaeda was being defeated. Far from conspiratorial, Nunes’ pursuit of transparency was quite successful. Nearly half a million documents were finally made public in November 2017. One of the claims this release debunked was that al-Qaeda had been weakened by being cut off from an isolated Osama bin Laden.
The New York Times’ own terrorism reporter Rukmini Callimachi made this exact point in a panel discussion in November 2017, following the release of the cache.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com