[ad_1]
Matt Zapotosky
Journalist for National Security at the Department of Justice
Devlin Barrett
A Journalist for National Security and Law Enforcement
When a BuzzFeed reporter looks for the first time Special advocate spokesperson, Robert S. Mueller III, treated the application in the same manner as any other article .
The reporter informed Mueller's spokesman, Peter. Carr and one of his colleagues had "an upcoming article that Michael Cohen would have been urging President Trump to lie to Congress about his negotiations on the Trump Moscow project," according to copies of their e-mails provided by a spokesman. from BuzzFeed. It is important to note that the reporter did not make any reference to the special council office, nor to the evidence that the Mueller investigators had discovered.
"We will not accept comments," said Carr, a familiar refrain for journalists covering Mueller's work. 19659007] The innocuous exchange denied the chaos that it would produce. When BuzzFeed published the story a few hours later, it far exceeded Carr's initial impressions, said people close to the case, saying that Cohen, the former Trump lawyer, told the lawyer Special that after the elections, the President personally asked him to lie, "and Mueller's office learned of the existence of the directive" through interviews with many witnesses of the Organization internal trump and emails, text messages and a cache of other documents. "
[BuzzFeed’s stumble is highest-profile misstep at a time when press is under greatest scrutiny]
Special board office, which was fake, two people Familiar with the question said, under cover of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.And while Democrats wielded specter of investigation and dismissal, Mueller's team began to discuss of a stage that they had not never crossed before: publicly contesting the evidence contained in their ongoing investigation.
Within 24 hours of the publication of the article, the special council office issued a statement doing just that. Trump, who described the media as an enemy of the people, said Saturday the statement of the special advocate as evidence of what he considered a bias of journalists against him.
"I think BuzzFeed's text was a shame for our country. It was a shame for journalism, and I also think that traditional media coverage was shameful, and I think it will take a long time for mainstream media to regain their credibility, "Trump said Saturday. "It's a huge loss of credibility. And believe me, it hurts me when I see that. "
BuzzFeed maintained its reports.
" While reconfirming our reports, we have not seen any evidence that any specific aspect of our story is inaccurate. . We remain confident in what we have reported, and we will communicate more, to the extent of our means, "media spokesperson Matt Mittenthal,
said on Saturday. he would have more vigorously discouraged reporters from moving forward in history, if he knew it would have been alleged that Cohen told the special advocate that Trump had told him to lie – or that the special advocate told him to lie. would have learned through interviews with witnesses of the Trump organization, as well as in the form of e-mails and text messages internal to the company.
Carr refused to comment on this story Beyond the statement from the special advocate's office released on Friday.
After Carr declined to comment on BuzzFeed, he sent journalist Jason Leopold before the article was released. partial transcription of the Cohen's plea hearing, in which Cohen admitted to having lied to Congress about the timing of discussions on a possible project for the Trump Tower in Moscow, according to emails provided by BuzzFeed's spokesman. Cohen had falsely claimed that the company's efforts to build the tower had ended in January 2016. In fact, discussions continued until June of the same year, while Trump was winning the Republican President's candidacy for the presidency.
"I corrected these anomalies with the political messages of the individual 1 and his lack of loyalty to the individual 1," Cohen said during his advocacy hearing. last year, using the term "Individual 1" to refer to Trump.
million. Carr, those in the know, hoped that Leopold would note that Cohen had not said at the hearing that Trump had explicitly told him to lie. But Leopold, who co-wrote the report with journalist Anthony Cormier, told the spokesman that he was taking no signal, and Carr acknowledged the point.
"I do not read what you sent and I interpreted it as a FYI," Leopold wrote.
"Okay, just a FYI," Carr replied.
Someone inside the Trump organization said that a BuzzFeed reporter also spoke with an organization's lawyer hours before the article was posted and was warned that the story was flawed and should be examined more closely.Mittenthal said: "We have confidence in our sources for the organization that is still run by Donald Trump's family.This organization is directly involved in allegations relating to the Trump Tower Moscow project and refused to make a statement in the record of our history. "
The language used by Cohen and his representatives in court was ambiguous.Cohen pleaded guilty in two cases – one for to have lied to Congress to prop the Moscow project and another for funding campaign violations for pouring money hidden from women suspected of having relations with Trump.
Although neither Cohen nor his representatives ever explicitly stated that Trump ordered Cohen to lie to Congress, Guy Petrillo, Cohen's lawyer, wrote in a note of pre-sentence service: "We are addressing the campaign financing and misrepresentation charges together, both stemming from Michael's fierce loyalty to the client- 1. In each case, the behavior was to benefit the client. 1 in accordance with the instructions of the customer 1 ".
Client 1 refers to Trump. Petrillo declined to comment on Saturday. It is not clear what "guidelines" Petrillo was referring to, although he did not claim elsewhere in the memo that Trump had explicitly asked Cohen to lie in Congress. He wrote that Cohen was "in close and regular contact with White House-based staff and Client-1 legal counsel" while he was preparing his testimony and "knew it precisely. . . that Client 1 and his public spokespersons were seeking to describe contact with Russian representatives in any form whatsoever, the Client 1, the Trump campaign or organization, as having actually ended before the caucus of the Iowa from February 1, 2016. "
After BuzzFeed published his story – which was attributed to" two federal law enforcement officials involved in an investigation into the case " , the special attorney's office reviewed the evidence to determine whether there were any documents or witness hearings similar to those described to those who, in their opinion, might have an interest in the
They found none, said these people, which partly explains why it took almost a day at Mueller's office to publicly challenge the story. interval, cable news organizations and other media, incl. omitted the Washington Post, dissected the possible consequences, without even their journalists being able to confirm it independently.
Testifying to the fact that the special advocate had failed to find support for the article, Mittenthal, BuzzFeed spokesman, said, "Our senior officials of the Law enforcement, which helped corroborate months of specific reports on the Trump Tower Moscow deal and its aftermath, told us the opposite. We look forward to further clarification from the Special Council in the near future. "
Two people aware of the case, said that the lawyers from the special board office had discussed the statement internally rather than talking with officials from the department of Justice for a large part of the day .. At the advanced stage of these interviews, the Deputy Attorney General's Office asked whether the Special Council had provided for any response, and was informed of the preparation of a statement. , said the population.
At around 7:30 pm, Carr distributed it to numerous media outlets by e-mail.
"BuzzFeed's description of specific statements to the special council office, as well as that the characterization of documents and testimonies obtained by this office concerning the testimony of the Congress of Michael Cohen, are inaccurate "
Those familiar with the file stated that the office of the special council l meant that the statement rebutted the central theses of BuzzFeed's story, particularly those that referred to what Cohen had said to the special advocate and to the evidence that he had collected. .
However, BuzzFeed asserted that the wording did not specifically explain what was contested.
"We are sticking to our information and the sources who have informed him, and we urge the Special Council to clarify what it is challenging," Ben Smith, editor of BuzzFeed, said in response to the statement by the special council.
Cohen did not address the subject of the BuzzFeed report, and BuzzFeed h as it was stated, he was not a source for his story. Prior to issuing the statement from the special advocate, Lanny J. Davis, Cohen's legal counsel and communications advisor, said: "Out of respect for the investigation of Mr. Mueller and the Office of the Special Counsel, Mr. Cohen refused to answer the questions asked by the chairman. the journalists and me too. "He refused to answer this question after the special council office issued the statement.
Cohen declined to comment on Saturday.
Shane Harris and Tom Hamburger contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
Source link
