Header Ads

ad

Media Acknowledged Ukrainian Election Meddling Until It Hurt Their Impeachment Efforts

November 22, 2019

As the endless impeachment hearings drag on, congressional Democrats and the mainstream media are pushing the narrative that Ukraine meddling in the 2016 election is a fictitious theory. But that’s not what they said just after President Trump won the election.

“It’s not just that [Trump] subverted U.S. policy for this fictitious theory about Ukrainian meddling in the election. Which, by the way, the absolute, unanimous conclusion is it was Russia, not Ukraine, is a conclusion based on fact.” CNN’s Andy McCabe said.



However, the corporate leftist media were the ones that initially reported on Ukraine’s meddling in the 2016 election. Now, those facts contradict their narrative, which means we must ignore them.

Lucky for us, the internet doesn’t scrub their former reporting away. So, here are five times these outlets reported on Ukrainian meddling as fact.

1. Financial Times, 08/28/2016

The Financial Times reported Ukraine attempted to intervene in the U.S. election.
“The prospect of Mr Trump, who has praised Ukraine’s arch-enemy Vladimir Putin, becoming leader of the country’s biggest ally has spurred not just Mr Leshchenko but Kiev’s wider political leadership to do something they would never have attempted before: intervene, however indirectly, in a US election,” Financial Times reported.

2. Politico, 01/11/2017

Politico reported the Ukrainian government tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump.

“Ukrainian government official tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election,” Politico reported.

They also reported that a Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington, D.C. in an effort to expose ties between Trump, Paul Manafort, and Russia.

3. Financial Times, 12/22/2016

The Financial Times reported Russia used Ukrainian technology to hack the DNC server in the 2016 election. Based on the reporting, it appears the technology used to hack the election was operated in eastern Ukraine.

4. Politico, 02/23/2017

In 2017, Politico reported that a Ukrainian parliamentarian attempted to contact Manafort claiming to have politically damaging information about Manafort as well as Trump.

“The undated communications, which are allegedly from the iPhone for Manafort’s daughter, include a text that appears to come from a Ukrainian parliamentarian named Serhiy Leschenko, seeking to reach her father, in which he claims to have politically damaging information about both Manafort and Trump,” Politico said.

5. New York Times, 12/12/2018

Ukranian courts ruled that releasing information to Manafort about the 2016 U.S. election was illegal interference.

“Both lawmakers asserted that if the release of the slush fund information broke the law, then it should be viewed as an illegal effort to influence the United States presidential election in favor of Hillary Clinton by damaging the Trump campaign,” the New York Times reported.
The mainstream media that is today claiming Ukrainian meddling is a “fictitious theory” is the same mainstream media that reported on Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election just a few years ago. It appears the only thing that can account for this change is the question: What narrative can we use to get Trump?

Post a Comment