Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
The key point of Abramson's critique is that the NYT is misreporting several aspects of the latest Flynn developments, and uncritically repeating the Trump administration line about the investigation. In one example, he says they've mistated the exact nature of of what Mueller has been charged with investigating, then provides a document to back up this assertion.
They're not misreporting. There's the avenues of investigation and there's what might actually constitute wrongdoing, particularly by Trump himself. It is not in any way unlawful or criminal (which is what the Mueller investigation is necessarily seeking to investigate and prosecute) to have communicate with, engaged in business deals in, or otherwise fostered ties to Russia at even recent points in someone's career, for instance. Which would be why I describe all that writing about 2013 as "gassing." As far as Trump himself is concerned that section is almost completely irrelevant. It's just a vehicle for investigating others to try and uncover actual wrong-doing and then flip them on people even higher-up.

The purpose of the investigation is, as Loki points out, in the title of the order. Will the investigation pursue other wrongdoing it uncovers, as the order mentions? Yes. Is that really salient to the reporting or as an objection to what the NYT writer (or past reporting) put down? No.



If the critique is true (and, honestly, the above example seems pretty damning unless he literally made up the document), in what universe does that constitute neutrality and non-editorial reporting?[/QUOTE]