Back in October 2016, Snopes attempted to debunk our assertion that the New York Times had colluded with Clinton’s campaign by warning them in advance about potentially negative stories that were about to be published.
An email circulated amongst internal Clinton campaign staffers revealed how, “The NYT (Jonathan Martin and Maggie Haberman) reached out this morning to tell us that they are aware of a meeting HRC had with Senator Warren at her house back in December. They plan to write imminently, so wanted everyone to be aware that this could pop soon.”
We responded to the email, which was released as part of Wikileaks’ Podesta email dump, by tweeting, “New York Times warns Hillary campaign in advance of stories they are about to publish.”
New York Times warns Hillary campaign in advance of stories they are about to publish. https://t.co/Nz6EwzT7id #PodestaEmails7 pic.twitter.com/VDDCRDxlPe
– Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) October 14, 2016
Snopes then attempted to debunk this assertion by claiming the email “provided no evidence of improper collusion between the Times and the Clinton camp. It is standard journalistic practice for reporters to ask the subjects of their news stories for comment before publishing, and Times reporters Jonathan Martin and Maggie Haberman were doing their due diligence as professional journalists.”
The notion that the NYT was merely asking for a comment is a patently insufficient explanation given that they didn’t ask for a comment.
Now Snopes has been embarrassed further by the revelation that a New York Times reporter used to email Hillary Clinton’s State Department days in advance to warn them of stories that were about to be published.
In one 2010 example, NYT national security reporter Scott Shane contacted Philip Crowley, who was at the time the United States Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs under Clinton’s State Department, listing the topics of all the different stories that the New York Times was set to run over the course of a week.
Email shows New York Times handed over Cablegate’s publication schedule to the US government (without telling @WikiLeaks) giving the State Department, then headed by Hillary Clinton, up to 9 days in advance to spin the revelations or create diversions. https://t.co/IMrDOwoCd2 pic.twitter.com/CT4XkEs8Mc
– WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) December 31, 2017
This proves that the New York Times was indeed colluding with Clinton’s State Department by giving them a heads up on stories that were about to run, just as the newspaper colluded with the Clinton campaign during the election in the same manner.
Having initially fallen flat with its weak denial that the NYT colluded with the Clinton campaign, this email again underscores how the New York Times routinely colludes with government bodies and political campaigns it is friendly with, and that this is not just “standard journalistic practice”.
As we have previously documented, Snopes brands itself as an independent authority on fake news, yet has repeatedly proven itself to be a hyper-partisan biased outfit.
As the Daily Caller reported, Kim Lacapria, Snopes’ main political “fact checker,” describes herself as “openly left-leaning” and a liberal. She has previously equated Tea Party conservatives with jihadists.
In December 2016, an investigative report revealed how Snopes was accused of using company money to pay for prostitutes.
Snopes’ obvious bias in favor of the Democratic Party establishment is deeply troubling given that they are being used by numerous large corporations as supposedly “impartial” fact checkers.
The notion that Snopes is non-partisan is ludicrous. It’s a propaganda organ for the left and this proves it yet again.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.