Why the Special Counsel refuted that Buzzfeed article

Jason Leopold. Cassandra Fairbanks. Twitter

The SCO has remained almost entirely silent about the Trump investigation. Yet in an extraordinary step, the Mueller investigation went public to refute parts of that Buzzfeed article, whose disingenuous (at best) research and reporting gave Trump a temporary victory.

Buzzfeed told the Special Counsel Office they had a story saying Trump directed Cohen to lie. SCO made no comment, primarily because BF made no reference to SCO or documents uncovered by them.

However, The published Buzzfeed article made reference to SCO documents that showed Trump instructed Cohen to lie. This is why SCO went public. 1) BF was less than honest with SCO. 2) SCO says they do not have such documents. 3) BF rushed the story out, badly sourced, maybe in an attempt to get impeachment started now. It’s too soon for that. Let Mueller release his report first.

Also, Jason Leopold has written for Infowars, thinks Wikileaks and former Bernie supporter now Sputnik journalist Cassandra Fairbanks are just wonderful, and has appeared on RT numerous times. He’s more than a little dodgy.

“When BuzzFeed published the story hours later, it far exceeded Carr’s initial impression, people familiar with the matter said, in that the reporting alleged that Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer and self-described fixer, “told the special counsel that after the election, the president personally instructed him to lie,” and that Mueller’s office learned of the directive “through interviews with multiple witnesses from the Trump Organization and internal company emails, text messages, and a cache of other documents.

People familiar with the matter said Carr told others in the government that he would have more vigorously discouraged the reporters from proceeding with the story had he known it would allege Cohen had told the special counsel Trump directed him to lie — or that the special counsel was said to have learned this through interviews with Trump Organization witnesses, as well as internal company emails and text messages.”