Limbaugh Lies About NY Times Changing Wiretap Headline

[edthecynic]

I don't think Limbaugh lied.
He likely got his information from his close friend Andrew McCarthy, who has since retracted his claims, and apologized for his mistake. Here it is here:
My Error: The New York Times Did Not Change Its Headline – There Were Two Headlines from the Start

Actually the lie was started by Chris Farrell of Judicial Watch, and debunked the same day, the day before LimpBoy and McCarthy and all the other Right-wing fake news outlets like WND, Breitbart, IBD, the Washington Examiner, National Review, the NY Post, etc., spread the Republican GOSSIP. So the lie was already debunked the day before Limpboy and McCarthy spewed their gossip!!!

And how do you know it was a lie, and not just a mistake?
I believe McCarthy when he says he assumed the print paper and the online version would use the same text.

Because the rationalization for the lie was to discredit the NY Times and back Tramp's wiretapping lie. As I said the lie was debunked the same day Judicial Review started it, which was the day BEFORE McCarthy and Limpboy spread the gossip. They both knew it was a lie before they repeated the lie.

Well you'll have to come up with more proof before you can conclude they drove the story fully well knowing it wasn't truthful.

To the Right-Wing-nuts no amount of proof is ever enough to discredit their side, and no amount of proof is ever too little to discredit the other side.

 

[edthecynic]

He got it backwards. Simply because virtually NO journalist or commentator USES the paper version for research. If you picked up the NY times paper saw the headline and then went back to the site to pull quotes and search the article -- the EARLIER E-version is ALL that exists at the site. So OBVIOUSLY -- IT CHANGED. Except that the sequence in time is reversed from the way he said it on air. B F D

AHHHH, but that IS the BFD!!!

As McCarthy himself admitted:
"I accused the Times of altering the headline of an important report (pertinent to the so-called FISAgate controversy) in order to revise history in light of a shifting political narrative."

 

[flacaltenn]

HOWEVER -- it's not relevant to this discussion because the "Title change" was from the earlier E-edition to the title on the street edition that went out the next day.

But all the Right-wing liar are claiming the "Title change" was from the street edition of Jan 20th to the E-edition on March 9th.
That's right, the GOP fake news are saying that the title was changed on March 9th FROM the Jan 20th edition, not from the Jan 19th edition to the Jan 20th edition.
Get it???

Who's the "right-wingers" doing this? Lemme at them. I'll fix it... I want NAMES !!!!

 

[Faun]

HOWEVER -- it's not relevant to this discussion because the "Title change" was from the earlier E-edition to the title on the street edition that went out the next day.

But all the Right-wing liar are claiming the "Title change" was from the street edition of Jan 20th to the E-edition on March 9th.
That's right, the GOP fake news are saying that the title was changed on March 9th FROM the Jan 20th edition, not from the Jan 19th edition to the Jan 20th edition.
Get it???

Their story on Trump's Tweet keeps changing, depending on which day of the week it is. First it was Trump idiotically claiming his phones were wiretapped. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his phones, his server. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his server, British intelligence secretly provided Obama with transcripts of conversations with Trump and his people. Next it will be Obama held a glass to a wall at Trump Tower.

 

[flacaltenn]

HOWEVER -- it's not relevant to this discussion because the "Title change" was from the earlier E-edition to the title on the street edition that went out the next day.

But all the Right-wing liar are claiming the "Title change" was from the street edition of Jan 20th to the E-edition on March 9th.
That's right, the GOP fake news are saying that the title was changed on March 9th FROM the Jan 20th edition, not from the Jan 19th edition to the Jan 20th edition.
Get it???

Their story on Trump's Tweet keeps changing, depending on which day of the week it is. First it was Trump idiotically claiming his phones were wiretapped. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his phones, his server. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his server, British intelligence secretly provided Obama with transcripts of conversations with Trump and his people. Next it will be Obama held a glass to a wall at Trump Tower.

But he WAS spied on. YOU just don't know how it happened. Do you? HE KNOWS.. Ask yourself WHY he's not defending himself right now.

 

[Faun]

HOWEVER -- it's not relevant to this discussion because the "Title change" was from the earlier E-edition to the title on the street edition that went out the next day.

But all the Right-wing liar are claiming the "Title change" was from the street edition of Jan 20th to the E-edition on March 9th.
That's right, the GOP fake news are saying that the title was changed on March 9th FROM the Jan 20th edition, not from the Jan 19th edition to the Jan 20th edition.
Get it???

Their story on Trump's Tweet keeps changing, depending on which day of the week it is. First it was Trump idiotically claiming his phones were wiretapped. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his phones, his server. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his server, British intelligence secretly provided Obama with transcripts of conversations with Trump and his people. Next it will be Obama held a glass to a wall at Trump Tower.

But he WAS spied on. YOU just don't know how it happened. Do you? HE KNOWS.. Ask yourself WHY he's not defending himself right now.

You have no proof Obama spied on him.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Yep, wasn't Limbaugh lying. Most of use knew about the NY Times altering their archives a week or more ago.

Even when exposed to the truth, DittoTards just keep on lying!

I mean, who are we going to believe, the Soros Hate sites or our own lying eyes?

 

[flacaltenn]

HOWEVER -- it's not relevant to this discussion because the "Title change" was from the earlier E-edition to the title on the street edition that went out the next day.

But all the Right-wing liar are claiming the "Title change" was from the street edition of Jan 20th to the E-edition on March 9th.
That's right, the GOP fake news are saying that the title was changed on March 9th FROM the Jan 20th edition, not from the Jan 19th edition to the Jan 20th edition.
Get it???

Their story on Trump's Tweet keeps changing, depending on which day of the week it is. First it was Trump idiotically claiming his phones were wiretapped. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his phones, his server. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his server, British intelligence secretly provided Obama with transcripts of conversations with Trump and his people. Next it will be Obama held a glass to a wall at Trump Tower.

But he WAS spied on. YOU just don't know how it happened. Do you? HE KNOWS.. Ask yourself WHY he's not defending himself right now.

You have no proof Obama spied on him.

But YET -- he and his campaign were spied on. Using information that could ONLY come from sophisticated domestic intel collections. Drop the "wiretap" -- substitute "spied on" and go figure out where all this "evidence" came from....

 

[Hutch Starskey]

And it's entirely possible the NY Times and others have been flat out lying in their reporting of this since October.

Possible, but not probable! What is most probable is you pathological liars have been lying about the NY Times to protect pathological liar Tramp!

Yeah, 'cuz it's not like we can actually read the NY Times article talking about FISA warrants and wiretapped conversations.... If only those articles were somehow made public through some sort of printing process or some kind of electronic medium.

Post it.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

you keep being told that that doesn't mean that trump tower was tapped or that the orange sociopath was the subject.

lying loon

So Jillian -- Was the NY Times lying THEN -- or are they lying now? Seems to be a valid question -- don't it?

Post the associated article.
That is just a headline with the word wiretapped.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

HOWEVER -- it's not relevant to this discussion because the "Title change" was from the earlier E-edition to the title on the street edition that went out the next day.

But all the Right-wing liar are claiming the "Title change" was from the street edition of Jan 20th to the E-edition on March 9th.
That's right, the GOP fake news are saying that the title was changed on March 9th FROM the Jan 20th edition, not from the Jan 19th edition to the Jan 20th edition.
Get it???

Their story on Trump's Tweet keeps changing, depending on which day of the week it is. First it was Trump idiotically claiming his phones were wiretapped. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his phones, his server. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his server, British intelligence secretly provided Obama with transcripts of conversations with Trump and his people. Next it will be Obama held a glass to a wall at Trump Tower.

But he WAS spied on. YOU just don't know how it happened. Do you? HE KNOWS.. Ask yourself WHY he's not defending himself right now.

You have no proof Obama spied on him.

But YET -- he and his campaign were spied on. Using information that could ONLY come from sophisticated domestic intel collections. Drop the "wiretap" -- substitute "spied on" and go figure out where all this "evidence" came from....

Pure BS.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I suppose the answer COULD be that they've lying and spinning for political purposes all along.

Exactly like you are.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

[
LOL

The online headline never changed either. Limbaugh, among others, falsely claimed the NYT went back and changed the headline of their online edition by scrubbing the words, wiretapped data, which they didn't actually do. Most on the right don't have the dignity to admit they fucked this one up. But to their credit, American thinker did issue a retraction and an apology for getting this one wrong.

The Times deleted the front page image with the article on the wiretap from their archive.

That is a pretty significant change, hack.

The article is the same, dope. It never said anything about surveillance at TT.

 

[Boss]

And it's entirely possible the NY Times and others have been flat out lying in their reporting of this since October.

Possible, but not probable! What is most probable is you pathological liars have been lying about the NY Times to protect pathological liar Tramp!

Yeah, 'cuz it's not like we can actually read the NY Times article talking about FISA warrants and wiretapped conversations.... If only those articles were somehow made public through some sort of printing process or some kind of electronic medium.

Post it.

It's been posted repeatedly, you morons just keep acting like you're reading something else. I mean, this has been an ongoing story since October 2016, reported by the NYT, WaPo, BBC, Guardian, McClatchy, etc. It's the basis for ALL your Trump/Russia narrative and assorted allegations. It's the source for the leaks of private conversations now numbering in the dozens. But you're all somehow claiming this is a figment of imagination. You're clearly living in some bizarro universe where things exist for libtarded purposes yet don't exist otherwise.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

And it's entirely possible the NY Times and others have been flat out lying in their reporting of this since October.

Possible, but not probable! What is most probable is you pathological liars have been lying about the NY Times to protect pathological liar Tramp!

Yeah, 'cuz it's not like we can actually read the NY Times article talking about FISA warrants and wiretapped conversations.... If only those articles were somehow made public through some sort of printing process or some kind of electronic medium.

Post it.

It's been posted repeatedly, you morons just keep acting like you're reading something else. I mean, this has been an ongoing story since October 2016, reported by the NYT, WaPo, BBC, Guardian, McClatchy, etc. It's the basis for ALL your Trump/Russia narrative and assorted allegations. It's the source for the leaks of private conversations now numbering in the dozens. But you're all somehow claiming this is a figment of imagination. You're clearly living in some bizarro universe where things exist for libtarded purposes yet don't exist otherwise.

The article said nothing about surveillance at TT. It did say clearly that information was obtained from intercepted Russian communications.

 

[Faun]

HOWEVER -- it's not relevant to this discussion because the "Title change" was from the earlier E-edition to the title on the street edition that went out the next day.

But all the Right-wing liar are claiming the "Title change" was from the street edition of Jan 20th to the E-edition on March 9th.
That's right, the GOP fake news are saying that the title was changed on March 9th FROM the Jan 20th edition, not from the Jan 19th edition to the Jan 20th edition.
Get it???

Their story on Trump's Tweet keeps changing, depending on which day of the week it is. First it was Trump idiotically claiming his phones were wiretapped. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his phones, his server. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his server, British intelligence secretly provided Obama with transcripts of conversations with Trump and his people. Next it will be Obama held a glass to a wall at Trump Tower.

But he WAS spied on. YOU just don't know how it happened. Do you? HE KNOWS.. Ask yourself WHY he's not defending himself right now.

You have no proof Obama spied on him.

But YET -- he and his campaign were spied on. Using information that could ONLY come from sophisticated domestic intel collections. Drop the "wiretap" -- substitute "spied on" and....

Yeah, and also drop "phones", "server", "Trump", "Obama" and "Twitter" and then Trump never bullshitted.

....and go figure out where all this "evidence" came from....

Oh? Specifically which evidence do you mean?

 

[flacaltenn]

you keep being told that that doesn't mean that trump tower was tapped or that the orange sociopath was the subject.

lying loon

So Jillian -- Was the NY Times lying THEN -- or are they lying now? Seems to be a valid question -- don't it?

Post the associated article.
That is just a headline with the word wiretapped.

The article is exactly the same as the one filed in E-edition. It's been linked multiple times in this thread.

 

[flacaltenn]

I suppose the answer COULD be that they've lying and spinning for political purposes all along.

Exactly like you are.

That's awfully personal.. Might actually be illegal

But all the Right-wing liar are claiming the "Title change" was from the street edition of Jan 20th to the E-edition on March 9th.
That's right, the GOP fake news are saying that the title was changed on March 9th FROM the Jan 20th edition, not from the Jan 19th edition to the Jan 20th edition.
Get it???

Their story on Trump's Tweet keeps changing, depending on which day of the week it is. First it was Trump idiotically claiming his phones were wiretapped. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his phones, his server. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his server, British intelligence secretly provided Obama with transcripts of conversations with Trump and his people. Next it will be Obama held a glass to a wall at Trump Tower.

But he WAS spied on. YOU just don't know how it happened. Do you? HE KNOWS.. Ask yourself WHY he's not defending himself right now.

You have no proof Obama spied on him.

But YET -- he and his campaign were spied on. Using information that could ONLY come from sophisticated domestic intel collections. Drop the "wiretap" -- substitute "spied on" and....

Yeah, and also drop "phones", "server", "Trump", "Obama" and "Twitter" and then Trump never bullshitted.

....and go figure out where all this "evidence" came from....

Oh? Specifically which evidence do you mean?

WHY are you having problems following along? The "evidence" that Trump has ANY NEFARIOUS ties to the Russians? Where did the transcripts of Flynn's conversations come from?

Wouldn't SOMEONE have to spy on their political opposition to MAKE those claims?

Is there an FBI investigation or NOT? If NOT -- the NY Times has been spouting shit for months.

 

[Marshal]

If TT wasn't wiretapped, then there wasn't any FBI investigation of collusion between Trump and the Russians. If there wasn't any investigation, then the Dems have been lying the entire time that the Russians hacked the DNC. Nobody brings up the investigation in the family of brothers that were all fired from their position of IT techs for various Dems on the intel committees. One of which had password access to Debbie Schultz's tablet and access to all the DNC emails. You don't hear much about that investigation.

 

[Faun]

I suppose the answer COULD be that they've lying and spinning for political purposes all along.

Exactly like you are.

That's awfully personal.. Might actually be illegal

Their story on Trump's Tweet keeps changing, depending on which day of the week it is. First it was Trump idiotically claiming his phones were wiretapped. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his phones, his server. When they couldn't prove that, it became, no, not his server, British intelligence secretly provided Obama with transcripts of conversations with Trump and his people. Next it will be Obama held a glass to a wall at Trump Tower.

But he WAS spied on. YOU just don't know how it happened. Do you? HE KNOWS.. Ask yourself WHY he's not defending himself right now.

You have no proof Obama spied on him.

But YET -- he and his campaign were spied on. Using information that could ONLY come from sophisticated domestic intel collections. Drop the "wiretap" -- substitute "spied on" and....

Yeah, and also drop "phones", "server", "Trump", "Obama" and "Twitter" and then Trump never bullshitted.

....and go figure out where all this "evidence" came from....

Oh? Specifically which evidence do you mean?

WHY are you having problems following along? The "evidence" that Trump has ANY NEFARIOUS ties to the Russians? Where did the transcripts of Flynn's conversations come from?

Wouldn't SOMEONE have to spy on their political opposition to MAKE those claims?

Is there an FBI investigation or NOT? If NOT -- the NY Times has been spouting shit for months.

You really should pay attention better... the transcripts, which have not been released, were from conversations Flynn had with Russians who were wiretapped.