Disinfo: NYT story on Trump’s tax returns proves Russiagate is a hoax

Summary

The New York Times report on Donald Trump’s tax returns admits that there are no financial ties between the US president and Russia.

This proves that the Russiagate narrative is thoroughly discredited, and no one in their right mind is paying attention to CIA statements about “Russian influence” any longer.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative denying Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election.

The NYT report analysing President Trump's tax returns does say that the documents do not "reveal any previously unreported connections to Russia" [emphasis added]. This does not contradict the January 2017 findings of  the US intelligence community or the Special Counsel investigation. In the course of the latter, the office of Special Counsel Robert Mueller  "issued more than 2,800 subpoenas; [...] executed nearly 500 search-and-seizure warrants; [...] obtained more than 230 orders for communications records; [...] and interviewed approximately 500 witnesses, including almost 80 before a grand jury" (Mueller report, p. 13), and concluded that Moscow had "interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion" (p. 1). See here for a summary of the report's findings.

publication/media

  • Reported in: Issue 213
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 28/09/2020
  • Language/target audience: English, Russian
  • Country: Russia, US
  • Keywords: election meddling, Robert Mueller, Manipulated elections/referendum, Donald Trump, Conspiracy

Disclaimer

Cases in the EUvsDisinfo database focus on messages in the international information space that are identified as providing a partial, distorted, or false depiction of reality and spread key pro-Kremlin messages. This does not necessarily imply, however, that a given outlet is linked to the Kremlin or editorially pro-Kremlin, or that it has intentionally sought to disinform. EUvsDisinfo publications do not represent an official EU position, as the information and opinions expressed are based on media reporting and analysis of the East Stratcom Task Force.

see more

Lukashenka was inaugurated in accordance with Belarusian law

There is no Belarusian law which says that a presidential inauguration ceremony should be conducted in any specific manner. Lukashenka’s inauguration did not violate any Belarusian legislation.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative concerning the ongoing situation in Belarus.

Lukashenka's secret inauguration did, in fact, violate both the spirit and the letter of Belarusian law. His election victory is widely contested and has since been the target of mass popular protests across the country.  For this reason, the EU has rejected both the "falsified results" of the presidential race and Lukashenka's "so-called inauguration."

The United States and its European allies organised a “colour revolution” in Belarus

The United States and its European allies started preparing the colour revolution now taking place in Belarus 10 years ago. They are following the same “colour revolution” model  used in Syria and Venezuela.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about Belarus protests and  “colour revolutions” allegedly directed and funded by the West.

The protests in Belarus erupted to contest the results of the presidential election on the 9th of August, which are considered fraudulent by a large part of Belarusian society. The European Union has also stated that the elections were neither free nor fair.

Navalny poisoning: Western media prefer ideology before facts in discussing poisoning

Western media immediately talked about a poisoning of Alexei Navalny because of their anti-Kremlin bias. They didn’t use the conditional mode or corrected their coverage when the Russian medical team excluded the hypothesis of poisoning. There are two contradictory versions, but only one story against the Kremlin in the media.

Disproof

Recurrent pro-Kremlin narrative that aims at impairing credibility of leading media and avoiding the Navalny case.

The poisoning of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny was confirmed in three independent laboratories. The German Federal government said that toxicological tests provided  “unequivocal evidence of a chemical nerve agent of the Novichok group” in the blood samples of Alexei Navalny.