Typical Fake news. Neither of the 2 commentators refuted the CNN report. They actually couldn’t refute it since neither of them currently work for the CIA.
The “refutation” comes from the NY Times article which cautiously says “But former intelligence officials said there was no public evidence that Mr. Trump directly endangered the source, and other current American officials insisted that media scrutiny of the agency’s sources alone was the impetus for the extraction.”
Typical Fake news. Neither of the 2 commentators refuted the CNN report. They actually couldn’t refute it since neither of them currently work for the CIA.
The “refutation” comes from the NY Times article which cautiously says “But former intelligence officials said there was no public evidence that Mr. Trump directly endangered the source, and other current American officials insisted that media scrutiny of the agency’s sources alone was the impetus for the extraction.”