On her show Thursday morning, MSNBC’s Ana Cabrera made her opinions obnoxiously clear through her biased leading questions. While holding a group discussion on President Trump’s disagreement with a leaked early intelligence report of the damages to Iran’s Fordow nuclear facility, Cabrera asked her guests about what Trump’s denial of the report meant, never once asking whether the report was accurate or not.
It was already known that this leaked report was nothing more than a preliminary, low-confidence report, but that was not important to Cabrera as she asked one of her guests, New York Times correspondent Peter Baker, “Is this an administration that will accept any intel that suggests otherwise? Can the American people have confidence in the info this White House is sharing?”
Naturally, Baker, along with the rest of the guests in that segment, played into Cabrera’s narrative. Baker made it clear what he thought Trump’s rejection of the report meant:
The signal the president has sent is that he wants the intelligence to fit his preconceived outcomes, what he wants the outcome to be. Now, it may be that he did achieve the outcome that he is describing. We don't know that, these intelligence reports are preliminary. They are still gathering information. More information will be, you know, assessed by professionals who know what they're talking about. But no question that the pressure and the signal from the White House is that the intelligence ought to suit what the president wants it to say.
(...)
***The complete post is on NewsBusters***
