Most of these comments are really nifty, pretty accurate and reflect a traditional belief that "truth" is whatever can be supported by verifiable facts.
They ignore the shocking discovery made by ordinary US citizens in the 1960s and 70s (but which was well-known to the elite political and moneyed classes) that very many of the "verifiable facts" that have supported the truth as told by our own government and trusted mainstream media have been manufactured, or distorted or "spun" by that same government and media to represent the "truth" those elites wanted us to accept.
From the enemy body counts in VietNam through the cryptic investigation into the assassination of President Kennedy to the "Weapons of Mass Destruction" and the Flint water crisis, all too many have learned that "truth" is a fragile thing and that almost anyone can create a false truth, while "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" is something we can rarely rely upon our government to tell us.
"Who is John Solomon?" The questions that are better raised are: "What is John Solomon?"
"How have we allowed lies and mistrust to overtake us so long that 'John Solomons' can instill belief in half of America?"
"Why have we allowed the takeover of public discourse by the Facebooks, Twitters 8chans, etc.?"
Joseph de Maistre wrote in 1860: "Toute nation a le gouvernement qu'elle mérite." A line that is perhaps better known as: "In a democracy, people get the government they deserve."
C'est ca.
2
Trump has an inner and outer orbit of people who are exemplars of the “banality of evil” (due respect to Hanna Arendt). The article suggests Solomon’s specialty is disinformation and is one of many we might place in the outer orbit.
Trump – with the absolutely essential help of the Fox machine – has a knack for attracting these people and bringing them out from under their rocks, thus giving them prominence and influence. They would be nameless faceless nobodies otherwise.
This is at least one explanation of why the Trump cult is so gigantic and terrifying. These orbits are a hierarchy with a huge multiplier effect outward, in the end convincing tens of millions to follow him no matter what.
Charisma is a hard thing to fathom or explain. Trump is disgusting in about every way I can think of, yet he seems to have it for this vast army of followers. I’ve heard many attempts to explain his “charm.” I still don’t get it.
1
As far as Hunter Biden is concerned. Can somebody tell me what he does that is worth 50k a month?
12
In this administration, you don't have to be an expert or even a knowledgeable person to be in charge of anything. That Solomon is devoid of experience in the matter is par for the course. Just check the entire Trump cabinet and find anyone competent in the issues that he/she oversees. Indeed, lack of knowledge is the criterion on which their appointments are made. As the saying goes: Happy are we in our ignorance.
33
What I would like to see is Mr. Solomon interviewed under oath before Congress and held responsible and prosecuted for verifiable lies. The spin which Republicans attempt to make by using "Whataboutisms" and "Gaslighting techniques" is insulting and terrifying to anyone who follows factual, verifiable News and who have critical reasoning skills. Joe Biden's son Hunter is not the subject of this justifiable Impeachment Hearing. Republicans need to stop changing the subject just because they have no justifiable defense for this criminal president.
65
Well, what do you expect them to do, seek truth and take responsibility? Way too late for that.
3
I respect the veracity of Lily Tomlin's character Edith Ann more than what comes out of the mouth or off the keyboard of John Solomon.
After all, Edith Ann always ended her shtick by telling us: "And that's the truth."
It is truly scary what total nonsense our "fearless-leader-in-chief" appears to believe and to act upon.
No one should be surprised when the guy who for decades ran and failed at a chaotic family business tries top run the US Government in the same manner and with the same results.
1
I had never heard of this man.
But I am not surprised by his rise.
In today's world, the media has largely discredited itself - especially with investigations of this POTUS.
So, folks believe just about anything they are biased to believe.
And the rise of talk shows which are presented as news programs has added to the perception that all news is fake.
It also does not help that dissemination of such news is so easy.
The concept of number of "likes" implying that news is perfectly newsworthy.
And it's one reason I do not do Fakebook.
2
The non-Fox News sources have done a bang up job vilifying and undermining conservative news sources. It is obvious that many people have taken very seriously the word of news outlets considered "mainstream" as they warn against the conspiracy theorists on the other channels or in the other newspapers. If one "side" of an issue/argument/point of view tells me not to listen to the "other side" then I must listen to the other side to find out what I should not be hearing, so I can make up my own mind. This has served me well in understanding and gaining perspective about what is happening in our country and around the world. When we stop listening to/reading what we deem "other" and succumb to the comfort of confirmation bias we only drift further apart.
6
Several months ago, I started to read John Solomon opinion pieces relating to the Bidens in the Hill. While they did contain a disclaimer that his opinions were not those of the Hill, he did tout himself as a highly honored, award winning investigative journalist, writer, and editor of importance at the Hill. He wrote with such conviction that the Biden-Ukraine corruption scandal was the biggest of all scandals and would make Trump’s look like small potatoes. I was stunned. I thought where have I been? After all this was scandal was published in the Hill. I did check and found that Solomon was puffing up his credentials and was one of the main sources of the Biden expose, but there were no other credible stories or other verification of his reported events. Solomon continued to pontificate in the Hill. I have never regained my confidence in the Hill, since despite the disclaimer, they printed articles that were hit jobs and allowed an inflated list of his credentials.
41
Let me see if I have this straight: (1) Solomon’s supporters are the people who have been bashing the mainstream media since at least the launch of the tea party 10 years ago. (2) Solomon’s supporters are telling us what a well-credentialed journalist he is because he worked in the mainstream media.
11
@David Becker
I think you have that right.
The explanation is that items 1 and 2 can be simultaneously true only IYAAR ("if you are a Republican").
3
@David Becker
Why is he well-credentialed by the mainstream media if he's a quack who spouts lies?
People don't believe Solomon because he's well credentialed or worked for mainstream media.
People believe him because he presents easily disprovable court documents, affidavits and video interviews. He does not seem to rely on unnamed anonymous "sources" or self-proclaimed "experts" as the writers of this article clearly do.
It took 3 different people to write this article, and not a single one of them was able to cite evidence of Solomon fabricating evidence.
The fact is that Solomon's claims are easily disprovable. You can't make up FOIA documents. You can't make up court documents, affidavits or video interviews with central players like Lutsenko.
Funny how the article leaves out that Lutsenko, the "unreliable source", is the very same person Biden supported and asks us to believe is a stand-up guy who cleared Burisma of any wrongdoing, and Hunter too.
If he's an unreliable source, then what makes Biden's claims credible?
6
John Solomon, formerly with TheHill, is nothing but a hired gun in Giuliani's effort to give Fox News some explosive "proof" that Donald Trump was wronged and has been right all along.
TheHill just published THIS DOOZY by another opinion contributor (hired gun) onto my smartphone's screen: "Trump impeachment is blueprint to overthrow government from within".
Jenna Ellis Rives lists 'Wife to @TheDavidRives. Attorney. Trump 2020 Advisory Board. Contributor @DCExaminer @realDailyWire and on @FoxNews" on her Twitter profile.
Hilariously, Mrs. Rives accuses Adam Schiff of promoting a slanted opinion - while very little digging illuminated her position on the Trump 2020 Advisory Board.
TheHill's editor, if it has an editor, might want to ask Mrs. Rives -- Why doesn't she hold herself to her standard and recuse herself as a political operative?
Adam Schiff is an elected representative and that position comes with the responsibility to perform oversight of the Executive. Our free press has a role; and one has to question TheHill's motives when it promulgates another Trump political operative as "opinion".
5
John Solomon, Sarah Carter and James O'keefe are among a very few journalists who actually investigate to learn the facts. The MSM has does not care to uncover anything that might impugn the left. Did Hunter Biden and his father cash in with Burisma? Did Joe Biden blackmail the Ukrainians to get the prosecutor fired? Isn't it the President's job to have it investigated? Isn't there an agreement in effect with the Ukraine to uncover corruption? Wasn't Trump abiding with that agreement? Where is the MSM on the $1.5B from China and where it went? Some people need to get over their TDS bias and open their eyes.
8
@Frank
James O'Keefe is a convicted criminal who edits video to make a slanted, or totally false, impression.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O%27Keefe
Even TheHill reported that story:
Quote:
Conservative filmmaker James O’Keefe was sentenced to three years of probation, 100 hours of community service and a $1,500 fine after he pleaded guilty on Wednesday to misdemeanor charges stemming from his involvement in a break-in at Sen. Mary Landrieu’s (D-La.) office.
End Quote
https://thehill.com/capital-living/in-the-know/100105-filmmaker-okeefe-sentenced-in-sen-mary-landrieu-break-in
So you suggest we should be listening to "investigators" who break into people's offices? Like the Watergate burglars?
Very funny, but no sale, my friend.
1
Funny how this acolyte of Fox News' guests who "learn the facts" -- presents zero facts and THRIVES ON QUESTIONS containing conjecture and innuendo.
Send us one of those facts, @Frank.
FYI, I've already heard the Party Fact:
"Perfect call" is "entirely appropriate".
The answers to all your questions are contained in the facts which are available for your examination.
You’ve placed the cart ahead of the horse by believing a discredited allegation against Joe Biden. Hunter Biden’s business interests in Ukraine are not related to the work his father was carrying out on behalf of the US government. Should it be illegal for relatives of sitting elected officeholders and political appointees to accept jobs working in foreign nations?Maybe, but it isn’t, and you do realize why.
Trump could investigate this whole Biden conspiracy he’s feverish over, but he never should pressure a foreign government to investigate a US citizen, especially one who is running for president. That’s easy to understand, if you care about national sovereignty and protecting civil rights from abuse by elected officials.
Lastly, you’ve listed a crew of propagandists as exemplars of “honest” reporting. One of those people, O’Keefe, is a convicted felon and a deeply unfunny “conservative” version of Abby Hoffman. His “facts” are not. Being aggrieved and self-righteous aren’t hallmarks of accurate reporters, but they are those of anarchic nihilists.
You can’t make just decisions without facts and you have none. Just a list of troublemakers who are hired to do this work. Plumbers for the 21st century. Mavericks of alternative “facts”.
1
"The Woodward and Bernsteins of our time....." I laughed so hard when I read this my coffee almost spewed out of my nose.
8
A right wing hack and partisan Trump cultist, Solomon offers propaganda, not news. His presence on Fox “News” shows it all.
6
If the NYT is running a hit piece to discredit him, it probably means that he’s onto something that is counter to their own narrative and story they want you to believe. Funny that they aren’t talking about many of the pieces that he has released, such as the one where he reports on the DNC working with a Ukrainian ambassador to dig up dirt on Trump and Manfort in the 2016 election.
10
Never has a President known so little about so much and relied on such unreliable sources of information.
Fox News is Trump's most trusted advisor. That should concern everybody. Fox doesn't even pretend to be impartial; it is rabidly and openly right wing propaganda.
Trump suffers from confirmation bias and loves Fox News because it tells him what he wants to hear.
22
We have the same trend all over the world for many years now.
There were and still are many credibility issues for many mainstream media and many journalists. It started with the same people like John Solomon, who worked in many "reputed" mainstream media companies. They dished out the same biased and half-baked gossips that many considered "news"- in mainstream media.
Editorial oversight was severely compromised by business and other personal interests of the owner(s) or the majority share holder(s), just like any other for-profit company. State owned or state controlled media like BBC, NPR/PBS were less affected by such bias/corruption. For them the quality of Got and parliament was & still is a issue.
That's how these fringe and "conspiracy theory" media got increasing acceptance among a large section of population. Gradually, such gossip journalists got concentrated under such media houses and online groups, which increased in popularity in this internet era where almost anyone can start such a company or group without much capital investment or personal liability involved.
These people and media wanted and still want to fight corruption, bias, and lies in mainstream media by dishing out more lies, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Such people might not have much impact by itself. But as groups they do have huge power to influence politics & policies.
Cleansing of such fringe media must start with introspection in mainstream media & it's a long term process.
4
One of the selling points Trump made in campaigning for president is that, because he is very wealthy, he can't be bought, and therefore would presumably serve with integrity. What he has demonstrated, as described in this and many, many other articles, is that he can be manipulated emotionally to accept complete fabrications in place of facts, to the detriment of our national interest.
The conventional wisdom is that women are the emotional ones, but that is clearly not the case.
7
"In an interview with The New York Times last month, Mr. Lutsenko blamed the confusion on the interpreter who handled his interview with The Hill. But he insisted that the ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, had in fact asked him not to target certain politicians and activists who worked with the embassy on its anti-corruption efforts."
How is this different from getting a list? This needs more background or information.
8
@Gordon In answer to your question, "How is this different from getting a list?" - GETTING a list intimates receiving documentation, a written list. ASKING him not to target certain politicians and activists intimates verbally setting forth names. By parsing words, voila, he did not "get" a list. This is what Americans have to deal with when reading or hearing information in the news - one must use a fine tooth comb to grasp what is being said.
2
The Murdoch family has meddled in America's election and democracy more than any foreign government. Fox News commentators have debased and lied about just about everything and everybody. Their commentators are mostly women with very heavy makeup and revealing poses who simply are unqualified to discuss world affairs. Most of their commentators are parrots. We have to ask ourselves why we Americans are allowing a British corporation to continue to meddle. They arent interested in our democracy. Fox should be ostracized by viewers and advertisers.
9
@pb
Sorry, but Murdock is Australian, and Fox-News has no British connection.
American connection with Australia was cemented essentially during WW2, when the British would not have been able to save the Australians from the Japanese. Ever since, the Australians have been hangers on to America. This is a Foreign connection American SHOULD break.
"John Solomon is shaping how millions of Americans understand this moment. But officials had never known him to be an authority on Ukrainian policy."
Mr. John Solomon is not alone in shaping views of American public on Ukraine and, therefore, on Mr. Trump's actions that has led to his impeachment hearings. Other equally unqualified individuals who appear on Fox News - and speak as authority on Ukraine or other global hot spots - have been doing the same (some for years!). One can also ask:
Is Tucker Carlson an authority on Ukrainian policy?
Is Bret Baier an authority on Ukrainian policy?
Is Martha MacCallum an authority on Ukrainian policy?
Is Bill Hemmer an authority on Ukrainian policy?
Is Harris Faulkner an authority on Ukrainian policy?
Is John Roberts an authority on Ukrainian policy?
Is Ainsley Earhardt an authority on Ukrainian policy?
Is Trace Gallagher an authority on Ukrainian policy?
Those running the show in Fox News may not care whether their commentators know anything about Ukraine, its politics, and how those relate to Mr. Trump's re-election chances. What apparently they do care about is the extent to which Mr. Trump republican base considers these individuals trustworthy and credible.
7
@Eddie B.
America loves liars and rascals, provided that are entertaining. Some report DIFFICULT to believe facts, (Ripley's Believe it or Not) and some report OUTRIGHT lies, dressed up as facts-with-traction.
1
Written into every school mission statement, whether private or public school, is some mention of critical thinking. While I understand that definition of that educational goal is broad, we can all pretty agree that somewhere in that value is the ability to determine the authority and veracity of the source, the coherence of the claims with their own prior knowledge, and the degree to which the claims meet the standards and criteria of a discipline. So, my question is, what is going on in schools that are producing rather large groups of individuals, some now in very powerful positions, who demonstrate none of the skills of critical thought--in fact quite the opposite, they turn that concept on its head with lead stories filled with conspiracy theories, stereotypes, confused logic, and just plain lying. Many decades ago, in a college introductory class, I was fortunate to have a professor, who, in our classroom discussions, would at some point ask the question: "Your evidence for that, Mr. Jones." Throughout my career, that one question served me well.
5
Another talk show character with a philosophy none should approve who have intelligence or common sense, and shows just how incompetent this administration is. Choosing someone like this to handle foreign policy. The Ukraines must be laughing, not at Biden, but at Trump.
3
The way this is written does not make it clear whether the claims he makes are true or not.
Just that certain officials don't think so.
And buried in there is some data about the do not prosecute list which didn't exist. Ie he is pushing lies.
Please do better - say at the outset if his claims have any substantiation. My understanding is they don't. But here you are just saying fox repeats it, a confused reader might think Solomon is reliable as lots of people like him, right?
1
Google’s news aggregator used to grab articles from John Solomon’s time at The Hill for me. Annoyingly, I couldn’t filter out his “opinion” pieces, but I quickly realized they were fueled by fringe conspiracies and propaganda. That they would be used to inform government decisions is bonkers.
3
Why bother with Google .”news” in the first place? Don’t give over your news judgement to an algorithm.
This is perfect for the Republicans because it helps create the false impression that they are still a viable, functioning party with ideas and people worth fighting for. In fact, whatever the outcome, this is their swan song.
3
There is no controversy around the existence of the 'Don't Prosecute' list and Lutsenko never changed his story. The only clarification by Lutsenko is that the ambassador verbally gave the list to Lutsenko and not in writing. John Solomon has interviewed Lutsensko on this and the interviews are easily found on the Internet.
3
How can we allow our justice department and every enforcer of law and order in this to become an outlet of Fox News? When did made up 'facts' become the bottom line for investigations in our country? When a media outlet becomes the sole arbiter for 'truth' for a vast swath of people and its leadership and can be unquestioned it is a sure sign that we are on the way to a dictatorship and an oligarchy of lies. Thank goodness for the NYT and a few other sources where information and opinions can still be debated and questioned. Without that we are truly lost.
5
So many words on someone who's real job is to unleash lies, the kind of lies conservatives end up believing and using as campaign weapons.
4
Not sure why the NYT is surprised that Trump would traffic in misinformation from whichever bobble head happens to pule conveniently for him, whatever its lack of knowledge and credibility might be.
Look at that face, for heaven’s sake - like something out of some Victorian children’s horror story. No offense.
3
"He joined The Post in 2007 but stayed only a short period before leaving for the Washington Times, telling his bosses that he could not pass up the large salary the conservative paper was offering."
$$$$ is always the constant here, especially with conservative set--it feeds, greases, and lights their fantasy gaslit world.
why do I hear the Dire Straits line "Money for nothin' and your chicks for free" ?
4
Who is the real president of USA. Mr Solomon, Mr Giuliani, Mr Miller, The Federalist Society or Mr. Putin. Take your pick.
3
Burying the lede, again.
Giuliani didn’t want to go to the DOJ with the bogus investigation result so he went to Solomon and Fox.
The NY Times reporters should call Mr. Solomon’s work what it is: an integral part of the misinformation and disinformation campaign.
And that disinformation and misinformation campaign is strong evidence that the bribery/extortion plot evidenced by Trump’s phone call was cooked up well in advance of the phone call.
Solomon’s part of the disinformation and misinformation campaign was to inject the storyline into the mainstream media to give it credibility.
Consider: In May, Giuliani was told by the State Department that the two men he was relying on: Shokin and Lutsenko were corrupt and couldn’t be trusted. Yet, who was Hannity going to interview in September: Shokin. Who was Giuliani trying to get a visa for?Shokin.
And who were the people that Lutsenko wanted to persecute? The heads of the anti-corruption unit and an activist group that was succeeding in pursuing corruption.
The “Deep State” propaganda pushed by Giuliani and others should be considered as nothing more than propaganda to remove those who belief in the rule of law and love of country prevent traitorous grifters from succeeding.
5
Someone else said this recently but it bears repeating. Rupert Murdoch has done more damage than any other single immigrant this country has ever admitted.
Fox - All Propaganda All the Time
7
Another generator of high whines and disbelievers.
This is a question of Ukraine policy. The US state Department has taken the position that no matter how corrupt Ukraine is, we will send aid as a policy to poke a finger in Russia's eye. And to get Ukraine into NATO which is now impossible since NATO will not admit a country who lack clear and protected boundaries which both Ukraine and Georgia lack. The EU does not want Ukraine either due to the corruption and impoverishment of the country.
Out foreign policy experts like Hill, etc. tend to overlook all the corruption in Ukraine and try to pretends that Ukraine is trying to be democratic. We praise the new president and conveniently overlook his huge debt to Igor Kolomoisky.
Zelensky's TV show appeared on a TV Channel owned by Kolomoisky. Kolomoisky financed Zelensky's presidential campaign. Kolomoisky has returned fo Ukraine and no matter what the blind experts say Zelensky is Kolomoisky's man and we pretend that he is not.
The civil war will not not end in Ukraine until Zelensky negotiates a deal with Moscow. Moscow holds all the cards. and the aid we give is not worth much if Russia decides to up the ante. A Frozen conflict like the war in the DOnbass suits Moscow. It is a war Ukraine can never win.
3
Interesting little bit tucked in at the end of this depressing story - The Hill's owner, James Finkelstein, is the brother of Andrew Stein, the disgraced former head of NYC City Council who pled guilty to lying about his involvement with Madoff. Also Mr. Finkelstein is formerly the son-in-law of the late Sidney Frank, the P.T. Barnum of booze, who promoted Jagermeister to college kids as the "best drink in the world" and held a bogus taste test to "prove" that Grey Goose is the world's "best-tasting vodka."
It seems quite fitting that The Hill is home to a sleazy "journalist" like Mr. Solomon.
4
Trump’s daily briefing should be produced and presented like a Fox broadcast (but with actual facts). That might get him to pay attention and believe the presentation, since he can’t or won’t read.
The hearings should be presented that way too, for voters who are like him.
17
'it drew the attention of the Presidents son'. I laughed when I read that and the picture in my head of Don Jr was his head bobbing around following a buzzing bee, a la cartoon character.
9
"Media scholars describe the environment that has elevated Mr. Solomon’s stories as an information ecosystem entirely sealed off from other news coverage."
Including facts.
17
If expertise is determined based on being quoted/featured on Fox, we're in far deeper trouble than can be imagined. Bring back the Fairness Doctrine.
18
The key question for Republicans is why Trump and his inner circle always land in the same philosophical spot as Russian propaganda campaigns. From the outset Moscow has peddled a false narrative that Ukraine (the tiny and besieged nation invaded by superpower Russia recently) was interfering in our presidential campaign. The goal of course is to deflect the truth that it was Russia which interfered in the 2016 election to support Trump, who due to his relentless ego would in turn be a gullible and unwitting peddler of Russian conspiracy theories. An unvirtuous circle... well planned by the old KGB's best - Vladimir Putin.
28
I'm just wondering ... if people were using their relationship to the president to interfere with official government business to further their own agendas .. could they be accused of crimes against our country ... and prosecuted individually ...
7
@Steve of Albany I hope you are not overlooking that these "people" are chosen by Trump, so if they are dishonest then so is Trump...he chose them...in fact he is worse. And I suppose by all I have seen even more dishonest, perhaps not more than Giuliani or Manafort, but yes, totally dishonest if it serves his interests.
1
@JHM I'm not sure why the hurry .. if we began to prosecute the underlings, do you think they might be willing to incriminate others ...
Mr. Soloman has used the FOIA to gather his information. He has presented his findings to the public in a very cogent manner. The NYT is now trying to discredit him and his work.
9
Sure, look for all the factual news that's fit to broadcast from Faux News. Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk. It's the bad-for-you fast food of new sources, feeding the obsessions, hatreds, and phobias of a huge number of self-satisfied Americans. The
faithful can't even imagine looking elsewhere for an 2nd, or 3rd opinion, so they can make up their own minds. Tells you all you need to know about these low information, lazy minds who have the right to VOTE, for Pete's sake! John Solomon has never been appointed or elected, but we all know what his goal is, MONEY HONEY, and that is the same as tRump's.
8
Whenever I argue the legitimacy of Fox News,I start by pointing out that nothing W. did, from crashing the economy to lying us into an unjust invasion, ever resulted in anything but unalloyed praise. However, when Obama was president everything he did, from tripling the stock market, halving the unemployment rate, reconnecting with allies, bringing every country in the world into the Paris accords, providing healthcare to millions, was met with derision, hate and cries of socialism. Now with Trump it has turned back to unbridled support even as he undermines the very institutions America was founded on, including a free press. There is no way that someone could witness this behavior and then have the gall to tell me that it is “Fair and Balanced “. More like “Fake and Biased”.
62
@Rick Gage
Fox doesn't even try to hide the fact that it is unadulterated right wing propaganda.
It is proof positive that propaganda works, even when the viewer knows, or ought to know, that what they are being told is highly biased.
People like hearing things they agree with - Trump chief among them.
Fox News has much to answer for.
8
Freedom of the press belongs to those who own one.
Mr. Solomon has to make a living. If the Hill had to identify his articles as opinion, he is now toxic for the main street media (MSM). He is unemployable.
The NYT does its readers a disservice by referring to Mr. Solomon as an investigative reporter. He is a wacko that has lost his moral compass.
I do not judge Mr. Solomon. I might lose my moral compass if I had bo income and needed to pay the rent and feed my family? That seems to be Mr. Solomon's problem at the moment.
Remember Hannity, Levin, and Limbaugh are opinion, not news. They are not MSM. The same can be said for Rachel Maddow. She is opinion.
The only safe haven for MSM today is print. I read the WSJ every day and the news is very close to that of the Times. When I read the opinion pages of the WSJ, I have doubts their writers read their own newspaper. They live in an alternative universe.
I can count on one hand the times I have seen or heard a retraction on electronic media. Every day I see the printed media make corrections. They take it to silly extremes such as correcting the spelling of someone's name.
My message to you is the printed media is our only hope.
18
@Joe Aaron -- Not until people realize that they cannot allow history, or government, to be bought by the malicious, covetous rich. All for them, none for you, and you should thank them for it.
4
In a series of articles and interviews, John Solomon reported allegations made by a former Ukrainian president, a former Ukrainian prosector general, Ukrainian diplomats and members of Ukraine's parliament. (The whistleblower listed these allegations on page five of his complaint, which triggered the impeachment inquiry.)
Trump asked Zelensky, as a favor, to look into these allegations. Zelensky readily agreed, but then discovered the Ukrainian constitution does not allow presidents to initiate criminal investigations. So he did not comply. During his joint press conference with Trump at the United Nation in September, Zelensky told reporters he did not mention Trump’s request to the prosecutor general. Nevertheless, the Trump administration released military aid to Ukraine prior to the end-of-fiscal-year deadline.
Expectations that the Senate will remove Trump from office because he asked Zelensky to look into the allegations made by Ukrainian officials are delusional. Since asking was not treason, bribery, or a high crime or misdemeanor, the Senate many refuse to consider it. If it comes to a trial, Chief Justice Roberts, who would preside over a trail, might dismiss the charges.
5
@William Case "Trump asked Zelensky, as a favor, to look into these allegations." What you leave out is that this "favor" was predicated on the withholding of hundreds of millions of dollars of "aid" to Ukraine. That is extortion and that is an impeachable offense.
17
The Hill isn't a right wing/ alt right site btw. It's basically centrist, it's news articles do not flatter Trump, its opinion articles are split between left and right, including 'extreme' ends of both.
6
@Steven I read The Hill religiously every day for work; while their factual reporting is generally evenhanded, their op eds are largely (I'd venture at a ratio of nearly 3:1) written by right wingers, from right-of-center to fanatical, rather than centrist or center-left contributors. On top of that, The Hill often accepts op eds from absurd contributors on the right who have no business being published in an (ostensibly) serious outlet - see: Charlie Kirk; Jessica Tarlov; Ann Coulter; and yes, dear old John Solomon until recently.
9
@Schultz I read it daily too., along with Politico, the Times, and a smattering of other outlets. The 'news' part of the Hill is what matters most to me and you agree that it's good. The Hill was founded by a Democratic fundraiser (but also Trump friend) and an ex-New York Times guy. Analyses from media watchdog groups consistently put it in the center, or at most slightly right of center. It may *seem* heavily right wing to you because of crazy right-wing op-eds that irritate you more. Their current roster of regular columnists is split Dem/Repub. And yes, as I said they publish op-eds from what could be considered *extremes* at both ends. Of course, to me the liberal ones don't seem 'extreme' but they could well seem that way to conservatives. Today, in fact, their Opinion page offerings are leaning pretty 'liberal'.
For me this story once again raises a question I have had since I started reading anti-Communist propaganda as a high school student in the 60s: Do these people actually believe the outright lies and distortions that they pump out, or are they just doing it for the money? Being a right wing yapper is far more lucrative now than it was in 1962 and people like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity have become very, very wealthy. Most of what they say can easily be demonstrated to be false. So, which is it, true believer or con artist?
20
Don't Schiff's witnesses Kent and Taylor have nothing but third-hand and fourth-hand heresay so-called "evidence", with nothing of personal knowledge to testify about?
Of course in a court of law this would not be permitted but in this theatrical presentation it appears that anything goes. Trump's big sin? Defeating Hillary and calling Schiff names.
This is what you get when the guy leading the inquiry includes in his Congressional district Hollywood where fantasies are conjured up.
8
All you need to know about this is that Zelensky was in process of preparing the Biden investigation statement that Trump was looking for, because the money that Trump put on hold would be gone after September. Zelensky was being bullied and extorted, is that simple.
Plus, Trump was interested in that statement only, that is when he would release the $. He was not interested in the actual investigation getting started ( ie getting prosecutor assigned, forwarding "info" trump had on Bidens, etc)
1
@MIKEinNYC How convenient that you do not mention: the transcript (which is evidently incomplete per testimony of a listener of "the call") or the testimony of Alexander Vindman and Timothy Morrison, both of whom were on the call between Trump and Zelensky or Gordon Sondland whose memory was "refreshed" (as a way to avoid possible a perjury charge?). So, while you talk about Hollywood "fantasies", at least viewers of Hollywood's films know them to be fantasies, which is not the case with FOX News viewers who cannot discern fact from "untruths", better known as outright lies and disinformation.
3
I thought he trusted Rudy.
2
Solomon peddled a pro Russia, 'nothing to see here, folks' line for years on The Hill. I wondered what his deal was.
10
As for trying to persuade Trump that it was the Russians not the Ukrainians who meddled in the 2016 election, what on earth would lead any impartial journalist to think at this point that this Ukrainian smoke screen is rooted in “belief”? It is clearly and with a load of evidence we already know, carrying out Putin’s agenda to undermine both the new Ukrainian president by withholding military aid and meddle in our own upcoming election, and Donald Trump is their man. How can you even print an article like this without drawing that line?
9
His website should be named Pravada (the word "truth" in Russian) Reporting, then Daddy Don and his 2 non-governmental employees, Rudy and Donnie, Jr., will be able to recognize more quickly how to set American governmental policy, toward with Ukraine, without needing to ask Vlad directly.
You know, the same Vlad and his fellow Russian friends, whom Donnie, Jr. has been quoted in the past, as being the majority source of the Trump "empire's" investors. I guess they are receiving good dividends, from Trump, Inc. these days.
2
This important and informative piece demonstrates so clearly the mechanism by which falsehood can be turned into damaging 'truth'. It is happening more and more often all over the world as governments, power brokers,lobbyists and others whose objective is persuasion by any means, refine their techniques and hone the skills that allow them to mold public opinion. It is a growth industry in which highly skilled operators, in effect, propaganists. become enormously influential.
11
This administration thinks its pretty clever, thinking the American people can't tell that Solomon is part of the propaganda machine. Fox is simply a propaganda-delivery device. Got my fingers (legs and eyes) crossed that Congress does its job and ousts this divisive, dangerous, autocratic waste of a presidency. This country is way off base on clean energy and economic equity, not to mention moral decency. Time to get past the smoke-screen of propaganda and back on track.
11
If more people were acquainted with critical thinking and were able to identify agenda driven news for what it is, we would all be better off. At least, I would hope everyone would be aware of their own biases and not limit themselves to one news source.
10
he's a mouthpiece for the conservatives nothing more and unfortunately has Trumps ear. He'll be replaced by another as soon as he says something unfavorable.
7
Thank you for this story. It should be linked to the general claim that the Ukrainian stories about the Bidens and the DNC have been de-bunked. Since this is central to the impeachment hearings, it needs to be clearly documented. This article could use even more supporting links, such as when "Lutsenko changed his story" about the list of people not to prosecute.
The defense of the Mr. Trump will include other such story lines, and they must be clearly investigated and referenced in further reporting.
7
It will be difficult to influence the public about the gravity of Trump's actions as long as the mainstream media adheres to a high standard of reporting unlike FOX news.
2
This article did not have the punch I expected it to have. It seemed to lack specifics and was too vague for my tastes. I thought this article would effectively skewer John Solomon, but it didn't.
10
It appears that our Republic is in turmoil and the President is splitting it to suit his own ends. Does anyone remember the years 1861-1865.
.
5
Someone explain to me how so many men in the White House can look so similar?
13
Well I would have given the authors of this article their right to report as they see fit until I got to the line about "these writers" are the reason for Trump's high approval rating among the base......um....it couldn't be low unemployment, high stock market, low inflation, low interest.....no ....it's the right wing writers who are keeping it high. Talk about slanted
12
I think the point is simply that “these writers” ignore or downplay the severity of Trump’s missteps and only focus on the positive. If the there’s a chance— just a chance— that Trump committed impeachable offenses, then sincere readers who follow these writers would be completely misinformed. This explains how Trump’s base blithely ignores Trump’s debacles, e.g., Turkey, China, Ukraine.
5
@concerned citizen 1 "it couldn't be low unemployment, high stock market, low inflation, low interest". Could be. Of course, much of this is a result of corporate decisions made in 2014-2016 as businesses recognized the slow but steady recovery from the mess that Obama inherited.
7
@concerned citizen 1
You wrote about Obama: low unemployment, low inflation, low interest, high stock market (though it has Trump's election soared irrationally). Funny how some are able to see a strong economy only after their guy is in office. Well, not "funny, ha-ha".
5
I know one shouldn’t judge another based on a photo, but having never seen this man, the accompanying photo is revealing. The defiant arrogance just oozes out.
10
You read the NY Times which says you are probably reasonably well educated and smart enough to think critically. You deal in facts. You don't get caught up in conspiracy theories or demagoguery. But you are in the minority. C. Bernard writes below that about 80% of our population is in the dark. That figure may or may not be correct, but a large portion of our population swallows conservative lies hook, line and sinker, and ask for more. Without them the lies would die.
What makes this more troubling is that most of them have the right to vote. They have already elected one of their own president, and they are ready to do it again. That's the real problem.
32
@Lou
"a large portion of our population swallows conservative lies hook, line and sinker, and ask for more"
Yup, only people you disagree with do that. Liberals would never do that.
3
@Robert - Thank you for proving Lou's point.
4
No Robert, people I agree with do it too. That's why I think critically. When I get information from NYT, WaPo, CNN, etc. (I don't get info from only one source) I ask if it is reasonable and backed up by facts. I check it with subject matter experts. And I try to find sources that are objective, not those that will confirm my own biases.
Commentators and politicians have biases on the liberal side too. But I think it's a bigger problem with conservatives.
I didn't really see anything in this article identifying any real misstatement or misinformation by Solomon. The business about the list that didn't exist seems like small beer since the prosecutor still insists that the former US ambassador had told him not to prosecute certain people. If anything, the (imes article burnished Solomon's credentials as a journalist : 2 decades at the AP and awards for investigative reporting. It is certainly true that the narrative that Solomon and others in conservative media advance is never heard elsewhere and is a counter-narrative to what the mainstream press provides. It's obvious that Solomon's narrative irritates the president's opponents and virtually all of the reader commenters here at the Times. Regardless, this article is actually useful because it gives those who get their news exclusively from liberal sources ( NPR, MSNBC, CNN) an idea of the counter narrative that a substantial portion of the country is following. A well-informed citizen follows news from a variety of sources and makes his own intelligent decision. Ignore or this counter-narrative just because it helps the president, but then don't ask why he was re-elected next year.
18
@martin
The ambassador was trying to protect an effective new anti-corruption bureau that had criticized Solomon's source prosecutor for being too lax on corruption (according to an earlier NYT report).
@martin Did you not read what Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman said about Mr. Solomon's reporting? He said there were many non-truths and errors in his writing.
2
@Reason
Yeah, he didn't bother to mention any, though. Did he?
4
trump, guiliani, fox news, john solomon, republicans in Congress, et al, the true deep state.
37
American journalists willingly becoming the Soviet-style state-run media. Terrifying. Where up is down and down is up. 1984 here we come.
23
Interesting point of view.
When you are on the "other side" of a debate, you attack the journalists. After what has transpired in the nonsense Russian collusion craziness for 2+ years, most journalists should take a deep breathe and thank the lord that they are not held responsible or legally responsible for their lack of journalistic instincts over the last 3 years.
There certainly isn't anyone at the NYT that could be considered an expert on the Ukraine. BTW how did the experts at the CIA ans State department do in predicting or at least having some prior knowledge of Russia annexing Crimea, which last I checked was part of the Ukraine. Experts? Not sure there are too many of them for the Ukraine.
7
Matt, one of the major questions in this whole Ukrainegate affair -- a corruption scandal that is likely to get Trump impeached -- is who was supplying Rudy and Trump with propaganda, including false stories about the U.S. Ambassador. This information does need to be tracked down, and the Times is making a good start. Now we need to find out whether Solomon was on someone's payroll or was helping the pro-Russian Ukrainians for free.
1
@Matt
Ever since the overthrow of Ukraine's democratically elected President in 2014 there have been so-called "experts" on Eastern Europe who claim to have been astonished that Russia annexed Crimea soon after.
I've never claimed to be an expert on the subject but I know enough to know that anybody claiming to have expertise in the matter and surprise at the annexation is lying, either about their expertise or about their surprise.
7
I wonder how often Mr. Solomon has been to Ukraine. I’ve been there eight times so would that make me an expert? Probably not — well, maybe in airport navigation. One thing is for sure: They don’t hand out $500,000 a year jobs without a hook.
9
When the president of the United States gets his “information” from someone completely unqualified like Solomon, while he ignores and vilifies his own diplomatic corps, you know we’re in deep, deep trouble. When 30+% of the American people will believe anything Trump or Hannity says you know we’re in deep, deep trouble. When a major political party chooses to ignore their oaths of office and put their political interests over the interests of the country, you know we’re in deep, deep trouble. As long as Trump is in the White House and Republicans control the Senate, we're in deep, deep trouble.
I have never been so frightened for this nation as I am now. Next year we’ll finally know the answer to that age old question, “Does God exist?”
9
I appreciate the Times reporting on this as much as anything. Some day, I would really love to know whether the main players in conservative media truly believe what they say.
7
Trump did not ask President Zelensky to investigate conspiracy theories concocted by Republicans. He asked, as a favor, that Zelensky ‘look into” allegations made by Ukraine officials, including a former president and general prosecutor, that appeared in John Solomon's series articles and interviews published by The Hill. Solomon did not make the allegations; the Ukrainians made them. They alleged
—they have evidence that Ukraine’s National Anticorruption Bureau collaborated with the Democratic National Committee and the U.S. embassy in Kyiv to interfere in the 2016 presidential election;
—that members of the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv obstructed Ukrainian anticorruption investigations;
—that Vice President Joe Biden quashed a Ukrainian investigation of Burisma Holding to protect his son Hunter, who say on its board of directors.
The whistleblower listed these allegations on page five of his complaint, which triggered the impeachment inquiry.
Expectations that the Senate will convict and remove the president for asking Zelensky to look into these allegations as a “favor” are delusional. The Obama administration explicitly threatened to deny Ukraine aid unless it investigated corruption allegations, including those against former Trump campaign manger Paul Manafort. Three Democratic senators sent a letter to Ukraine’s prosecutor general demanding that he reopened an invitation of Manafort he had shutdown because he regarded it as politically sensitive.
7
@William Case -- In the summary, Zelensky asks Trump for an increase in military aid — specifically, to purchase more Javelin anti-tank missiles, useful in Ukraine’s ongoing conflict with Russian-backed separatists in its east.
Trump responds by saying, “I would like you to do us a favor though.”
So the "favor" turns out to be about two investigations Trump would like Ukraine to conduct: one about a unfounded theory about Ukrainian possession of a Democratic email server, the other about the Biden family’s allegedly corrupt dealings with a Ukrainian prosecutor.
Trump is soliciting help in an election by attempting to bribe Zelensky which is a felony.
BTW your comment is straight from Charlie Kirk's tweet which was fact checked and determined to be false.
4
I'm astonished that someone who claims to be an attorney would think it appropriate for a U.S. President to ask a foreign government to investigate an individual American citizen. Presidents can't even ask that of the DOJ, never mind a foreign state actor.
4
I often wonder if these figures on the right, like Hannity and Limbaugh, actually believe the stuff they spew, or do they know it's mostly garbage, but, wow, is it profitable.
10
Putin told Trump to put the squeeze on the Ukraine. Knowing that US military aid (authorized by Congress) was all that prevented the Ukraine from being overrun by Russian forces, Trump had the perfect tool to use against the Ukraine. Now Trump had a chance to manipulate the Ukraine unto doing his political dirty work. So he attempted to use blackmail & extortion against a NATO member.
Emboldened by having Barr successfully shield him from accountability after the Mueller report, Trump now demanded that the Ukraine fabricate smears to undermine a political opponent who he feared. Faced with overwhelming alarm throughout the State Dept. & foreign service corps over this reckless behavior, Trump latched onto any conspiracy theory (no matter how thoroughly debunked) in a pathetic effort to put a benign spin on his outrageous abuse of power. Thus, opinion writers such as John Solomon are useful props for Trump, in his never ending public relations campaign.
As the public hearings will show, Trump has willfully subverted US foreign policy to his own political aims. Only a fool would value the word of John Solomon over that of Taylor, Vindman, Hill, Yovanovitch, & the other true Ukraine experts.
5
I've considered starting a Conservative web site as a way to become rich. All I'd have to do is sprinkle my site with American flags, use the words "patriots", "real Americans", "fake news", and "deep state" and I'm halfway there. The rest is easy because I don't really need to investigate anything, I can just feed my gullible audience the red meat they desire. It could be a lot of fun! I could run a story on how Elizabeth Warren cheated on her SATs; on how Pete Buttigieg made sexual advances or how Joe Biden faked his son's death. All lies, of course, but that's what Conservative news is.
The fun part is I could take the profits and funnel them to progressive causes like the Sierra Club or MoveOn.org. If I did well enough, I might get on a live Conservative show where I could confess I just made it all up. Oh, to dream....
12
@Jim Dennis The facts about "conservatives:" are even funnier. A "star" of the alternate GOP universe is a former Ohio State wrestling coach who looked the other way when that team's physician molested his charges. An unmarried senator from a Southern state who wants to "out" the whistleblower (strange use of verb).
"Conservatives" have perverted language itself and yet claim to be holier-than-thou.
2
Alternative universe fraudulent pap spewed by Foxy News, Rush et al. gobbled up by the uncritical 39% “always Trumpers.”
The Founders knew that the vitally and survival of our democratic experiment depended on an informed electorate with a sense of civic duty.
Now it’s apparent that the GOP members of the Congress and other Trumpo sycophants are doing all they can to insure ignorance and disinformation are the coin of the realm solely for the purpose of acquiring and maintaining political power.
7
What will happen to the Solomons, Hannitys and other bottom-feeding liars when Trump is gone? Will they disappear quietly into their own conspiracy theories or will they reinvent themselves as purveyors of real news?
5
Who is John Solomon?
He is a cog in the republican right wing fringe propaganda machine owned largely by the Murdochs.
Republicans learned their propaganda techniques while Karl Rove was W's brain and voice. Rove planted "reporters" in the press pool to ask softball questions and to voice conservative talking points.
We are now in an Orwellian era wherein opinion is masked as news and propaganda is core to political beliefs. It is a mainstream weapon in our domestic civil cold war.
I think it was Lenin who once said that the ends justify the means. The employment of John Solomon is a perfect example of this approach to truth.
91
That old saw is also attributed to Machiavelli, Heroides and St. Jerome and the odd time to the Jesuits. Whoever originated it was obviously a brute who cared more for results than ethics.
4
The unfortunate aspect with this administration is that we already went through this experience when we were in junior high school. If there are no principals, hall monitors, bathroom passes, security guards and detention periods after school the place goes into full ballistic chaos. There is a REASON for having Congressional oversight and management of a system that governs a country like ours. There are good children and there are "Rotten Apples" and we already know the results even if they wear silk suits and dye their hair orange. This isn't rocket science...
15
Putin and his oligarch money have a hand in everything Trump does going back to Kushner setting up a secret line through the Russian embassy. Putin will have his way in Ukraine just as he did in Syria. Trump doesn't even try to hide his work on relieving sanctions and now dismissing Russian meddling in our election.
Any journalist from Fox news et al must work for Trump and therefore Putin. They bash the European Union which Putin wants to break apart and push for Brexit for the same reason (divide and conquer.) White nationalists are the target, but sometimes they get out of hand and commit terrible crimes turning decent people against them. The regulations of the European Union reining in corporations that harm people and restricting guns, not to mention their social safety net, are things that we should emulate.
13
@betty durso Without meaning to I think you actually hit the nail on the head In regards to the critical divide in America
On one side, “deconstruction of the administrative state”
On the other side, “fundamentally transform America to more closely resemble the European social democracies”
This is a divide among the political class and also a very deep divide across the public. Throw in the geographic predispositions, and you actually do have the potential makings of a Civil War. It may not be a shooting war, But we have two groups with very different views who clearly are moving towards despising each other. So much for the union.
This story is light on facts and big on guilt by association. Since when is it not politics as usual for a new party coming in to differ with previous administrations’ appointees and replace them? Where is the beef? Trump is doing what he was elected to do. Democracy is not a pillow fight. Further, the Ukraine is a swamp and traditionally a part of Russia, as is the Crimea. Why are we and Europe taking over? America is tired of war and our endless aggression and control. Liberals used to have broad vision, but now are myopic. Sadly so.
5
@Sandra Cason Actually the story isn't light on facts. Did you follow Solomon on The Hill? I did. All roads according to him led to Soros. He was pushing a conspiracy theory that had no back up. He hasn't shown his emails, or anything. Yes, you can believe that Ukraine is part of Russia, but it isn't since it has its own government. By the way, it's Ukraine, not the Ukraine.
3
@Sandra Cason
Read the article again - there are lot's of facts you just don't like.
Texas was part of Mexico and Maine was part of Massachusetts. So what?
There is a Ukraine and it wants it's independence from "Mother Russia". Republicans of old would have stood shoulder to shoulder with them - to allow them to maintain their freedom.
But that was before Putin found his puppet in Trump. The irony is incredible. The same puppet being manipulated by a Cold War intelligence Chief and the Captains of Fossil Fuel Oligarchies. Guess they are all the same - driven by a lust for power and money.
Trump is a TOOL.
2
Do we want our Presidents making policy based on their favorite talking heads and journalists? Or do we want them to make policy based on a wide range of long time, well educated, well informed experts that are publicly recognized as he officials, advisers and consultants to the government?
Do we want our Presidents using their personal attorneys to conduct international or even domestic relations? Or do we want them to conduct our national affairs with cabinet officials and staff appointed by the President and approved by the Senate specifically to conduct "our" public affairs, not the President's personal affairs.
Do you have your healthcare addressed by your doctor or your best friend. That's your personal decision. But if you are the School Board chairwoman, is it appropriate for you to single out a newspaper reporter to guide your information and decisions, and have your best friend carry them out and negotiate agreements for the school district? Or would you work with the school board and it's official consultants.
3
In the first paragraph, Solomon is described as a journalist, which he is not.
Journalists are supposed to educate the public through honest reporting, not by the amplification of conspiracy theories and blatant lies.
One of the disasters of American media is Fox News, an opinion platform at best, whose unwavering support of misinformation and prejudice, and whose rabble-rousing rhetoric has done more damage to American society than any other ‘news’ organization, social media excluded.
Solomon has found a perfect home for his brand of noxious ‘journalism’, together with his angry, mendacious colleagues. Appropriately, Trump’s survival largely depends on these truth-benders, whose malevolent influence leave a deep stain on America.
10
Trump doesn't listen to Solomon for answers or direction, for that he goes to Mr. Putin.
Solomon is just a mouthpiece that Trump enjoys hearing.
3
He could very well be as good, if not a better 'expert on Ukraine' than Col. Vindman, whose family left that country (which by the way was part of another at the time) at the wise age of 3.
Get real.
2
@waldo Excellent comment and good rejoinder to the biased, albeit well written article by Messieurs Vogel and Peters.Now that's enlightening that Col. Vindman knows about as much about Ukraine as ALEXANDER HARRISON and I have never set foot there. 1 could listen to liberal media all day singing the praises of Col. Vindman and never know that he is no more an expert on Ukraine than the average person, and if he speaks Ukrainian, it could be the Ukrainian of the dinner table or the kitchen.So why all the hosannahs?Tuned in to FN 1 day and heard Mr. Solomon speak w/o knowing his name, and was impressed.We tend to elevate State Department officials and INTEL.officers to almost deity status, assuming that if they are career diplomats or retired military officers they must know what they r talking about, they must be telling the truth. But not always so. John Brennan, former CIA chief whom I share something in common with, since we have both been in the Mamlaka and r students of Arabic--I have a certificate in Arabic writing from NYU and was a sub contractor in Jiddah in early 1970,s, goes on CNN and makes a fool of himself, accusing president of treason.Are there not more graceful ways of spending 1's retirement?
2
@waldo
It was my dubious pleasure to read Fiona Hill's very poorly written book "The Siberian Curse" for a Russian Geography class a couple years ago. It's worth a look,
just to see how these 'experts' think. She thinks people freeze to death at 0 degrees F if they go outside, etc. etc. and her 'solution to Siberia' was to move everybody who lives there to Moscow or St. Petersburg.
The Pew Foundation, for this sort of work the most respected American polling organization and distinctly conservative, did a survey of which news sources provided their recipients with the most factual information. They asked a scientifically chosen sample of thousands of Americans what their main source of news was, and tested these Americans on a few simple facts that were in the news. Those whose main source for news was Fox News. They did significantly worse than those who paid no attention at all to any news, and worse than if they had just answered the questions randomly. Mr. Soloman is a poster boy for Fox's disinformation. The Hill, a Conservative website, for years posted Soloman's columns with a disclaimer and then quit carrying them.
The NYT should not call Mr. Soloman a journalist - that should be edited out. Soloman puts out too much that is entirely made up. He is a propagandist, and on the subject of Ukraine he is clearly lying in ways that benefit Russia. Is he paid to do so, or do the Russians have lurid videos to blackmail him with, does he just love to lie, or does he just have a bromance for autocrats like Putin? I would not know for Solomon, though those might be reasons Trump and his minions love Soloman.
18
Solomon seems more like a mercenary for hire than a sincere partisan. Like Giuliani he see’s a big payday working for the alt right propaganda machine. You have to wonder where the money comes from to support all these clowns. There is an extensive network of wealthy reactionary conservatives more than willing to fund liars and frauds like Solomon to front their agenda. You’re way into Orwellian double speak when people like Solomon and Giuliani talk about “truth”. White is black, day is night, tyranny is freedom and Trump is the alt right messiah. Only the last has a ring of truth. To bad all those billionaires worried about the “wealth” tax don’t direct their ire at the real threat to their wellbeing. Maybe there’d be less concern over their wealth hoarding if they did something about the alt right / fascist takeover of the Republican Party and supported economic justice as well as social justice. Just a thought eh.
12
In that picture of Giuliani and his co-conspirator Parnas, I wonder who decided to plant an American flag in the sugar caddie so it just flops on the table there among the dirty dishes.
What a couple of patriots.
3
If you lie with dogs, you get fleas. It’s time to clean the kennel thoroughly.
5
Instead of getting his news from y’know, daily Intelligence Breifings, Trump gets his news from TV personalities. Perhaps that’s the problem.
13
I can only hope that these Fox journalists are ‘The Woodward and Bernsteins of our time’. These yahoos never cease to amaze me in how they fumble history. Woodward and Bernstein exposed Watergate and the unraveling of Nixon. If Fox News can do the same for Trump, they would be heroes.
4
All that a good conspiracy needs is a bit of mud in the water. Guys like John Solomon provide the mud. When you watch the impeachment proceedings you will get a glimpse of how conspiracy works. The Republicans will keep trying to distract from the facts and muddy the waters by referring to so called reporters like Solomon. While the facts are not on their side, their supporters don't need them. It's enough to conjecture. I guess what I'm saying is that this will be a test of American intelligence. Can they differentiate between, facts, conjecture and conspiracy? I hope so.
153
Steve, You’re talking about Trump supporters, they’re not the sharpest tools in the shed. They will only believe what their Dear Leader and his propaganda machine tell them to believe.
Don’t think for one second that the impeachment will change their minds. It won’t because it it a cult of personality. Their Dear Leader is their god, all knowing and perfect.
24
@Steve McMahon
Wishful thinking.
About a third of Americans couldn't think for themselves if their lives depended on it...
It's not just in the USA. Here in Alberta over half the population cannot think critically and are cheering on our race to the bottom under the kenney conservatives.
Try as I might, I cannot fathom why these people are cutting off their noses to spite their faces. It's sad, really...
10
@Steve McMahon
So, you are calling relevant documentary evidence mud?
Facts you don’t like should not be heard?
The documents don’t lie.
2
So the President of the United States eschews the real experts in the State Department and Intelligence community—authoritative, largely objective resources paid for by the taxpayers—in lieu of crackpots and conspiracy theorists paid for by the advertising revenues generated from Fox advertisers. And anyone is surprised that Trump is on the cusp of impeachment?
199
@D. Smith -- "eschews the real experts in the State Department and Intelligence community"
If you want to be "the real experts" then get elected.
Don't lose and then sabotage the winner.
Don't lose and then say only you know the truth.
And don't elect a Republican Lite who would do the same wars and economic sell out, but pretty it up with different "facts" about places like Ukraine being "vital."
Don't just WMD us again, Hillary, like you did every time you had the chance from Iraq to Libya and Syria and Yemen.
6
In a nutshell you have hit the essence of Trump's Daily Intelligence Briefings.
It clearly makes perfect sense to rely on a “Washington-based reporter and Fox News personality” as an authoritative source to inform US foreign policy! What could possibly go wrong?!
Seriously, it’s bad enough to have a president that uses a combination of Fox and Friends and social media to garner his daily news briefing. To learn that he has eschewed policy experts in favour of yet another armchair expert defies belief. Has the man ever been to the Ukraine?
The choice of advisers tells a lot about a person, Trump’s choices verge on “high crimes and misdemeanours” all by themselves before you even take into account the many others that he has committed.
93
@Andrew
Actually, rather than defying belief, it again illustrates that the thin skinned narcissist must be surrounded by yes-men/women and only hear news that casts him in a favorable light. All else is “fake”. No dissent or “disloyalty” to him personally (Supreme to the national interest, of course) shall be tolerated.
1
“A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.” ~ Winston Churchill. Considering the barrage of lies coming from this Whitehouse, garnered from questionable sources, it’s going to mean we all must stay fully dressed and in running shoes.
59
"And for some of his biggest stories on Ukraine, he has relied on a prosecutor with a history of making inconsistent statements who is now under criminal investigation."
Are the authors of this piece referring to Giuliani? If so, he should have been identified as "former prosecutor." If not, the person should be specifically identified.
If you are going to write a piece criticizing someone else's shoddy journalistic practices, then please be sure your own is solid.
6
@Michael B
No, they're referring to Lutensko.
Lutsenko was the prosecutor Biden called "a very solid guy" and whom he supported to replace Shokin.
Shonkin was the guy Biden and the international community wanted fired because he was corrupt, and investigating Burisma founders.
Yes, Lutsenko is under investigation by the new prosecutor in Ukraine. It is alleged Lutesenko abused his power and provided cover for "illegal gambling" in Ukraine.
These things tend to happen when you give bad interviews. He told John Solomon that the Obama administration handed him a "no prosecution list" and withheld funds from his office. That's bad for the "Joe Biden did nothing wrong" narrative.
Extra icing on the cake: Lutensko was one of the organizers of the Euromaidan movement, which sparked the ouster of Ukranian President Yanukovitch. (Yanukovitch tended to lean towards Russia instead of the European community).
Lutensko's role in the Euromaidan movement was one of the biggest reasons the US and the EU supported him, and wanted him in government.
1
@Michael B
My impression is that they are referring to Yuriy Lutsenko because further in the article, they give an example of an inconsistent statement. I agree that they could've done a better job in making that clear.
@Rick
They intentionally chose to make that NOT clear because it undermines the article.
Lutsenko is a central figure in the Biden story. There is nothing wrong with using him as a source.
Biden himself is asking us to believe he did nothing wrong because the new prosecutor (Lutsenko) closed the Burisma investigation and found no wrong doing by anyone.
It is very taxing sometimes to write a comment because the 500 pound gorilla in the room can never be mentioned. Many reading this article can see this as another puzzle piece but can't mention exactly where they think it fits, in this politically correct environment. Anyway, I do thank the N.Y. Times for your reporting even though I feel you are held back at times yourself. But without you we all would REALLY be in the dark, not just 80% of our population.
9
Sorry, I admit to not seeing the gorilla. What do you mean?
1
So, we're looking for somebody who knows something to advise the president on Ukraine. The president, and with him the solid core of the Republican Party, reject advice from knowledgeable sources. People who know things upset, annoy and threaten them. This is what's making "great" in a whole new way.
16
The real coup is the Republican’s Universe of Lies over reality. It is truly Orwellian. One lie at the top leads to an entirely fake world. Trump/Putin and climate denial is the big lie - everything else has to follow suit.
27
I thought I heard that other journalists were complaining about Solomon at The Hill. I would not be surprised especially after the whistleblower report came out.
He's a propagandist for Trump pure and simple.
15
When Solomon’s credentials including touting his support by Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh it’s no wonder trump and Gulilliani gathered him into their swamp. He needs to testify in front the country as to the sources and validity of his “facts”. Someone also out to question how much money he has made from Russian sources to propel his “information”.
9
@Linda Greenwood
Really? You want a reporter to be forced to testify under oath to Congress about his sources and information? Does the First Amendment only apply to journalists whose information you like?
2
Trump and his fellow Republicans use John Solomon's television commentary to undermine the duly authorized foreign policy of the United States; basically in the manner they use and have used Rudy Guiliani.
The impeachment inquiry is the last opportunity for the Republican Party to help save America from Trump's treacherous acts and to save the Republican Party. If Republicans do not wish to help save America, then Democrats must do all they can to block Trump's treachery.
Save America! Impeach Trump!
15
@John S.
America can be great again. Impeach Trump!
1
Solomon's failure to check with multiple sources or any source at all maybe his downfall. By failing Journalism 101 he maybe the single source that brings Trump News down.
9
By this description John Solomon sounds like an entirely made-up character. A deliberate misinformation counterpoint to most main news sources.
6
He is the other Solomon - the unwise, the opportunist.
9
A major difference between the recent past and the last three years is that Fox has gone from being a large right wing mouthpiece to "State TV," and this TV "president" who appears unable to think for himself unless it is about himself, has abdicated leadership to a bunch of right wing radicals with a huge megaphone. Hannity, Murdoch, etc., and their support staff figure out the day's message; they broadcast it; Trump parrots it; they amplify it; the rest of their followers on the media metastasize it like the virulent cancer it is.
The above summary is not news, but it is the theme of this and other revelations of the hidden players in this mess. "State TV" has been normalized to such a degree that we tend to forget that it now almost controls what is truth. Almost, because the NYT, WaPo and a few more are doing their best to counter the lies and spin; certainly the half-hour network newscasts would rather stay with "if it bleeds it leads," and most local news is worse.
This unwise Solomon, and the Times' exposure of him, has given us a new name to whom to assign responsibility, but the crisis of truth and trust remains the same and deepens daily. Let's hope that today's hearings will begin to turn things around - but sadly, my hopes are not high.
16
The Justice Department won't peddle in disproven conspiracy theories so Giuliani turns to an obscure right-wing media personality for integrity. You can't make this stuff up. I'm mostly amazed it took this long to uncover the connection to Fox News. I've played games of "Six Degrees" that are harder to figure out. Trump both informs and is informed by right-wing media propaganda. Apparently engaging in fantasy based news entertainment eventually caught up with him.
52
I hope Mr. Solomon is not a scapegoat for Trump's investigation of Biden in Ukraine. Mr. Solomon is just a decoy to divert attention in the impeachment process.
The ultimate responsibility still lies in the mouth of the person who actually requested in one way or another of Ukraine's president to investigate Biden.
Please don't take detour to draw attention. Go to the heart of the matter and show the evidence. Mr. Solomon is just a side show.
11
America - It appears financial opportunism is only subordinate to the personal ambitions of Mr. President.
What a country!
18
Listening to “The Daily” podcast the guest , Leo, a third grader, is asking questions about the impeachment inquiry.
I wish half the Country had the smarts of Leo. 
Worthy of a listen. Way to go Leo! You give me hope.
38
Next thing we know, Solomon will be Trump’s new press secretary.
103
@insomnia data
Really now, I doubt that Trump would make Soloman Press Secretary. Much more likely would be ambassador to Ukraine, or Assistant Secretary of State.
22
@Marvant Duhon
“...or Assistant Secretary of State.” You mean assistant to Rudy?
He is but one in a small (or not so small) army of propagandists at Fox “News”, The Hill, and many other alt-right sources of alt-facts. Very scary that for so many Americans that garbage is their only way of keeping (mis)informed.
183
@RickyDick
There is so much flak and attention on Facebook and what an awful source of misinformation it is. But it's really not as pervasive as the likes of Fox News, Rush, Levin, Breitbart, Solomon, The Federalist, and all those others who appear on Fox or on the internet that I don't even know.
What a bunch of liars - and who soaks up all those lies? The church going uneducated white unemployed working class "deplorables" who may or may not be racists. You know who they are. These people are not on Facebook - that's not where they get their misinformation.
4
Bloomberg, Steyer, Bezos, et al need to team up to buy out Murdock and remove the Fox propaganda machine from attacking the country. It would be more beneficial than any run for office.
303
@poslug We live in a capitalist country. There is obviously a huge market in spreading falsehoods that businesses with low ethical standards will exploit...Sure, I suppose Bezos and group could buy Fox but what would prevent another billionaire from starting a "new" Fox network? The cancer of lying in journalism -- and getting away with it -- is permanently in our country's bloodstream, and metastasizing. Sad.
16
@poslug That would certainly be better than what we have, but we need a new updated Fairness in Media Doctrine with some regulatory teeth too.
8
Far out! Brilliant idea. Such irony! Billionaires a proper target by the progressive wing of the Democratic Party can save the day.
But won’t.
I do admire Steyer. He is the “real thing” someone for whom I could vote.
The others I regard as next to useless.
Whatever happened to Howard Shultz another billionaire who could be added to the group? There must be more. Don’t Gates snd Buffett want to defeat. I suspect they feel more threatened by the likes of Sanders or Warren than Trump.
18
"While Mr. Solomon was at The Hill, his relationships with sources were sometimes closer than reporters typically get with the people they cover. In March, according to documents uncovered as part of the impeachment inquiry, he shared a draft of one of his stories before publication with a noteworthy group: people who had helped gather the information that Mr. Giuliani had provided to Mr. Solomon."
I don't like the sounds of this guy Solomon, but what would be wrong with checking reportage with the sources of what is being reported? And the writer of this article says that Solomon's "relationships with sources were sometimes closer than reporters typically get with the people they cover." But a source is not the one covered in a story: a source provides information on the subject. The writing in this piece is very poor. Makes me question the integrity of this piece.
27
@farhorizons I believe it would be entirely appropriate to share the draft of that portion of an article with a source characterizing the information provided by the source to confirm accuracy. Sharing the entire piece suggests you are acting in concert with your source instead of independently reporting.
4
@farhorizons as a former journalist, you don’t share drafts of your stories with sources. Too much opportunity for them to taint the coverage.
2
I seem to recall an NYT report that Ambassador Yankolovich was trying to protect an effective new anti-corruption board that had criticized the chief prosecutor who was Solomon's source for being too lax in pursuing corruption. The annoyed prosecutor seemed to be trying to get back at that anti-corruption board by using Solomon to attack the ambassador. Whatever the story, journalists must be careful to avoid relying on only one source. Otherwise, they can end up being manipulated by that source, as seems to have been the case with Solomon.
75
@Alicia Lloyd
Isn't single source how Cheney talked us into Iraq?
7
@Alicia Lloyd You're assuming Solomon was manipulated. More likely he found a source for the dubious story he wanted to write in the first place, and used him as window dressing.
At best, shoddy journalism; at worst, cynical and damaging pandering to the nastiest in American rightwing journalism.
5
Your comment seems to assume the good faith of the reporter in trying to actually report a balanced, truthful account. I’m afraid that concept is not in play in the case of Mr. Solomon. The desire for a scoop to discredit the Ambassador and relieve the pressure put on his source Lutsenko by her support of AnTAC’s reporting was the only purpose.
1
In this battle for the hearts and minds of the US citizens there is the opportunity to make a lot of dough. John Solomon is cashing in.
136
Democrats need to call Solomon to testify in the impeachment inquiry. The nefarious interplay of right wing media and the Trump administration needs to be exposed.
226
@Murad in that case,they need to call Rachel Maddow and the rest of
of so called journalists.
2
@Murad I agree with the sentiment ... the caveat being that Solomon seems able to weigh in credibly when defending his 'methods' ... he's been on the radar for a while as a slick shyster who doesn't care about accuracy and simply wants to make money ... shining up to Trump as one of his golden geese (the rest being ultra right groups and other paranoia-spreading types) will work even if Trump is impeached and/or jailed ... Solomon will continue to spread lies, half or otherwise, to keep his readers, many of whom are ever-Trumpers, and the money flowing in.
Makes me wonder if his dad was a good cop, not that he should necessarily suffer the sins of the son.
1
@Murad Hannity too. He's neck deep in the Ukraine scandal. We know he took regular calls from the president and served as a megaphone for Giuliani's litany of false narratives.
1