4 ms·

Interesting, very interesting. Which "American officials" leaked this to the NYT, and why? > The Central Intelligence Agency has concluded that the Saudi c

Interesting, very interesting. Which "American officials" leaked this to the NYT, and why? > The Central Intelligence Agency has concluded that the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, ordered the killing of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi, according to American officials 1. Leaked late on a Friday. The traditional time to release news that you hope gets forgotten ASAP. So the "sources" wanted this story out there, but not too out there? Maybe this isn't significant; maybe the leakers wanted the news out there sooner but the NYT didn't run the story right away. 2. Leaked to a liberal-leaning news source as opposed to one more friendly to conservatives. Don't know what to make of that decision either but it was a conscious one. 3. What were they hoping to accomplish by making it public? Most obvious explanation: they leaked this because they didn't trust the White House to tell the public about this; they feared the White House would simply bury this finding in order to maintain their relationship with Saudi Arabia. Alternate explanation: The White House leaked it themselves. Gives them an "excuse" to punish Saudi Arabia while claiming they had no choice in the matter since the "CIA leak" tied their hands. In other words, they are attempting to eat their cake and have it too... punishing the Saudis and trying to maintain a good relationship with them. (folks, why the downvotes? If you don't want politics on HN, fine, but I didn't post the story. I just replied to it... and I hardly feel my post here is partisan or negative in any way...)

Consultant32452 8y ago
>Most obvious explanation: they leaked this because they didn't trust the White House to tell the public about this; surely they feared the White House would simply bury this finding in order to maintain their relationship with Saudi Arabia. Prediction: The White House is going to maintain its relationship with Saudi Arabia anyways. All this might do is force the administration to make some sort of symbolic gesture of finger wagging at them.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
acct1771 8y ago
Controlled disclosure. Keep the focal point of news off the Saudi-Israel paradigm.
boomboomsubban 8y ago
This is a fairly standard way that the CIA releases press reports. Technically they can't release the information without clearing huge amounts of red tape, and they don't like publicly admitting who they spy on as it could cause an incident. As for why, this story attracted a lot of attention from journalists, many of whom knew him. This story is being released when the professionals are the only ones paying attention, Friday evening, and is meant to reassure them that the CIA is taking care of this. As for why the NYT, them and the Post regularly do this for the CIA, and the Post would be a poor choice.

Consultant32452 8y ago

>Most obvious explanation: they leaked this because they didn't trust the White House to tell the public about this; surely they feared the White House would simply bury this finding in order to maintain their relationship with Saudi Arabia. Prediction: The White House is going to maintain its relationship with Saudi Arabia anyways. All this might do is force the administration to make some sort of symbolic gesture of finger wagging at them.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

acct1771 8y ago

Controlled disclosure. Keep the focal point of news off the Saudi-Israel paradigm.

boomboomsubban 8y ago

This is a fairly standard way that the CIA releases press reports. Technically they can't release the information without clearing huge amounts of red tape, and they don't like publicly admitting who they spy on as it could cause an incident. As for why, this story attracted a lot of attention from journalists, many of whom knew him. This story is being released when the professionals are the only ones paying attention, Friday evening, and is meant to reassure them that the CIA is taking care of this. As for why the NYT, them and the Post regularly do this for the CIA, and the Post would be a poor choice.