Ken Dilanian defends NBC News’ report that Senate Intel Committee found no evidence of conspiracy
As Twitchy reported Tuesday morning, NBC News published a report saying that both Democrats and Republicans on the Senate Intelligence Committee had uncovered no direct evidence of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia.
NBC News’ Ken Dilanian did, however, note in a follow-up tweet that the committee had not found evidence exonerating Trump, either — which is not how investigations work, but that’s where he stood this morning, just to be clear.
President Trump even posted a “thank you” tweet which included MSNBC’s segment on the story.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 12, 2019
However, Mother Jones reported later in the day that Democrats on the committee took issue with NBC News’ reporting. “The president is terrified about where our investigation and where the Mueller investigation may lead,” Sen. Mark Warner told Mother Jones, insisting the investigation was not over.
That story was picked up by Rachel Maddow, where it caught the attention of Dilanian:
"Senate Intelligence Committee Democrats Dispute Claims That Russia Probe Found No Collusion"https://t.co/Ndc4v3Puhy
— Rachel Maddow MSNBC (@maddow) February 13, 2019
NBC News stands by its story, which has not been credibly challenged. King appears to be disputing something we didn’t assert—that they have reached a final conclusion. Warner did not contradict our reporting whatsoever.
— Ken Dilanian (@KenDilanianNBC) February 13, 2019
dude ….yeah he did.
— Aggressively Challenged (@MiiNi_mB) February 13, 2019
We have to admit, it’s fun watching NBC News have to report that the committee hadn’t found any evidence of a conspiracy. Fun for us, but not for The Resistance.
"Respectfully, I disagree," Warner said Tuesday. "I'm not going to get into any conclusions I've reached because my basis of this has been that I'm not going to reach any conclusion until we finish the investigation. And we still have a number of the key witnesses to come back.
— Sharon (@Sharonresists) February 13, 2019
No one is disputing Burr said what he said. What I find concerning is the way this story was presented. I feel you jumped the gun & did not allow for the full context of the story to be researched before NBC made it public. GOP is now running the story as proof of no collusion.
— Sharon (@Sharonresists) February 13, 2019
Ken isn’t this the second time you are out on a limb? The first was when you said mueller was almost done. I like your reporting but don’t jump the gun.
— julie b (@reSISTERhood9) February 13, 2019
Why report on an incomplete investigation as though it’s complete? It’s misleading. 😡
— Krisnena (@KrisnenaNY) February 13, 2019
Warner disputed the conclusion.
What is up with your own rush to report the end of investigations anyway?
— Eliza K (@Eliza328) February 13, 2019
I don’t doubt that Burr said what you reported he said, but what he said is obviously false; we’ve ALL seen evidence that would “suggest” there was collusion.
— Kim Mathers (@KimLMathers) February 13, 2019
Honestly, there was Russian collusion on live TV when trump asked Russia to release more of Hillary's emails, then they did. We all saw it.
— bonnie blue ♀ (@BonnieblueBlue) February 13, 2019
He was joking, which was obvious to anyone not afflicted with TDS.
You are not reporting unchallenged “facts.” You have been fed a story about opinions about the meaning and the significance of the evidence gathered by the committee. In this situation, no one can truthfully say there is “no” evidence of collusive before the committee.
— K. Jensen (@kkjnsn) February 13, 2019
Once again @KenDilanianNBC tweets and reports mis-informed and not 100% factual information as fact to rush out. Once again @KenDilanianNBC is played by his source and develops a Trump defense based on inaccurate information
— PreservingAmericasConstitution (@PreservingC) February 13, 2019
Oh please. Just stop.
— This Got Me Thinking (@Speaking_Plain) February 13, 2019
Umm your reporting is based in a fantasy world that Putin and Trump would have executed a written agreement and that the paltry investigation the GOP have conducted would have discovered it. However, you do you Ken.
— Nate (@philly_nate) February 13, 2019
Sure Buzzfeed, I mean NBC.
— Marc Murphy (@mnnurse10) February 13, 2019
While technically accurate, the reporting was confusing and misleading.
— Jennifer14 (@CAJenn1114) February 13, 2019
Your assertion of "no collusion" appeared to be conclusive. Burr should have said nothing at all. In reality, the Senate Intel was not looking for the information that you alluded too. Disappointed, Ken.
— Kimberly (@IAmBut1Voice) February 13, 2019
Stand by it all you want but sure looks like you got out over your skis.
— CC (@Sadiegirlcc) February 13, 2019
Ken, with all due respect, you went on TV and said the senate committee has found no direct evidence of collusion. I appreciate you trying to contextualize after the fact but I’ve been watching the lawyers on MSNBC clean up that statement all day.
— It’s Pat (@Pple1st) February 13, 2019
Bad journalism, Ken. You didn't mention most of the rest of the interview which infers the investigation is far from over. You gave the cult a nice way to spin based on a vague opinion of Trump's former National security advisor on his campaign.
— Briar (@netherskye) February 13, 2019
Sorry Ken, this is bad reporting.
— Mike McCoy 🍀 (@MikeMcC2point0) February 13, 2019
Give it up. Your job is to report news, but increasingly you insist on *characterizing* the news you report, either through omission or editorialization. If I want polluted reporting, I can go to Maggie Haberman.
— Dan Davis (@Bindlestaff) February 13, 2019
That is a bunch of bull, Warner did contradict your reporting, just look it up, it's not hard to find.
— Michelle B. (@iDreamer18) February 13, 2019
Your story was reckless. And without context. I’m disappointed.
— Katherine Robinson (@KMR31871) February 13, 2019
— Sean Ryland (@sean_ryland) February 13, 2019
John Brennan … now there’s an unbiased source. Didn’t he lose his security clearance?
"direct evidence" is weaselspeak. There's no such thing as "direct evidence," just evidence. And there's a LOT of evidence.
— Stop Celebrating Billionaires (@BikSlyce) February 13, 2019
No that’s not what you said, Ken. You’re a liar and do not deserve to be labeled a journalist. Repeating what you’ve been told is not remotely journalism.
— Camille (@Camille75324598) February 13, 2019
You have been talking out of both sides of your mouth all day!
— Toniann (@Toniann561) February 13, 2019
Delete the "intelligence" from your bio. Disappointed
— The NightMan (@misguidedsoul7) February 13, 2019
Why do you enable Trump Ken?
— Um Yeah…. (@msut777) February 13, 2019
You are an idiot.
— At @Ingrid Legat (@edgar_legat) February 13, 2019
Wait until the Senate’s investigation actually is complete and the mainstream media has to report on that — it’s gonna get ugly.
‘Not even a pretense of objectivity’: Kimberley Strassel calls out NBC News’ national security reporter https://t.co/02rVDq4R5J
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) September 30, 2018