The ultraliberal New York Times has been working tirelessly to complicate life for President Trump, but their latest stunt has drawn the ire of the U.S. military.
In the President’s war on terror, a number of complicated maneuvers have been thwarted by the so-called “resistance” of the left. Trump’s temporary travel ban, which would have secured our nation’s borders from wayward terrorists from the middle east, has repeatedly been neutered by meddling liberal judges, some of whom have had dinner with former President Barack Obama within hours of their ruling. Nevertheless, Trump has pushed forward in an effort to eradicate ISIS and put a damper on radical Islamic terror originating from Syria, Iraq, and the like.
Now, as our military has made incredible strides in hunting down and eliminating terror targets overseas, the New York Times, a deeply powerful member of the so-called “resistance”, has thwarted the U.S. military by divulging leaked information that allowed one ISIS leader to stay one step ahead of his American-made fate.
“ISIS in Iraq and Syria has been ‘dismantled,’ with tens of thousands of its jihadist fighters dead, but a promising lead on its leader ‘went dead’ after a media leak, according to a key U.S. military official.
“’We have absolutely dismantled his network,’ Gen. Tony Thomas, speaking of Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, said at the Aspen Security Forum. ‘I mean everyone who worked for him initially is dead or gone. Everybody who stepped to the plate the next time [is] dead or gone. Down through a network where we have killed, in a conservative estimate, 60,000 to 70,000 of his followers, his army.’
“’That was a very good lead. Unfortunately, it was leaked in a prominent national newspaper about a week later and that lead went dead,’ Thomas said. ‘The challenge we have [is] in terms of where and how our tactics and procedures are discussed openly. There’s a great need to inform the American public about what we’re up to. There’s also great need to recognize things that will absolutely undercut our ability to do our job.’”
The willingness of the mainstream media to risk the lives of American soldiers in order to stymy their political enemies is an abhorrent evolution of the radical left.
No longer are we merely talking about a group of left-leaning individuals who are looking to annoy and antagonize the Commander in Chief. What we are dealing with now is an insubordinate, unethical, and ultimately dangerous mutation within the dinosaur press in an attempt to stay relevant. The level of competition has increased for failing outlets such as the New York Times, and publishing possibly harmful information seems to be the only way for the organization to keep their names on the tips of Americans’ tongues.