Slightly drunk, straps on Tin Foil Hat
So.
A: NY Post – a paper supposedly friendly towards Trump – prints pictures of Melania, and flubs the date of when the photos were taken to make it look as if Melania worked in the US illegally.
B: When this becomes an issue in the media, NY Post visibly does nothing to refute.They don’t go back and double check their dates. Something the rest of the media seem to have been able to do from cold in less than a day.
C: Melania issues letter from respectable Attorney, stating that her legal status all maps out.
D: Media highlights discrepancy between dates, then discovers discrepancy does not pan out. After missing a smoking gun, decide not to investigate further.
Net Result?: Melania avoids the scrutiny of the press examining her immigration documents, elicits sympathy in voters for being questioned by the media.
Also note from the article above: Jarl Ale de Basseville, the photographer who shot the Trump photos for Max, told TPM via email that the Post “made a mistake” in saying the photos appeared in the January 1996 issue and confirmed that the photos ran in the February 1997 issue.
TL/DR – The photographer is claiming that the Post made a mistake.
January 1996 to February 1997. That’s not even the slip of a single digit. It’s not just 1996 instead of 1997. It’s January to February, too.
It’s difficult for me to see how they’d mistakenly transpose one date for the other – which leads to some interesting questions:
-
If the NY Post are not Trump-friendly and JAdB got the date wrong – did they knowingly let the story roll?
-
If the NY Post are not Trump-friendly and JAdB got the date correct – did they alter the date he gave them to make Melania deliberately look bad?
-
If the NY Post are a Trump-friendly paper and JAdB got the date wrong, why didn’t they fact check date when it became an issue?
-
If the NY Post are Trump-friendly and JAdB got the date correct – then are the media and the general public being played?