Last week, Washington Post was trending on social media due to their decision to retroactively redact their statements regarding details on key sources for the infamous, anti-Trump Steele dossier, which painted a picture of the Trump organization colluding with the Russians during the 2016 elections.

The two corrected news stories, from March of 2017 and February 2019 were not the only ones to undergo changes as a dozen other articles on the matter, released throughout the entire Trump mandate, were brandished with editor’s notes, following the newspaper’s executive director Sally Buzbee’s statements that she could no longer warrant for the accuracy of said articles.

These changes come in light of recent revelations by Special Counsel John Durham, who took it upon himself to shed light on the already disputable Steele dossier, further discrediting it when the Russian-born informant Igor Danchenko was indicted on 5 accounts of lying to the FBI.

A media reporter for the Washington Post stated that the indictment means that Danchenko’s source for the information regarding Trump’s alleged hotel encounter with Russian nationals, was not Belarus businessman Sergei Millian, but rather, a far more biased Charles Dolan Jr. with long-standing ties to Trump’s then election opponent Hillary Clinton.

„Slap an editorial note on it and we are guilt-free”

The editorial note added to the articles in question states that Danchenko’s federal indictment directly contradicts the information provided in the articles, adding that references to the initial report have been removed from all articles containing them.

The amount of articles that underwent significant changes now totals at 16 including the 2 that started the wave of Washington Post’s attempts at removing evidence that could point to them trying to defame the then-president.

These articles span over 4 years, with many of them not directly related to Trump’s alleged collusion with the Russians, but rather just using it as a prop to push their agenda further.

Donald Trump may have scored a victory with these article changes, but the real issue lies in the intent behind the corrections, as the Post didn’t bother changing any information up until after they were caught lying, showing that liberal media cares more about propaganda than presenting objective information to the public.

Many social media users involved in this mess argue that Washington Post and the like would probably do it again for the next republican candidate to run for office.