media attention than anything else that happened in that remarkable q & a with reporters. but in the grand scheme of things, it is not unheard of for a white house transcript to be inaccurate. when that happen, reporters point out something that s wrong or missing or miscaringized and then the white house later makes a fix. it happens, not all the time but fairly frequently. it is not that big a deal. so after this incorrect transcript came out from the trump and putin summit with the question, did you want president trump to win the election, with that gone from the transcript, the atlantic published this criticism noting that the transcript was wrong. and after the atlantic first published this account, a lot of other news outlets picked it up, and pointed out that the white house transcript was wrong. the white house is not correcting it. it is still incorrect tonight. the incorrect transcript dropping out the question when putin was asked if he wanted
yes, i did. yes, i did. they just dropped it out. first part of queflt president putin, did you want president trump to win the election? they just dropped that out. what the white house has disappeared from the official record. both in print and in the video, president putin answering in the affirmative when asked if he wanted trump to win the election. just for kicks, if you want to try the russian government version, their supposed transcript of this event. in the russian transcript, not only does the reporter not ask the question. it doesn t even exist in the russian transcript. see that red arrow? they ve completely taken out that whole part of the q & a. at least the white house had the courtesy to leave in half the question so you can get a misleading answer. the russians took it out all
president putin, did you want president trump to win the election and did you direct any of your officials to help him do that? and yes, yes, i did. as of right now, here is the official white house transcript of that same moment. do you see that? in the white house transcript, look at what is missing. in the white house transcript, we ve still got president putin s answer, yes, i did, yes, did i. the white house just dropped the question that he was answering there. the white house transcript has no reference to reuters asking president putin, did you want president trump to win the election? that s not in the white house transcript. now, the reporter at the atlanta magazine was first to report on this anomaly right after it happened. and sometimes transcripts are wrong. they re very rarely wrong at such a high profile, simple thing. that moment probably got more
a secret russian agent in this country, working on behalf of the russian government to affect the conservative movement and the republican party in the 2016 election. just tonight the judge in the case filed memorandum about why butina should stay in jail and not get bail while she awaits charges. as is the case in many court filings, the footnotes here turned out to be the best part including this footnote here on the bottom of page 6. this is an issue we pulled out of a transcript from her last court hearing. this is about u.s. person one, right? the unnamed person who is described in the maria butina transcript. u.s. person one not named in the documents in conjunction with the case but he s been widely reported to be a republican named paul ericson. who is described as her boyfriend or her fake boyfriend just for spying purposes,