You might not know but Politico and the Washington Post are very closely entwined.

The Washington Post

The publisher of the Washington Post is Fred Ryan

http://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/592045

Fred Ryan is the founding CEO of Politico, he left the position and went to the Washington Post to take over as editor after Jeff Bezos purchased them Washington Post for 250 million dollars

Fred Ryan is the Vice-Chairman at Allbritton Communications who's CEO is Robert Allbritton

Politico is a privately owned company https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politico

It's owned by Capitol News Company

Capitol News Company was created when Politico was spun out of Allbritton Communications Company in 2009.

Capitol News Company, LLC is an American media company based in Arlington, Virginia, United States. It is a private holding company owned by Robert L. Allbritton.

So not only is the current Publisher and CEO of the Washington Post the founding and former CEO of Politico, but he actively serves on the board of the parent company of Politico.

Now if you'll remember that shortly after Jeff Bezos buys the Washington Post, his other company Amazon, received a $600 million dollar contract from the CIA. Now that's not a "direct" connection and the reasonable doubt is there, but I wouldn't say it's a large leap to suggest that the CIA may have suggested Jeff Bezos should buy the Washington Post and let them have influence over it and they'll make the investment worth his while.

Considering all this, a nice little system comes to light. The CIA, or forces within the intelligence community use the Washington Post (as they have used the media for years) to disseminate/leak info/disinfo to alter/warp/control public perception on various issues/situations. There is no limit to the value on being able to control the media, and the effect it has on the people. And Politico then runs with all kinds of extreme angles/propaganda on the various situations. Politico is the Washington Post/CIAs propaganda wing

For example here they don't even really say "annoymous sources from the CIA came to the post with this info" they just sort of start saying stuff and then say "says CIA/intelligence officials" no names no direct quotes nothing. But it pushed a certain narrative to millions of people and appeared to have official backing.

So the Washington Post doesn't appear to advocate for either side in this article but that's just because they are used as a launch point. They get the info to millions of people and the it's left to Politico to really turn it into propaganda. The above article, which again has no official word from anyone in the intelligence agency, and you'll remember at this time Clapper (DNI) himself was saying they didn't have good insight, was published on December 9th.

Politico publishes this on the 12th of December

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/trump-russia-intelligence-need-to-know-214520

This weekend, we finally learned the CIA’s professional conclusion about Russia’s involvement in our presidential elections: Russia hacked both the Democratic Party and the Clinton campaign, and the goal was to help Trump win. And the CIA isn’t out on a limb here: both the director of National Intelligence, who represents all 16 intelligence agencies, and the head of Homeland Security, have said Russia was behind the hacking. The FBI also holds Russia responsible for hacking, but hasn’t reached a conclusion about its motives.

Here's the problem. Almost none of that was substantiated at the time. And since has had no concrete support added to it. The fact is at the time the DNI had not said Russia was behind that "hacking" at all. That's a whole different issue that I won't get into but you can read here about how there is no evidence to point to Russia whatsoever. This is just blatant lies Politico is pushing off people and using the info from the Washington Post as their basis and jumping off point. Their cartoons are also pretty bold in their implications

https://instagram.com/p/BQ6SjBtgdsc/ https://instagram.com/p/BQlra1CAzA_/

More where Washington Post has a seemingly neutral position and Politico takes their more propagandist stand point

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/the-fix/wp/2017/02/21/how-milo-yiannopoulos-proves-the-gop-is-stuck-in-opposition-mode/

https://instagram.com/p/BQyhNDUge1Y/

And on the "dossier" Washington Post insists it's silly a few times (except of course for that fact that it shows Putin and Trump like each, like what???)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-trump-dossier-is-silly--except-for-one-thing/2017/01/11/f04fc1ba-d828-11e6-b8b2-cb5164beba6b_story.html?utm_term=.2d96c30755c6

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/intelligence-chiefs-briefed-trump-and-obama-on-unconfirmed-claims-russia-has-compromising-information-on-president-elect/2017/01/10/9da3969e-d788-11e6-9a36-1d296534b31e_story.html?utm_term=.2f70e16a716a

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/23/the-problem-with-buzzfeeds-defense-of-publishing-the-trump-russia-dossier/?utm_term=.20e9ab1807c9

Politico takes a different approach

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/donald-trump-intelligence-report-buzzfeed-cnn-coup-214623

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-dossier-buzzfeed-ben-smith-234023

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/02/donald-trump-russia-scandal-214825

And perhaps Politicos most egregious manipulation of the truth in my opinion is this https://instagram.com/p/BPJIA0BAYHR/

They try and make the reader think the DNC/Podesta emails are unverified when it fact they are more certainly verified.

Just wanted people to be aware of the connection between the two. Let me know your thoughts

And I'm on mobile so forgive me if I'm a little disorganized