Did you catch this one, that gives details about Buzzfeed and SC's response?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...5b-9fd3-72f0e911e28d_story.html?noredirect=on
According to this, Jason at Buzzfeed emailed Special Counsel about what they were going to run. But he apparently didn't include Special Counsel mentioned, and didn't include the core bit about Trump directing Cohen to lie.
SC replied "no comment". Jason took this to mean he's in the clear.
Jason sent it to the WH counsel, and they said it's wrong, you need to check your facts more. Jason felt as though WH was the enemy and shouldn't be trusted.
Peter Carr (SC) says he would have strongly opposed the release to Jason, if Jason had included what he actually ended up publishing.
As it was, Peter Carr sent Jason the transcript from Cohen (before publication of Jason's piece), hinting by showing Jason nowhere in there did Cohen claim he lied based on Trump directing him. Jason didn't take the hint either.
Special Counsel after the story broke, sought out the "two federal law enforcement matters" or any testimony/documentation referenced by Buzzfeed's article. They found none.
To me it looks like Jason was sloppy based on that.
It also looks like SC has a good story as to how Buzzfeed got it wrong, and only if they had it so wrong did they feel compelled to shoot it down.
Sure it's possible that SC is trying to keep it on the down-lo so they can spring this when it's time. Maybe we'll know more after Cohen's testimony. If under oath, he again says that Trump did NOT direct him (as he's already said publicly after his false statements arraignment) , then I don't see how it could be the case.
If he says he can't answer that, then it will be intriguing.
No one else has been able to corroborate Buzzfeed. A few other sources (Farrow) have said their own sources tell them Buzzfeed's not accurate in this case.