Thread by @MattWolking

Incredible. @WillieGeist asked @nytmike about "what exactly these members of the Special Counsel's team who spoke to you are upset about." Schmidt did not correct him, even though his article makes it clear his sources were NOT part of Mueller's team.

This happened twice. @WillieGeist's second question was "Do the sources you spoke to out of the Special Counsel's office dispute" or "contest the conclusion as presented by the Attorney General that there was no collusion?"

Michael Schmidt's answer to this question is pretty shocking given that his article fails to say whether Mueller team members' alleged "simmering frustrations" are related to what Barr presented on collusion or obstruction or both.

"The sense [of frustration] is less on the issue of collusion than it is on obstruction," Schmidt told @WillieGeist. "What it comes back to is the issue of obstruction."

This contradicts what @nytmike wrote in his own article, which says "it was not clear"

I was wrong. @WillieGeist didn't ask 2 questions predicated on the false notion that @nytmike's sources were members of Mueller's team. He asked 3.

The 3rd: "Are you saying that your sources inside the Special Counsel's investigation say … they do have evidence" of obstruction?

Once again @nytmike failed to correct Willie and set the record straight on the nature of his anonymous sources, which were NOT members of the Special Counsel's team.

On CNN just now, @MarkMazzettiNYT contradicted what @nytmike told MSNBC this morning, saying the alleged frustration of some Mueller team members is allegedly "because of details that are both on the obstruction of justice side as well as on the Russian conspiracy side."