UPDATE: The White House finally changed its transcript to reflect the full, correct exchange. NBC News noted the change at 9:26am Thursday. The White House told the AP it already had been done midday Wednesday. That was untrue.
The day after President Trump and Vladimir Putin held a joint press conference in Helsinki, Finland on July 16th, The Atlantic's Uri Friedman noticed the official White House record – both in print and on video – differed from the event most people watched live
The official White House transcript and live-stream left out Putin's key admission that he wanted Donald Trump to win the 2016 election. The Kremlin erased the reporter's question and Putin's answer entirely.
If you watch the video of the news conference provided by the Russian government, or by news outlets such as PBS and the Associated Press, you will hear the Reuters reporter Jeff Mason ask a bombshell of a question: “President Putin, did you want President Trump to win the election and did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?”
Putin then responds with a bombshell of an answer, according to the English translation of his remarks that was broadcast during the press conference: “Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the U.S.-Russia relationship back to normal.”
But recordings of the exchange were muddled for two reasons. First, the English translation of Putin’s previous response was concluding as Mason began to speak. Second, the microphone seemed to pick up Mason’s question halfway through—making the latter half of it easier to hear.
Technical difficulties aside, there’s further ambiguity. It’s unclear whether Putin said “Yes, I did” in reference to the question of whether he wanted Trump to win the 2016 presidential race, or in response to the question about whether he directed Russian officials to help Trump win. “You could interpret that to mean he’s answering ‘yes’ to both,” Mason told me, but “looking at it critically, he spent a good chunk of that press conference, just like President Trump did, denying any collusion. So I think it’s likely that when he said ‘Yes, I did,’ that he was just responding to the first part of my question and perhaps didn’t hear the second part.”
But if you watch the White House live-stream of the press conference or look at the transcript published by the White House, the first half of Mason’s question is not there. Without it, the meaning of the exchange is substantially different.
(...)
Here is the record of what took place, starting with the last part of Putin’s comments before Mason’s questions. Putin is describing his willingness to assist with Robert Mueller’s probe (bolding is mine):
Vladimir Putin: That could be a first step, and we can also extend it. Options abound, and they all can be found in an appropriate legal framework.
Jeff Mason: President Putin, did you want President Trump to win the election and did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?
Putin: Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the U.S.–Russia relationship back to normal.
And here’s the key section from the White House transcript, which makes it seem as though Putin is still talking about the Mueller probe:
PRESIDENT PUTIN: That could be a first step, and we can also extend it. Options abound, and they all can be found in an appropriate legal framework.
Q: And did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?
PRESIDENT PUTIN: Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the U.S.–Russia relationship back to normal.
Another strange wrinkle comes from the Russian government’s English-language transcript of the press conference. In contrast to its footage of the press conference, which features what really happened, the transcript does not include any piece of that key exchange.
Friedman notes technical issues impacted records published by other reputable outlets as well.
Transcripts published by the Federal News Service and Bloomberg Government mirror the White House transcript, while NPR’s contains the full exchange. Confusing matters further, C-span’s footage contains Mason’s full question but only the second half of Putin’s answer.
Rachel Maddow's MSNBC July 24th show covered the story thoroughly, and in response, The Washington Post claimed Maddow was incorrect, noting the Post's initial transcript mirrored the one from the White House because different audio was carried on separate audio channels.
What happened? If you watch the videos, it’s pretty clear. At some point in the middle of that question, there’s a switch between the feed from the reporters and the feed from the translator. In the White House version of the video, you can hear the question being asked very faintly under the woman who is translating saying “president.”
(...)
Our transcript and the White House’s were apparently based on the feed that runs only in the right channel. A White House official told CNN’s Abby Phillip that its transcript “did not have Mason’s audio turned up in time,” referring to Reuters reporter Jeff Mason, who asked the question.
This is not a conspiracy from the White House. While the White House certainly has a track record of misrepresenting facts, this would have been a remarkably futile revision of reality to attempt. As it turns out, they didn’t.
This article was updated after our transcript was corrected.
This would make sense if the White House, like the Post and others, adjusted its transcript and video to reflect the truth as soon as it came to its attention.
Here is Jeff Mason speaking to NPR's Ari Shapiro about the transcript discrepancies a week ago:
SHAPIRO: You and I both covered the White House for years, and we are accustomed to seeing corrections of the White House transcripts. But I can't remember an exchange that was quite so central that went uncorrected for quite so long.
MASON: It's very central. There's no question about it. And it's not like you can hide it. It's very clear if you go back and listen to my question on television or on video or a digital recording what I asked.
Today, the Associated Press reports the White House allegedly finally corrected the record:
The White House says the omission "was by no means deliberate" and that the transcript has been updated for presidential records.
As of publication of this post, that is not true.
It defies logic to believe this is a casual oversight given the gravity of Putin's admission, the omission of the same exchange from the Kremlin record of the event, and President Trump's declaration Tuesday that people should not believe their own eyes.
The President of the United States is intentionally lying to the American people. It is a well-tested Soviet tactic.
White House fails to address omission in Trump-Putin transcript (CNN)
The White House Transcript Is Missing the Most Explosive Part of the Trump–Putin Press Conference (The Atlantic)
No, the White House didn’t intentionally edit a question to Putin out of a video (Washington Post)
Collusion Question From Helsinki Summit Varies By Transcript (NPR)
White House says nothing ‘malicious’ in transcript omission (AP)