General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMatt Taibbi is hell-bent on trashing
the media for reporting on the Russia investigation.
Is he really of a mind that 'move on, folks - nothing to see here' is in order?
Control-Z
(15,682 posts)Source?
Context?
marble falls
(57,063 posts)In 2019, Taibbi wrote a piece for his self-published book, Hate Inc., titled "It's official: Russiagate is this generation's WMD", which argues that in light of the Mueller Report's finding (only partially released at the time) that the investigation "did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities", much of what mainstream media reported was exaggerated or outright false.[32] Michelle Goldberg in the New York Times criticized Taibbi's assertion that "the biggest thing [the investigation] has uncovered so far is Donald Trump paying off a porn star as "silly."[33]
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million
It's official: Russiagate is this generation's WMD
The Iraq war faceplant damaged the reputation of the press. Russiagate just destroyed it
Mar 23
Note to readers: in light of news that Special Prosecutor Robert Muellers investigation is complete, Im releasing this chapter of Hate Inc. early, with a few new details added up top.
Image: street art by Craig Tinsky, as photographed by Mike Maguire.
Nobody wants to hear this, but news that Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller is headed home without issuing new charges is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media.
As has long been rumored, the former FBI chiefs independent probe will result in multiple indictments and convictions, but no presidency-wrecking conspiracy charges, or anything that would meet the laymans definition of collusion with Russia.
With the caveat that even this news might somehow turn out to be botched, the key detail in the many stories about the end of the Mueller investigation was best expressed by the New York Times:
A senior Justice Department official said that Mr. Mueller would not recommend new indictments.
Attorney General William Barr sent a letter to congress summarizing Muellers conclusions. The money line quoted the Mueller report:
[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.
Over the weekend, the Times tried to soften the emotional blow for the millions of Americans trained in these years to place hopes for the overturn of the Trump presidency in Mueller. As with most press coverage, there was little pretense that the Mueller probe was supposed to be a neutral fact-finding mission, as apposed to religious allegory, with Mueller cast as the hero sent to slay the monster.
The Special Prosecutor literally became a religious figure during the last few years, with votive candles sold in his image and Saturday Night Live cast members singing All I Want for Christmas is You to him featuring the rhymey line: Mueller please come through, because the only option is a coup.
The Times story today tried to preserve Santa Muellers reputation, noting Trumps Attorney General William Barrs reaction was an endorsement of the fineness of Muellers work:
In an apparent endorsement of an investigation that Mr. Trump has relentlessly attacked as a witch hunt, Mr. Barr said Justice Department officials never had to intervene to keep Mr. Mueller from taking an inappropriate or unwarranted step.
Mueller, in other words, never stepped out of the bounds of his job description. But could the same be said for the news media?
For those anxious to keep the dream alive, the Times published its usual graphic of Trump-Russia contacts, inviting readers to keep making connections. But in a separate piece by Peter Baker, the paper noted the Mueller news had dire consequences for the press:
It will be a reckoning for President Trump, to be sure, but also for Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, for Congress, for Democrats, for Republicans, for the news media and, yes, for the system as a whole
This is a damning page one admission by the Times. Despite the connect-the-dots graphic in its other story, and despite the astonishing, emotion-laden editorial the paper also ran suggesting We dont need to read the Mueller report because we know Trump is guilty, Baker at least began the work of preparing Times readers for a hard question: Have journalists connected too many dots that do not really add up?
The paper was signaling it understood there would now be questions about whether or not news outlets like itself made galactic errors by betting heavily on a new, politicized approach, trying to be true to historys judgment on top of the hard-enough job of just being true. Worse, in a brutal irony everyone should have seen coming, the press has now handed Trump the mother of campaign issues heading into 2020.
Nothing Trump is accused of from now on by the press will be believed by huge chunks of the population, a group that (perhaps thanks to this story) is now larger than his original base. As Baker notes, a full 50.3% of respondents in a poll conducted this month said they agree with Trump the Mueller probe is a witch hunt.
Stories have been coming out for some time now hinting Muellers final report might leave audiences disappointed, as if a President not being a foreign spy could somehow be bad news.
Openly using such language has, all along, been an indictment. Imagine how tone-deaf youd have to be to not realize it makes you look bad, when news does not match audience expectations you raised. To be unaware of this is mind-boggling, the journalistic equivalent of walking outside without pants.
There will be people protesting: the Mueller report doesnt prove anything! What about the 37 indictments? The convictions? The Trump tower revelations? The lies! The meeting with Don, Jr.? The financial matters! Theres an ongoing grand jury investigation, and possible sealed indictments, and the House will still investigate, and
Stop. Just stop. Any journalist who goes there is making it worse.
For years, every pundit and Democratic pol in Washington hyped every new Russia headline like the Watergate break-in. Now, even Nancy Pelosi has said impeachment is out, unless something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan against Trump is uncovered it would be worth their political trouble to prosecute.
The biggest thing this affair has uncovered so far is Donald Trump paying off a porn star. Thats a hell of a long way from what this business was supposedly about at the beginning, and shame on any reporter who tries to pretend this isnt so.
The story hyped from the start was espionage: a secret relationship between the Trump campaign and Russian spooks whod helped him win the election.
The betrayal narrative was not reported as metaphor. It was not Trump likes the Russians so much, he might as well be a spy for them. It was literal spying, treason, and election-fixing crimes so severe, former NSA employee John Schindler told reporters, Trump will die in jail.
In the early months of this scandal, the New York Times said Trumps campaign had repeated contacts with Russian intelligence; the Wall Street Journal told us our spy agencies were withholding intelligence from the new President out of fear he was compromised; news leaked out our spy chiefs had even told other countries like Israel not to share their intel with us, because the Russians might have leverages of pressure on Trump.
CNN told us Trump officials had been in constant contact with Russians known to U.S. intelligence, and the former director of the CIA, whod helped kick-start the investigation that led to Muellers probe, said the President was guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, committing acts nothing short of treasonous.
Hillary Clinton insisted Russians could not have known how to weaponize political ads unless theyd been guided by Americans. Asked if she meant Trump, she said, Its pretty hard not to. Harry Reid similarly said he had no doubt that the Trump campaign was in on the deal to help Russians with the leak.
None of this has been walked back. To be clear, if Trump were being blackmailed by Russian agencies like the FSB or the GRU, if he had any kind of relationship with Russian intelligence, that would soar over the overwhelming and bipartisan standard, and Nancy Pelosi would be damning torpedoes for impeachment right now.
<snip>
octoberlib
(14,971 posts)Aaron Mate have all been attacking Rachel Maddow and MSNBC for saying Trump might of colluded with Russia .Most MSNBC anchors got their stories from well sourced articles in WaPo and NYT. I read Muellers report and he made it clear they couldnt establish a conspiracy charge because of lack of admissible evidence due to Trump people taking the fifth, deleting texts and other evidence , using encrypted apps and lying. Greenwald even said that Trump was justified in obstructing justice because he was being unfairly accused. Theyre all in for Russia.
dewsgirl
(14,961 posts)bashing RM. Idk Roger Ailes, was her mentor and friend. I still remember she gave a little speech the night he died, shocking many of us. I absolutely love her more than anyone else in the news world. But you have to admit even with these few, it is odd with all she reports on and as vicious as most of these @ssholes are it's very weird more don't bash her.
JustAnotherGen
(31,798 posts)She would never fall for Russian Propaganda and is not compromised.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2017/07/07/rachel-maddow-warns-media-about-forged-document-on-trump-russia-heads-up-everybody/?utm_term=.bfa9395548b8
They know she will knock their teeth out with FACTS. Not alternative facts, not rt.com bullshit, not a tweet - but actual Five Ws and How.
I wasn't shocked about the speech and it is not uncommon for women our age who have been successful to have had older white male mentors.
Granted - mine never joined Mar A Lago - but George was pursued to be a member.
JustAnotherGen
(31,798 posts)Nothing more and nothing less.
Kurt V.
(5,624 posts)FakeNoose
(32,617 posts)Not any more!
FYI - Matt Taibbi lived in Russia for 3 or 4 years during the early 90s and he happened to be there during their peaceful revolution. He must think he has to personally vouch for Putin or something, I don't get it.
NYMinute
(3,256 posts)sometimes subtly and many times not so subtly.
GeorgeGist
(25,318 posts)from his years in exile.
Trumpocalypse
(6,143 posts)Always seemed like an arrogant sh*t.