Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
|
You keep pointing to Taibbi on this, so I'm going to explain why I think his argument is lame. Basically, he says that the media overplayed the Mueller investigation. He doesn't really deal with what Mueller did find, so let's not dwell on the criminal convictions of the President's National Security Advisor and campaign manager, and the many times the President tried to obstruct justice. When you try to figure out what Taibbi thinks the media actually got wrong, it's very hard to say, because he makes sweeping claims but doesn't quote anybody for more than a few words. Ah, but you say, he quotes a lot of people in that article! He does, but only for ancillary stuff, not for the stuff he says the media got wrong. And when one bothers to click through, there's no there there. For example, one sentence with a bunch of links says:
Quote:
|
We were told we’d hit “turning point” after “turning point” leading to the “the beginning of the end,” with Trump certain, soon, to either resign in shame, Nixon-style, or be impeached.
|
The first "turning point" links to a Vox article (note: not major media by anyone's standards) which contradicts Taibbi.(1)
The second "turning point" links to a piece in The Nation (note: not major media, or a news source) which also contradicts Taibbi.(2)
And then I stopped checking his sources, because life is short. He starts the article by ostentatiously quoting the AP, the NYT and the WaPo as if he is going to deliver the goods on them, but then he hides his sources so that you have to find that his quotes are instead from Vox and The Nation, and they don't even say what he says they said.
Someone certainly needs to apologize for counterfactual, histrionic reporting. Hand Taibbi a mirror. And get Rolling Stone some editors.
(1) Vox: "Which of these, if any, will result in further charges remain unclear. It’s also not known for sure whether Mueller is preparing some sort of lengthy report on President Trump and Russian interference — perhaps to be sent to Congress for potential impeachment — or whether the next step is more indictments.
But Manafort could know a whole lot about any of these avenues of investigation. ... Manafort could be very helpful for whatever Mueller has in mind.
So now we wait for the special counsel’s next move."
(2) The Nation piece ends: "In the wake of Tuesday, Robert Mueller and the New York US Attorney’s office will continue down their methodical, principled path. But the special Counsel can’t solve what is at bottom a political problem for the country. However many of the president’s associates go to jail, Donald Trump will remain in office until the country musters the moral clarity of a pro-Trump juror who, MAGA hat in her car, could still follow the evidence."
Threaded Mode