Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Russiagate is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media

taibbi.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 227 posts

Re: Russiagate is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media

#191

Post by dragonwriter »

s_y_n_t_a_x wrote: post #178
dragonwriter wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> noone was indicted in the campaign other than for tax fraud and processing crimes. Pappadopolous was convicted for lying about his attempts, approved by higher ups in the campaign, to coordinate with Russia. Stone was indicted for lying about his role in coordinating between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks about the DNC document release in which, from other indictments, WikiLeaks was acting as either an agent or d…

Those are processing crimes. And Stone denies the accusation.

> Those are processing crimes.

Irrelevant, the actual facts charged in the indictment involve collusion. “Collusion” isn't a legal charge, it's a fact pattern, and it's part of the fact pattern in both the Stone and Pappadopolous indictments. The claim that there are no indictments involving collusion is false.

> And Stone denies the accusation.

Which is irrelevant to any claims about the content of indictments of findings of the Mueller probe. It would be relevant if the claim was “no convictions involving collusion” or “no confessions involving collusion”, though Pappadopolous would still disprove both of those claims.

Re: Russiagate is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media

#192

Post by arcticbull »

ethbro wrote: post #190
arcticbull wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very fair point.

That said, you're right that there are a lot of things we should be on guard for, but that aren't falsifiable. I suppose that's what the ~1850s quote "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty" is about. That there is much in a healthy democracy that cannot be mandated or prohibited, but must constantly be observed, thought about, and judged publicly in an open exchange of ideas.

You’re very much correct that it’s not a falsifiable statement. It’s also hard to express one wherein you can make the claim that political discourse is unaffected by the status quo or parties interested in maintaining/furthering it.

Agreed wholeheartedly that eternal vigilance is the cost of freedom.

I’m something of an outsider to the US political system, albeit with significant experience, and I do pay a lot of attention to it out of personal interest. I can’t vote anywhere in the world due to where I choose to live. I observe and try to understand.

Propaganda carries a lot of negative connotations though that’s usually from those who disagree with what’s being disseminated. The US approach is powerful in my opinion because it convinces people that they want to do the dissemination instead of telling them they need to, if that makes sense. In Canada for instance, there’s very little self aggrandizing, to the extent that we’ve asked ourselves nationally why people don’t fly the flag. I’ve come to feel it’s from a place of confidence; that we know what we are and like it, and so need not proselytize.

Re: Russiagate is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media

#193

Post by Fjolsvith »

SEJeff wrote: post #79
s_y_n_t_a_x wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because to have collusion you need to have multiple parties colluding. They haven't indicted anymore Russians or any other members of the Trump campaign, and no existing indictment has been due to collusion. So even though the President can't be indicted, the indication that no other indictments means that collusion is not a part of the report. There may be other offenses that Trump have committed, but that is even M…

Yet there could be sealed indictments that have yet to be unsealed. In fact, every single one of Mueller's indictments were originally sealed. Who's to say there aren't others that he's handed off to various federal prosecutors like at SDNY or EVDA? Assuming that Mueller has entirely cleared the president (or anyone around him) at this point is about as pointless as proving he's about to be arrested in the Oval Offic…

As of November, there were three dozen sealed indictments in the federal D.C. circuit. [1] My theory on this is that the FBI has been investigating crimes not committed by the current administration, but which would, if prosecuted during the Mueller investigation, raise a cry of obstruction and interference, due to the people they target. The FBI has been letting the Mueller special counsel wind down before going after the real criminals.

1. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dozens-sealed-criminal-indic...

Re: Russiagate is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media

#194

Post by Fjolsvith »

SEJeff wrote: post #79
s_y_n_t_a_x wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because to have collusion you need to have multiple parties colluding. They haven't indicted anymore Russians or any other members of the Trump campaign, and no existing indictment has been due to collusion. So even though the President can't be indicted, the indication that no other indictments means that collusion is not a part of the report. There may be other offenses that Trump have committed, but that is even M…

Yet there could be sealed indictments that have yet to be unsealed. In fact, every single one of Mueller's indictments were originally sealed. Who's to say there aren't others that he's handed off to various federal prosecutors like at SDNY or EVDA? Assuming that Mueller has entirely cleared the president (or anyone around him) at this point is about as pointless as proving he's about to be arrested in the Oval Offic…

> as pointless as proving he's about to be arrested in the Oval Office.

A sitting president cannot be arrested by his administration, by law.

Re: Russiagate is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media

#195

Post by Fjolsvith »

dragonwriter wrote: post #169
s_y_n_t_a_x wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because to have collusion you need to have multiple parties colluding. They haven't indicted anymore Russians or any other members of the Trump campaign, and no existing indictment has been due to collusion. So even though the President can't be indicted, the indication that no other indictments means that collusion is not a part of the report. There may be other offenses that Trump have committed, but that is even M…

> and no existing indictment has been due to collusion. The Pappadopolous indictment and conviction-by-guilty-plea was for (lying about) Trump-campaign initiated attempted collusion, in which Pappadopolous acted with the knowledge and approval of higher officials in the Trump campaign. The Stone indictment is for (lying about) collusion with WikiLeaks on the release of information that, per other indictments, was bei…

> The Pappadopolous indictment and conviction-by-guilty-plea was for (lying about) Trump-campaign initiated attempted collusion, in which Pappadopolous acted with the knowledge and approval of higher officials in the Trump campaign.

The two week prison sentence Pappadopolous received gave little weight to his complicity, and seemed to me to be more a slap on the wrist for his not cooperating with the FBI.

Re: Russiagate is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media

#196

Post by Fjolsvith »

dragonwriter wrote: post #191
s_y_n_t_a_x wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are processing crimes. And Stone denies the accusation.

> Those are processing crimes. Irrelevant, the actual facts charged in the indictment involve collusion. “Collusion” isn't a legal charge, it's a fact pattern, and it's part of the fact pattern in both the Stone and Pappadopolous indictments. The claim that there are no indictments involving collusion is false. > And Stone denies the accusation. Which is irrelevant to any claims about the content of indictments of fi…

> The claim that there are no indictments involving collusion is false.

As there is no actual crime of collusion for which a person can be indicted, this is a subjective viewpoint.

Re: Russiagate is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media

#197

Post by mindslight »

astrodust wrote: post #6
CptFribble wrote: post #2

I think the old guard media has misstepped on this, not for ideological reasons but for clicks. More banal certainly, but somehow worse, I think. Even the conservative media continued to talk about it, railing against, because it drives clicks. What we really need, and hopefully comes from this reckoning, is a new model of financing journalism that can be free to act in the public interest, and is built with that in…

All media owned by large, profit-at-all-costs organizations is conservative media, regardless of their branding.

You're tautologically right, but not with the colloquial definition of "conservative" that gets used politically. So for your comment to mean anything, you have to make a larger point.

(I'd argue that the colloquial "branding" definitions are a part of the problem. eg "drain the swamp" isn't conservative rhetoric)

Re: Russiagate is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media

#198

Post by Fjolsvith »

arcticbull wrote: post #120
ALittleLight wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And at the same time, the Pentagon is required to sign off on every movie script that shows any military buildings, or the White House. And they do make edits. You're omitting a crucial detail and by doing so you make the situation you describe sound much more totalitarian. You're required to get the military to sign off on your script IF you want to use free or discounted military personal, equipment, or locations…

I think that’s the crux of my point. Yes of course it’s optional to make a movie with the White House in it. It’s optional to use war footage to report on the war. It’s optional to interview officials in your coverage. However if you don’t, nobody’s going to pay attention so your only choice in effect is to play ball. Who would watch media coverage of the war from the only network without footage/boots on the ground/…

> the result is the same as under a totalitarian government but without the threats.

If the totalitarian government doesn't like your movie about their troops blowing up aliens, they can execute you. Not exactly the same results, IMHO.

Re: Russiagate is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media

#199

Post by Fjolsvith »

s_y_n_t_a_x wrote: post #140
akhilcacharya wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of those were less consequential (and with half of those unfounded) and didn't warrant a SCO investigation .

Which are unfounded, and how are deaths less consequential? The only reason a SCO investigation was pushed for in this case is because the media stoked for it.

It was an insurance policy in the highly unlikely event that Trump was elected. [1]

1. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/strzok-page-and-the-fbi-tex...

Re: Russiagate is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media

#200

Post by akhilcacharya »

thatoneuser wrote: post #175
akhilcacharya wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The point of mueller was to determine if Trump worked with Russia to steal a us presidential election. This is false, the charter was more broad than that. It investigated interference in the Russian election including this possibility. This is why they also prosecuted cases against Russian intelligence officers that performed the hacking operations and individuals that lied to the FBI over their ties to Russian cu…

Unless you cite something that verifies your claim, you're just making things up.

I...literally linked the news reports of the indictments which link to the indictments themselves.
Post reply on HN