Live data from Hacker News

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

taibbi.substack.com

61–70 of 227 posts

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

#61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems ill-fitting to say the Washington Post, NYT, and Huffington Post are 'conservative', perhaps it'd be more accurate to say that they're entrenched in the status quo? You can see that pretty clearly when there newspapers write about companies that compete for attention. I don't think I've seen a favorable report about FAANGs out of the NYT since Tim Cook came out of the closet.

Huffington Post pretends to be very socially liberal, but really it's all about preserving the status quo which is ultimately a conservative position. Also have you read any of those New York Times "editorial" pieces they crank out? "Trump isn't so bad" and "Why I voted Trump and I'd do it again, gosh darn it, and you should too" are typical fare. The term "conservative" has shifted dramatically in the last 50 years.…

> Also have you read any of those New York Times "editorial" pieces they crank out? "Trump isn't so bad" and "Why I voted Trump and I'd do it again, gosh darn it, and you should too" are typical fare.

I haven't seen those, and I can't find them with a search. Do you have links?

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

#62

Disclosure: I deeply loathe Trump, and I think he is unfit for office; very glad to see Mueller investigation initiated, because there was a lot of smoke and it needed to happen. But the author is very correct. A 'free press' is the 5th estate - an important part of civil society. ... but it only works if they have integrity. Over the last two years it has become clear how narrow and biased they have become in their…

It is a pity you have to put the big disclosure at the top of your comment. But our media have made things very binary black and white.

Not buying into the 'red scare' means that in the eyes of some you must be a Trump supporter.

This is a failure of critical thinking and far too many people fall into this trap, thereby perpetuating things like 'RussiaGate' when it no longer makes sense to do so.

The suspicions won't die down amongst those that have been sat in front of their televisions feeding their imaginations with 'RussiaGate'. To them 'it happened but it could not be proven'. Their suspicions are still confirmed.

There is also a failure to take people at their word when it could be prudent to do so in this world of politics and lying. People have motivation for lying and people have motivation for being honest.

The leadership in Russia - Putin, Lavrov and others - have stated why it is that they have not secretly foisted Trump on the American people. But those that don't listen don't want to take them for their word on that.

Fundamentally the Kremlin see other nations as having national interests and, in the case of America, they have no need to care about who sits in the Oval Office as the national interests will be the same. The Pentagon isn't going to go away, the need for oil isn't going to go away, the need for the world to be using the dollar as the world currency isn't going to go away. American capitalism is always going to be what it is. American national interests are a constant as far as Russia is concerned. They cannot expect some external change, they have to be self-reliant and foster their own good relationships with traditional partners.

The Russian leadership have also stated why it is not in their interest to put 'their man' in the Oval Office. It is not due to any standards of conduct it is simpler than that. Thinking two moves ahead, what legitimacy would a puppet President hold, how long would he/she last and how would Russia be treated should the American people find out?

The Kremlin have thought this out. However, explaining to someone that the Russians are not motivated to influence the American elections also falls under the 'instant disclaimer'.

'So you must be a Putin fan?' is the expectation for proffering this explainer. But it is not about that, it is about understanding motivation and the Russian leadership are not motivated to influence American elections in some super-sneaky way.

There is a failure by the press that have pursued RussiaGate to empathise and understand others, whether they be the people that voted for Trump, the Russians, the Democrat machine or even themselves. It is because of this that you are correct, the press will not reform. It is not in their culture and they don't have the mindset to do so.

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

#63

Disclosure: I deeply loathe Trump, and I think he is unfit for office; very glad to see Mueller investigation initiated, because there was a lot of smoke and it needed to happen. But the author is very correct. A 'free press' is the 5th estate - an important part of civil society. ... but it only works if they have integrity. Over the last two years it has become clear how narrow and biased they have become in their…

To be fair, we've been having these wars for many years already...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism

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

#64

This is...utterly delusional, and totally disconnected from the evidence on record. The President's campaign manager, deputy campaign manager, personal lawyer and National Security Advisor have either pled guilty or been convicted of felonies. Despite denying any contacts with Russia, we now know he'd been offered a deal to build the biggest tower in Europe, a payout worth $300 million, during the campaign. During th…

I think you are purposefully ignoring facts, so that high level sentences match your narrative. Flynn (security advisor for a couple of day) -- was setup. There was no collusion with Russia to change 2016 election outcomes, that Flynn was accused of. "... made materially false statements and omissions during an interview with the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") on January 24, 2017, in Washington, D.C. " [1] h…

Well said.

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

#65

"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." You know why impeachment is out? Because Republicans control the Senate, and because there are plenty of conservative Democrats too, so impeachment doesn't stand a chance. If anti-Trump politicians controlled Congress, Trum…

[deleted]

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

#66

Disclosure: I deeply loathe Trump, and I think he is unfit for office; very glad to see Mueller investigation initiated, because there was a lot of smoke and it needed to happen. But the author is very correct. A 'free press' is the 5th estate - an important part of civil society. ... but it only works if they have integrity. Over the last two years it has become clear how narrow and biased they have become in their…

It is a pity you have to put the big disclosure at the top of your comment. But our media have made things very binary black and white. Not buying into the 'red scare' means that in the eyes of some you must be a Trump supporter. This is a failure of critical thinking and far too many people fall into this trap, thereby perpetuating things like 'RussiaGate' when it no longer makes sense to do so. The suspicions won't…

While I respect your opinions of the press, I must also rhetorically ask, “Are you sure you want to be taking these men at their word?”

https://m.telegraphindia.com/opinion/some-clues/cid/1669915

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

#67

This is...utterly delusional, and totally disconnected from the evidence on record. The President's campaign manager, deputy campaign manager, personal lawyer and National Security Advisor have either pled guilty or been convicted of felonies. Despite denying any contacts with Russia, we now know he'd been offered a deal to build the biggest tower in Europe, a payout worth $300 million, during the campaign. During th…

I think you are purposefully ignoring facts, so that high level sentences match your narrative. Flynn (security advisor for a couple of day) -- was setup. There was no collusion with Russia to change 2016 election outcomes, that Flynn was accused of. "... made materially false statements and omissions during an interview with the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") on January 24, 2017, in Washington, D.C. " [1] h…

Money laundering through charities you say? Blaming the opposition for the same things they are guilty of, you say? Well now, to me that is interesting.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/18/nyregion/ny-ag-underwood-...

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

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Trump did not have any material activity in Russia, and it ended as it became clear Trump would be taking on a political nomination anyhow. Michael Cohen testified that their claims of doing this was a lie, and they continued their business dealings after having claimed to have ceased as a candidate. If they didn't feel they were doing anything improper, why did they lie to the American people and during subsequent…

They lied for political reasons. Cohen's lie was simply to 'move back the date' of the end of the discussions from August, to mid Spring. It was a campaign kind of lie, a lie of perceptions. Cohen et. al. wanted to simply make it clear that the 'end of Russia discussions' was well before the nomination, and not near to it, purely for optics. That's why it's an utterly stupid thing to do. It was a stupid, needless lik…

> Cohen et. al. wanted to simply make it clear that the 'end of Russia discussions' was well before the nomination, and not near to it, purely for optics.

"Purely for optics."

Why would the optics look bad?

Because what they did was a way in which corruption often happens, eg a foreign government rewarding someone for losing an election but causing a political disturbance, and they lied about it because they knew it would look bad during an investigation. We can see the Chinese rewarding the Trumps with various favors, eg trademarks, for an example of how this kind of corruption actually happens, and why people would have been suspicious of the Trump dealings.

You're correct: each misdeed of the Trump organization could be explained by bumbling -- a coin-flip between incompetence and malice.

Unfortunately, there's a large number of such questionable practices, and the intersection of a high number of overlapping events is actually a large degree of certainty.

The simplest explanation is the preferred:

Trump is a career criminal, who committed multiple kinds of crimes during the presidential election, ranging from campaign finance violations to colluding with Russian intelligence operatives. He did this not because he's some kind of deep-sleeper agent from Russia, or whatever media narrative has formed, but rather because he's an out-of-touch sociopath who has been sheltered by wealth and legitimately doesn't understand why breaking national security law to enrich himself is wrong. But he did it, along with the other crimes, and knowingly orchestrated the whole series of crimes. As he's been doing for years, through the Trump Foundation, Trump University, his frequent defrauding of contractors, etc.

So yes, he "colluded", but out of stupidity and incompetence, not thoughtful malice.

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

#69
post #50

I would argue that the US invasion of Iraq (WMD), the Vietnam War (Gulf of Tonkin), or the Spanish-American War (remember the Maine) have exposed the fallibility and blindness of mainstream press to counter-naratives in pursuit of being first / having an article about the issue of the day. The broader point about clicks is that the economic model behind the US press changed from a subsidized press to a for-profit pre…

When was the US press subsidized?

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

#70
post #55
post #50

I would argue that the US invasion of Iraq (WMD), the Vietnam War (Gulf of Tonkin), or the Spanish-American War (remember the Maine) have exposed the fallibility and blindness of mainstream press to counter-naratives in pursuit of being first / having an article about the issue of the day. The broader point about clicks is that the economic model behind the US press changed from a subsidized press to a for-profit pre…

And there's the nearly 20 year old elephant in the room...

...September 11th, 2001? How is that involved? Or did you mean something else?
Post reply on HN