Thread by @ggreenwald

The New Yorker and The Atlantic were the two mainstream magazines that did the most to help convince Americans that Saddam had WMDs. They're the two that were the most fanatical about Russiagate conspiracies. Now they'll lead on Iran and the bomb (Jeffrey Goldberg has for years):

Whenever there's an insane, unhinged, deranged conspiracy pushed by the CIA and the other US security services, you can be sure that The Atlantic and the New Yorker will be in the lead endorsing and ratifying it. That's one of their primary functions.

So revealing: the same CNN writer who wrote yesterday's predictable @NewYorker attack on Dan Bongino -- @eosnos -- which accused Bongino of profiting by spreading unhinged conspiracy theories, was the lead writer of the @NewYorker cover story depicting Putin in control of the WH.

The other attack on Bongino by @eosnos was that Bongino only speaks to a like-minded, ideologically homogenous audience. Meanwhile, Osnos spent all day re-tweeting praise of his article exclusively from Dem partisans. Do you see how they always accuse others of what they are?

The @NewYorker has the gall to run hit pieces accusing their targets of spreading conspiracy theories when they a) led the way claiming Saddam was in an alliance with Al Qaeda, b) pushed the deranged conspiracy that Putin took over the US and c) did this:

The pinned tweet of CNN's @eosnos, who wrote the color-by-numbers @NewYorker profile accusing Dan Bongino of spreading conspiracies to like-minded viewers. That's all these people do: babble about Russiagate and The Insurrection™ to like-minded liberals:

It's true that much (though not all) of right-wing media airs conservative views to conservatives, but that's because the corporate media turned itself into an insular, dissent-free echo chamber that serves only liberals. Amazing that *this person* can accuse *others* of that.