,
5 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
I agree w/ this. And I'd also include many other top left outlets including @democracynow (whose go-to Russiagate analyst was Marcy Wheeler) & the editorial leadership of @TheIntercept (Glenn Greenwald & Jeremy Scahill are not editors there, so this view does not refer to them).
Here's @TheIntercept's EIC mocking those who lack "nuance or intelligence"; believe "anything that the [IC] says can’t possibly be true"; & "continue to doubt the existence of some kind of relationship between Russia & the Trump campaign," which we know of "thanks to Mueller." 
On top of the key assertion turning out to be blatantly wrong (we know there is no Trump-Russia conspiracy “thanks to Mueller”), there’s another irony in accusing skeptics of lacking “nuance” while falsely claiming we believe “anything that the [IC] says can’t possibly be true.”
Anyone with any actual sense of nuance would know that no leading Russiagate skeptic believes "anything that the [IC] says can’t possibly be true.” That’s the most un-nuanced, and false, generalization you could make. We believe in not believing claims on faith. That should be a
basic tenet for any journalist, let alone an EIC — whether they grasp nuance or not.
