A timely reminder that in 2016, several major journalists were revealed to be explicitly coordinating with the Clinton campaign or—at the very least—favoring it and working closely with it. None suffered consequences. These folks will help shape 2020 coverage.
WaPo columnist Dana Milbank, who recently accused Mitch McConnell of being a Russian asset ("Moscow Mitch"), apparently asked the DNC in 2016 for oppo research on Trump. 2/ dailycaller.com/2016/11/06/wik…
Glenn Thrush, then with Politico and now with the NYT, sent John Podesta a story for approval, asking "can I send u a couple of grafs OTR [off the record] to make sure I'm not fucking anything up?" 3/
Thrush also told Podesta "because I have become a hack I will send u the whole section that pertains to u," and said,"please don't share or tell anyone I did this." 4/
And then there's John Harwood of CNBC, who consistently tweets misleading and critical takes on the economy. Harwood's exchanges with Podesta included gloating about his questions at a 2015 GOP primary debate, among many others 5/ dailycaller.com/2016/10/11/nyt…
Mark Leibovitch, the Chief National Correspondent for NYT Magazine, told HRC aide Jennifer Palmieri she could "veto whatever [she] didn't want" before he published a story titled "Re-Re-Re-Reintroducing Hillary Clinton." He cut parts she objected to. 6/ newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/scott…
Ken Vogel sent the DNC Communications Director an article about the HRC campaign's fundraising ahead of time, "as long as [the director] didn't share it." Politico acknowledged that doing so was "a mistake." 7/ huffpost.com/entry/politico…
And of course, Maggie Haberman—then with Politico and now with the NYT—was singled out by HRC spokesman Nick Merrill as a "friendly journalist" who was "safe" and had "teed up stories" for the campaign in the past and "never disappointed" them. 8/
I'm sure there are many other examples, but these are just a few.
In short, it's hard to dismiss accusations of media bias when a number of prominent journos at major organizations actively worked with a Dem campaign in 2016 but are still on the 2020 beat. 9/
Whether you like Trump or hate him, things like this are a stain on the journalism industry. And they're a prime example of why half of the country doesn't trust what they hear from major media outlets. Trump didn't create distrust in media, he exploited it. /fin
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
After “reopening” their investigation into the Kabul bombing and finally admitting the bomber escaped from Bagram after we abandoned it, the Biden DoD still insists the attack “was not preventable” because…some other suicide bomber would have done it anyway. 1/
The administration began with the conclusion that the attack was “not preventable” and worked backwards, and they refuse to admit otherwise no matter what. 2/
Jerry and I reported a bunch of key facts that the Biden Admin refused to admit, including that Abdul Rahman al-Logari was the ISIS-K terrorist whom the Taliban freed from prison around August 15 after Biden abandoned Bagram in July. 3/
There’s one part of the Afghanistan fiasco that's been mostly ignored, and it’s been nagging at me. It was a decision Biden made himself.
It led to more Americans left behind and factored into the bombing.
We detail it in Kabul, but here's a summary: 1/ amzn.to/3PuzSNy
Right after Kabul fell, the administration got lots of heat about the low numbers of people evacuated. At the time, we were only evacuating Americans and Afghan allies. Of course, the numbers were tiny because the administration failed to plan and no systems were in place yet. 2/
With scenes of civilians flooding the airfield and falling off planes on TV across the globe and constant questions from the press about the slow pace of evacuations, Biden panicked. 3/ amzn.to/3PuzSNy
Like, FFS. There was a story today about people lighting homes with children inside on fire and then blocking fire engines from responding. They're burning family-owned businesses and beating up elderly women. How much more evidence do you need, @Yamiche?
lol at all of the folks like @gtconway3d who are ostensibly committed to upholding American ideals—like, say, not rioting and burning small businesses—but tweet things like #WeLoveYamiche to own Drumpf.
It’s hard to think of something more vile than exploiting a sacred day like Memorial Day to push for universal mail-in voting. The point is to honor those who gave everything for this country—not to push domestic political perspectives. This is just gross.
I might add that this is an especially gross coming from a dude who pushed the Iraq from the safety of his desk, assured everyone that our troops would be welcomed as liberators, and said it would last “weeks, not months.”
In a just society, Bill’s record would make him ashamed to weigh in on the record about things of this nature. But Bill is clearly incapable of shame and simply bitter that he has lost his stature on the right.
Once you realize that it’s nearly been a decade since any member of the Lincoln Project was involved in a successful GOP campaign, you understand why this collection of individuals is jumping on this bandwagon. If you’re a strategist who can’t win, gotta stay relevant another way
No one is pretending you’re required to vote for Trump. So, with that said, I would love for a single member of the Lincoln Project to explain to me how affirmatively voting for a candidate who wants to use taxpayer dollars to fund abortions is truly “conservative.”
A thread on the election of China's handpicked Director-General, Tedros Ghebreyesus (the first non-physician to ever lead the organization, FWIW), and how he came to lead the organization tasked with out global health. (Spoiler: he was supported by many current armchair QBs)
1/
The procedure for choosing the Director General changed in 2016. "Previously, the WHO’s leaders were selected by the executive board, and merely ratified by the Assembly five months later." humanosphere.org/world-politics…
2/
In the 2017 vote, the leader was chosen by a secret-ballot vote, in which even the smallest countries (33k+ citizens) had the same voting power as countries like India. Who does that benefit? China, upon whom many developing countries now rely financially.