Now I say perhaps because these two takes from @JoyAnnReid should be etched into stone for the rest of human history.
But maybe the all-time best comes from - who else - @JRubinBlogger, who politely asked Avenatti to consider running for Congress before running for President (“I love ya, but…”)
But don’t be fooled. This wasn’t just the fangirling daydreams of a few chatty media types.
We had countless stories just like this one from @NBCNews that helped build Avenatti into a folk icon.
They have…not aged perfectly.
There were a lot of takes about how brilliant Avenatti was, so well positioned to strike at Trump, so likely to be his undoing.
This from @latimes captures the sentiment well. “Trump meets his match”
I’m…not confident this should be the takeaway, @JuliaDavisNews.
For @USATODAY, Avenatti had “cornered” the President and his team (this was around impeachment - Avenatti repeatedly said Trump wouldn’t serve out his term)
Some of the framing was…a little much.
Here, @frankrichny for @NYMag says that, despite the criticism, Avenatti is “the one media whore I can’t get enough of”
There were loving profiles in places like @nytimes.
(That also includes glowing actual coverage about Avenatti and, as we’ll get to soon, his future ambitions).
But it wasn’t just the Times who profiled him. Here’s @NPR which, as a reminder, gets a cut of your tax dollars, doing the same.
And of course the media hung on every twist and turn of the Avenatti saga.
Who can forget the fawning coverage of his presidential ambitions?
I’m not sure the idea that “Michael Avenatti’s Past Won’t Stop Him” - running for President or otherwise - has held up @TIME.
But the worst outlet had to be @MSNBC. Avenatti was a regular fixture on the outlet. They all but played comms director for him, even covering his Twitter spats with President Trump.
@maddow helped push some serious propaganda. And @AriMelber I…I don’t know what to tell you.
A few predictions & other commentary on the network haven’t exactly aged perfectly.
@JoeNBC, might you have preferred your original skepticism?
And @JonathanTurley, do you still stand by the idea that “the Michael I know would not make any allegations that he couldn’t back up”?
Again, the coverage was weird. But I think I will - in this case and in all others - dispute the suggestion that “CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin is America” @washingtonpost@AlexHortonTX
There should be an enormous lesson here: the media is incredibly vulnerable to a certain variety of camera-savvy huckster who tells them what they want to hear.
The media was the mark, and boy did they get taken by Michael Avenatti.
The question now becomes: will anyone learn anything?
Alas, my hunch is no. No one has faced consequences from promoting and fawning over the fraud of Avenatti. Avenatti was good for business. And we’ll see more like him in no time.
Avenatti is the apotheosis of a character that’s been all-too-common in the Trump era: a thinly veiled fraud whom the media push because they say mean things about a Republican.
If the media hopes to build any trust with the American people, they need to stop creating Avenattis.
With the pandemic in the rearview mirror, it can be easy to forget the destruction that it caused.
Food banks have been hit hard. In your charity, if you liked the thread, a donation to Capital Area Food Bank would go a long way. capitalareafoodbank.org
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
With the news that Trump freed the hostages and brokered an Israel/Hamas ceasefire, I thought it would be a good time to check in on the folks who compared the president to Hitler over the last few years, for reasons that I hope are obvious to you.
Remember? ⤵️
You may think the “Trump is literally Hitler” phrase is just a silly joke.
But for years, media outlets and left-wing voices on the internet have insisted that, no, really, Trump is just like Hitler.
Few have done so with as much gusto as @CNN.
Back in 2016, @CNN alleged that Trump rallies were just like Hitler rallies because…Trump had attendees raise their right hands.
A newly declassified CIA report on Joe Biden & Ukraine blows the doors off claims from the legacy press, in the lead up to the 2020 election and beyond, that Trump was pushing a “conspiracy theory” about Biden’s corruption.
Remember how the press buried Burisma? ⤵️
First, the facts. The report unearths how Biden blocked the release of intel from Ukrainian sources validating allegations of bribery tied to Biden’s diplomatic push to oust a prosecutor there in 2015, tied to his son Hunter’s work with the gas company Burisma.
You may remember this story because Biden’s having helped oust a prosecutor in a foreign country to allegedly protect his family’s corruption came up in the 2020 election.
To hear @ABC tell it, that was a “debunked Ukraine conspiracy theory.”
The media are melting down about former FBI director Jim Comey’s indictment, calling it Trump’s “retribution.”
But if prosecuting a political rival is such an outrage, why’d they cheer along when Biden went after Trump, Bannon & Navarro?
Some side-by-sides ⤵️
I want you to help me spot the difference in tone.
With Comey, @CNN put five — five! — reporters on the byline to declare the indictment was an “escalation” in “Trump’s effort to prosecute his political enemies.”
Where was that when Biden’s DOJ indicted Bannon? “A victory”
And @CNN wasn’t any better on Peter Navarro, another Trump aide indicted under Biden.
Rather than an “effort to prosecute…political enemies,” CNN quoted the prosecutor to tell the story.
Why is the claim of the government the framing of the piece under Biden? I have a guess.
The outrage over Kimmel’s canning is incredibly stupid, but it’s also enormously rich coming from the same media outlets who have cheered the government actually censoring people, particularly during COVID.
Let me know if you can spot the difference in tone? ⤵️
This @CNN headline made me think this story needed a thread.
Kimmel’s suspension is “straight from a European strongman’s playbook,” per @CNN’s @brianstelter.
When Biden cracked down on free speech during Covid, CNN hyped up the effort.
Few promoted the government’s actual attack on free speech more aggressively than the same @brianstelter now calling a comedian’s shelving evidence of autocracy, or something.
I know there’s a lot going on but we just had a media conspiracy implode that I think captures something important about the corporate press.
Did you hear about how Trump was allegedly going after John Bolton as retribution for his criticism?
Well…follow along ⤵️
We saw a week straight of media suggestions that Trump was abusing the powers of the state to deal out “retribution” to John Bolton following the news that the FBI (“Trump’s DOJ!” headlines rang out) raided his house.
We were in “unsettling” times, to hear @nytimes tell it.
The *Editorial Board* at @nytimes put out an even more dramatic statement, asking who Trump’s next payback victim after Bolton would be.
A single poll has bootstrapped a media narrative that DC residents are outraged by Trump’s takeover.
I poked around the cross tabs of the poll — of 600 or so of DC’s more comfortable residents — and I think it’s pretty suspect.
How come? Follow along: ⤵️
Let’s start with the poll. The @washingtonpost talked to 604 people, of whom 90% — 90%! — self-described as living in “very good” or “good” neighborhoods.
So, fine. 80% of people who like where they live in DC are upset.
But even beyond that, it’s worth asking whether this poll really captures DC’s opinion.
In the poll, only 31% describe crime as a “serious” or “very serious” problem in DC.
When @washingtonpost asked this same question in May, *50%* said it was a serious problem.