*Trump partisan sycophant, who Trump nominated to his position does a thing*
Aha, it's clear that this guy is a rogue Deep State saboteur. A principled peace-man like Trump (who I do not support) would never!
Lol even the very article Glem cites explicitly says that Trump was the one who ordered but he is so pathologically wedded to the Trump Innocent narrative, he has to create some laughable 'Deep State' conspiracy.
During the good ol' "Russia Hoax" days, Glem used to knock all the people who took 'thinly sourced' stories like this one as blind partisans who would believe anything.......and in arguing with one of the authors of this piece, no less. But this one is different (confirms biases)
Again, it's clear who this story is about.......Joe Biden. And uhh the deep state but not Donald Trump. Maybe Obama, but definitely not Donald Trump.
Again, if you are taking this story at face value, this is just a straight up lie. The story says Trump was the one who suggested 'assassinating' Assange (in a non-interventionist manner) & The Deep State laughed it off as ridiculous.
Grim & Glem just can't stop lying.
And again, this is the type of sourcing that Glenn & co immediately wrote off as garbage nonsense during the Russia saga, when it went against his narrative. When it's something useful, well then it's just total fact.
You guys know who the real journalistic hero of this story is? That's right, it's Tucker Carlson, of course.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
People ask, 'how could voters believe Dems have positions that they don't actually believe?' Well it's because the GOP bombarded them with lies about Dems and there's just not a great answer for such weaponized shamelessness. Truth just does not work.
The GOP (and its wealthy financial backers) have basically weaponized disinformation/lies to a completely unprecedent degree. And with the rise of technology are able to pump it out completely unchallenged (especially since social media outlets have completely given up).
So the NYT politics guys did a Reddit AMA several days ago. This was the top upvoted post. And then the extremely predictable (point proving) response.
And the predictably smug/condescending follow-up
Needless to say, they were heavily down-voted and deluged with (acurate) negative comments like these
#factcheck: Hamas is not keeping the hostages to rape them, they are just raping the hostages they are keeping for unrelated other reasons.
What....is even going on anymore?
I just don't understand why certain people feel the need to downplay Hamas' awfulness. It's not that hard to say that Hamas is an evil terrorist group, while also believing that innocent people do not deserve to die because of it.
Again, contra the lame "oh so you blindly trust the US govt" line from the above uhh journalists, the actual things to weigh:
Side 1- Israeli govt, US govt, every open-source analyst on this site & most importantly, the fact that the hospital was not destroyed
Side 2- Hamas' word
So yeah, I guess it's a real he-said, she-said if you just ignore everything but the competing government claims & also only pretend that the USG/Israel's 'lies' matter and not the fact that the initial claims by Hamas of the hospital being destroyed & 500-1000 dead, were a lie.
A lot of people I respect really, really showed their asses. And if they want to be able to maintain any sort of 'high ground' when it comes to journalistic integrity, really should at least make a basic statement that they got out over their skis.
And of course a lot of people who I don't really respect, but I don't expect them to ever admit they were wrong. Because that's just not what people do #onhere.
I'm not slightly 'gloating'. This entire site & almost all of the media falsely/uncritically ran with a characterization that relied solely on Hamas' word and created a major international incident. Sorry, if you don't think that deserves to be called out.