Read on Twitter
Fang is lying about me in his defense of Taibbi. My point was that Taibbi chose to misrepresent CIS as CIS[A] to make his argument both in Congress & in the Twitter Files. He intentionally changed a quote. That may not bother Fang, who has now left The Intercept, but it should.
Funnily enough, Fang nowhere in his piece addresses my central charge, which Taibbi tbf copped to in the interview!, but constructs a strawman argument about me in order to knock it down. I literally wrote a book about lazy and cynical moves like this.
bookshop.org/p/books/win-ev…
bookshop.org/p/books/win-ev…
“ Mehdi Hasan's claim that EIP only partnered with CIS, not CISA” - where do I make this claim? Where do I say ‘only’? Note the glaring lack of quotes from me in the Fang piece, which is revealing and a quality of people who lack editors (and integrity.)
“Hasan is wrong and presents a deeply distorted view of the mechanics of this process. Taibbi’s testimony, especially the video excerpted by Hasan, is accurate.”
It’s literally not. He read out the email incorrectly to Congress! Fang is defending something Taibbi admitted to!
It’s literally not. He read out the email incorrectly to Congress! Fang is defending something Taibbi admitted to!
Look, I get it. @lhfang was a polarizing guy at The Intercept, where he launched attacks on his own colleagues, including me, which he apologized for. Now he’s left TI & trying to make Substack money by attacking me & sucking up to Musk. I get it. It’s embarrassing. But I get it.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
