This story from @kenvogel of the @nytimes tonight is really something else. To be clear, shedding light on a rich guy wanting to buy a newspaper is fair game. What’s infuriating about this is similar to what’s maddening about many of Vogel’s stories: he decides on a thesis and then strains to support it w/ facts, or omits facts to support a narrative.

On Friday, the NYT did a piece about a podcast Secretary Clinton did with David Plouffe. They incorrectly quoted her saying that the “Russians” were “grooming” a candidate running in the Democratic primary. They rightfully fixed it to reflect that she was taking about the GOP. In yesterday’s paper, @superwuster wrote an opinion piece accusing Secretary Clinton of trading in conspiracy theories, based off of comments that she didn’t make.

Let's go a little deeper, because while the email saga is long and complicated, and to Charles' good point was deeply, deeply distorted by the right, @billmaher is smarter than this, or at least has no excuse not to be.

https://twitter.com/Green_Footballs/status/1138474161699864576

First, thanks for telling us she was a terrible candidate. I think history will show us that there were far more latent sexists in the world than bad women candidates, especially since this candidate won the popular vote by a margin twice that of your viewership on a good night.

For those old enough to remember almost 4 years ago when The New York Times ran with a farce of a story about Uranium One, here is the same New York Times admitting the story was a sham today...leaving out that they created it.
nytimes.com/2019/02/19/us/… Here is the original Uranium One story on the NYT’s website, with no corrections or admission that it was “debunked,” as the above article confirms.

I hate talking about emails. I don’t want to talk about emails. We have so many other things to think about right now that are important to peoples’ lives and need solving, but this nonsense with Ivanka this morning was nothing short of outrageous. Take a moment to watch her interview:
abcnews.go.com/GMA/News/video…

Back in August, Admiral William McRaven penned a letter in the Washington Post in the aftermath of Trump revoking @JohnBrennan’s security clearance.
washingtonpost.com/opinions/revok… In his letter, he admonishes President Trump for this petty act, and says that Trump’s time as President has “embarrassed us in the eyes of our children, humiliated us on the world stage and, worst of all, divided us as a nation.”

In her speech at Oxford University today, @HillaryClinton:
“Now is the time to bring human rights out of the ivory tower & diplomatic conferences...into neighborhoods & schools, offices, factories, & farms...into the heart & daily interactions of men and women everywhere.” “All of us who care about the legacy of the Universal Dec of Human Rights should be very worried.

“But let us view this challenge not as an omen of defeat, but as a call to action. As Eleanor said, “courage is more exhilarating than fear, & in the long run, it is easier.”

A few points I'd make about this Q & the arrangement with the DNC writ large.
To Ryan's Qs:
1) HRC did the vast majority of the fundraising for HVF as the candidate atop the ticket.
2) The lists the DNC paid for were campaign lists, not lists created with HVF money.

https://twitter.com/ryangrim/status/991117049601626112

More broadly, I think there are a few contextual things that get lost here.
1) The Clinton campaign had no outstanding debt. So the DNC was left shouldering no financial burden as a result of the campaign. Not the norm. There was debt from 2012 that the DNC helped pay off.

It hasn’t always been a perfect relationship, that’s for sure. And to those out there who see this as an attack on a reporter, it’s not. I know Hunter well and we had a constructive conversation about this over DM.

https://twitter.com/hunterw/status/989136873875492865

Equally as constructive, here are some things @HillaryClinton said defending press freedoms in a speech just 3 days ago, on Sunday night at the PEN World Voices Festival.

Some thoughts having watched the Comey interview with George Stephanopoulos last night. Let's start by giving Comey his due and look at his premise for writing this book: Leadership.