Rachel Maddow is excoriated by Rolling Stone columnist and Substack author Matt Taibbi here:
If I were Rachel Maddow and had a record of saying things on air like, “Above all else, we know this about the now-famous dossier: Christopher Steele had this story before the rest of America did. And he got it from Russian sources,” news like the Dolan item would make me furious. Not only did she flog the Steele document for years, she specifically hyped its credibility on the grounds of how it was put together, and by whom.
Now, we find out that the actual construction of the reports was like something out of a Three Stooges episode, with Igor, Chuck, and a Bronx Zoo zebra standing in for Moe, Larry, and Curly. The mere fact that some of Steele’s supposed “Russian sources” turned out to be this absurd stateside parade would have any honest journalist fuming.
Rachel not only isn’t upset, she’s expressing pride in having been burned, and is digging in for more.
She aired a report last night in reaction to the Durham indictment that painted the exercise as an effort by a Trump-appointed Special Counsel to exact revenge for the Russiagate investigation, using a spooky graphic that read “Payback?” As for the aforementioned details about Danchenko’s stimulating trip to New York and Dolan’s “fabricated” story (and those were only a few of many damning tales in the document), Maddow said:
But is also worth noting that this new indictment, just like the last one, spends comparatively little time talking about these false statements, and a lot of time talking about who Igor Danchenko came into contact with, or talked to, who are — horror of horrors — Democrats.
This is just a lie: the indictment spends a ton of time talking about the false statements. Moreover, the significance of Danchenko’s contact with Democrats isn’t that he associated with people of a certain political persuasion, but that, in the case of Dolan at least, this particular American Democrat was a source for the supposedly damning oppo research file both the Party and people like Rachel howled over for years. It’s a story about fake news, not ideology.
The most generous explanation for Rachel’s reporting of Russiagate has been incompetence, i.e. she and her network were duped by unscrupulous sources selling an irresistibly sexy, but flawed, ratings-magnet of a story. For those who’ve forgotten how craven the approach was, here’s the famed mashup of one night of “Russia” references on her show during the height of the Russia panic:
Entire swaths of the media owe President Trump apologies over the Russia hoax, which he’ll probably never get, but perhaps none so much as Maddow and MSNBC.
Action Line: Don’t believe everything you hear.
E.J. Smith - Your Survival Guy
Latest posts by E.J. Smith - Your Survival Guy (see all)
- Remembering Ronald Read Who Died with an $8 Million Fortune - September 23, 2022
- DeSantis Describes the Great American Exodus - September 23, 2022
- Honey, Where’d all the Covid Money Go? - September 23, 2022
- How Long Will Your Pension Fund Last? - September 23, 2022
- Sink Your Teeth into These Bond Yields - September 22, 2022