3 ms·

> I don't think it's fair to say it was the correct choice. It's absolutely fair and the Mueller Report proved Greenwald was right all along: https://theinterc

by Nacdor 6y ago

> I don't think it's fair to say it was the correct choice. It's absolutely fair and the Mueller Report proved Greenwald was right all along: https://theintercept.com/2019/04/18/robert-mueller-did-not-merely-reject-the-trumprussia-conspiracy-theories-he-obliterated-them/ https://theintercept.com/2019/04/18/robert-mueller-did-not-m... > it's not like he works for MSNBC or CNN. There doesn't need to be some grand conspiracy among liberal journalists in order for them to engage in the partisan censorship he describes. It's clear that most of them believe supporting the "correct" candidate is far more important than publishing the truth.

rat87 6y ago
The Mueller report did no such thing.
nl 6y ago
> It's absolutely fair and the Mueller Report proved Greenwald was right all along So says... Greenwald. He's doing a classic strawman: claiming that the "Russian interference" claim was that the Trump campaign co-ordinated with Russia. Outside some fringe beliefs that isn't the claim: instead it was that Russia interfered in the election which was exactly what the report found. It found Russian intelligence agencies hacked the DNC, stole the emails and disseminated them via DCLeaks, Guccifer 2.0 and Wikileaks. In regards to involvement of Trump campaign personnel, Greenwald conveniently leaves out the multiple mentions of Paul Manfort (pg 52-55) which the Republican-led intelligence committee confirms "One of Manafort’s closest aides during his time in Ukraine was Konstantin Kilimnik, who the Senate report identifies as a Russian intelligence officer." It's ironic that Greenwald would do what he claims other publications do: only publish material which confirms his views. [1] https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_volume5.pdf https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/docu... [2] https://theintercept.com/2020/09/03/trump-russia-senate-report-mueller/ https://theintercept.com/2020/09/03/trump-russia-senate-repo...
rainonmoon 6y ago
Linking to an article by Greenwald about how Greenwald was right all along is pretty spurious, to say the least. Even more so when there are plenty of non-Greenwald sources, like the ones involved in the Special Counsel investigation, which state exactly the opposite. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/04/complete-total-exoneration-team-mueller-nope-not-so-much https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/04/complete-...

by Nacdor 6y ago

rat87 6y ago

The Mueller report did no such thing.

nl 6y ago

> It's absolutely fair and the Mueller Report proved Greenwald was right all along So says... Greenwald. He's doing a classic strawman: claiming that the "Russian interference" claim was that the Trump campaign co-ordinated with Russia. Outside some fringe beliefs that isn't the claim: instead it was that Russia interfered in the election which was exactly what the report found. It found Russian intelligence agencies hacked the DNC, stole the emails and disseminated them via DCLeaks, Guccifer 2.0 and Wikileaks. In regards to involvement of Trump campaign personnel, Greenwald conveniently leaves out the multiple mentions of Paul Manfort (pg 52-55) which the Republican-led intelligence committee confirms "One of Manafort’s closest aides during his time in Ukraine was Konstantin Kilimnik, who the Senate report identifies as a Russian intelligence officer." It's ironic that Greenwald would do what he claims other publications do: only publish material which confirms his views. [1] https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_volume5.pdf https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/docu... [2] https://theintercept.com/2020/09/03/trump-russia-senate-report-mueller/ https://theintercept.com/2020/09/03/trump-russia-senate-repo...

rainonmoon 6y ago

Linking to an article by Greenwald about how Greenwald was right all along is pretty spurious, to say the least. Even more so when there are plenty of non-Greenwald sources, like the ones involved in the Special Counsel investigation, which state exactly the opposite. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/04/complete-total-exoneration-team-mueller-nope-not-so-much https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/04/complete-...