6 ms·

> lies about our elections for the past 4 years the media spun a narrative of Russian collusion, one that largely proved to be false and filled with fabricated

> lies about our elections for the past 4 years the media spun a narrative of Russian collusion, one that largely proved to be false and filled with fabricated stories. Nanci Pelosi tweet May 2017: Our election was hijacked. There is no question. Congress has a duty to #ProtectOurDemocracy & #FollowTheFacts. https://twitter.com/speakerpelosi/status/864522009048494080?lang=en https://twitter.com/speakerpelosi/status/864522009048494080?...

hehehaha 6y ago
You mean the investigation that the Trump administration actively obstructed?
- whateveracct 6y ago
  wonder why this is downvoted it's pretty fact-based and in plain sight probably normal HN bias?
  - hehehaha 6y ago
    Think it came off as political. Wasn’t my intention.
    - whateveracct 6y ago
      HNers take any claim of Trump criminality as political. Kinda skeevy but it is what it is.
- razius 6y ago
  Yet she wasn't purged from all social media?
ChrisLomont 6y ago
>the media spun a narrative of Russian collusion No, the media spun the narrative of Russian interference, with possible collusion, something that turned out to be true (interference) and collusion was left uncertain (Muller stated quite clearly that if he could show Trump didn't collude, then Mueller would have said so, but that he was not going to say so). "'The president was not exculpated for the acts that he allegedly committed,' Mueller told the House judiciary committee, adding that Trump could theoretically be indicted after he leaves office." [1] Then the Trump DOJ didn't release the summary of the report, but their edited version, leaving plenty out, in order to get people like you to write what you just did. Mueller was so outraged at how the DOJ spun the report, that he immediately did a press conference about it, an unprecedented step. Here is Mueller's letter to Barr on exactly this [2]. Once Trump is out of office, and several years have gone by without charges, then maybe you can claim these concerns were false, but they most certainly were not fabrications or lies. [1] https://www.politico.eu/article/mueller-refutes-trumps-no-collusion-no-obstruction-line/ https://www.politico.eu/article/mueller-refutes-trumps-no-co... [2] https://www.npr.org/2019/05/01/719004457/read-muellers-letter-expressing-concern-about-barr-s-summary-of-his-report https://www.npr.org/2019/05/01/719004457/read-muellers-lette...
- the_drunkard 6y ago
  > but they most certainly were not fabrications or lies. i'd strongly beg to differ. fake news was at its peak during the first two years of "Russia-gate" with networks reporting on hearsay and drawing wild conclusions irrespective of hard evidence. journalistic integrity was thrown to the wind. it seemed as if every week a "we got him" story broke only to fizzle as it turned out to be false. the linked article below offers some examples of these fake news stories about Trump. and I do recognize that the second quote is written by Barr, not Mueller. https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-mill...
  - filoeleven 6y ago
    I don’t think parent comment should be downvoted. I pushed back too in another comment above about the validation of evidence. IMO the evidence is mostly untested, and the_drunkard is correct about the media’s premature response. Also, given current events, here’s a fun quote from the linked article: > The Special Prosecutor literally became a religious figure during the last few years, with votive candles sold in his image and Saturday Night Live cast members singing “All I Want for Christmas is You” to him featuring the rhymey line: “Mueller please come through, because the only option is a coup.”
    - cafard 6y ago
      Wow. How did the cast of Saturday Night Live make it through Senate confirmation?
  - ChrisLomont 6y ago
    You present an opinion piece from Matt Taibbi on substack (where anyone can publish anything) as evidence of what mainstream news was writing? You might as well cite any fringe blogger. Your proof is like some idiot writing Trump is an Alien Unicorn on a personal wordpress site then claiming mainstream news was calling Trump an Alien Unicorn. No wonder you're convinced of wild things. I'm done with this level of dishonesty.
filoeleven 6y ago
> Nanci Pelosi tweet May 2017: Our election was hijacked. There is no question. Congress has a duty to #ProtectOurDemocracy & #FollowTheFacts. Which...they didn’t do. Republicans blocked having witnesses or documents appear during the Senate impeachment proceedings. So no, collusion was not largely proven to be false, because once it moved to the Senate, nobody was called to testify under oath since Republicans blocked it. The Mueller report remains largely unvetted, and while its conclusions are weak due to Justice Department policy on what a sitting president can be charged with (or accused of? I am not clear on this distinction), its evidence appears to be strong. We don’t know if it holds up or not. It was never rigorously examined, because Republicans blocked it.
- the_drunkard 6y ago
  > It was never rigorously examined, because Republicans blocked it. in my opinion, the objective person would likely agree that Trump and his campaign have been rigorously examined both formally (by Mueller and his team) and informally (by the media). i don't intend to change topics here, but in context of your usage of "never rigorously examined" one could point to Hunter Biden's international dealings as lacking rigorous examination, as stories on this topic have even been actively suppressed.
  - creato 6y ago
    The Mueller report is pretty damning. Unfortunately almost no one actually read it, and Barr's "summary" was allowed to dominate the news before it was released.
unethical_ban 6y ago
> one that largely proved to be false and filled with fabricated stories. And that's bullshit. Mueller Report was a damning document that Mueller didn't have the guts to force Barr's hand, and Barr gleefully lied about and declined prosecution. Furthermore, the objections by many about the election being "hijacked" was not an actual claim to voter-box or voter fraud, but of disinformation and foreign interference. You should stop posting false whatabouts on HN, it's unbecoming.
- the_drunkard 6y ago
  please don't take my comment out of context. i was referring to the narratives spun by the media as largely being false and filled with fabricated stories, not the Mueller report (something you're clearly still clinging to). as recent as June of 2020 the NYT ran a piece about "Russian bounties in Afghanistan" that was effectively walked back shortly thereafter after it was deemed "less than conclusive". https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/us/politics/russia-afghanistan-bounties.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/us/politics/russia-afghan... https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/u-s-officials-say-intel-russian-bounties-was-less-conclusive-n1233199 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/u-s-offic... https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1282646230779285504 https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1282646230779285504 i hope you find this more... becoming :)

hehehaha 6y ago

You mean the investigation that the Trump administration actively obstructed?

whateveracct 6y ago
wonder why this is downvoted it's pretty fact-based and in plain sight probably normal HN bias?
- hehehaha 6y ago
  Think it came off as political. Wasn’t my intention.
  - whateveracct 6y ago
    HNers take any claim of Trump criminality as political. Kinda skeevy but it is what it is.
razius 6y ago
Yet she wasn't purged from all social media?

ChrisLomont 6y ago

>the media spun a narrative of Russian collusion No, the media spun the narrative of Russian interference, with possible collusion, something that turned out to be true (interference) and collusion was left uncertain (Muller stated quite clearly that if he could show Trump didn't collude, then Mueller would have said so, but that he was not going to say so). "'The president was not exculpated for the acts that he allegedly committed,' Mueller told the House judiciary committee, adding that Trump could theoretically be indicted after he leaves office." [1] Then the Trump DOJ didn't release the summary of the report, but their edited version, leaving plenty out, in order to get people like you to write what you just did. Mueller was so outraged at how the DOJ spun the report, that he immediately did a press conference about it, an unprecedented step. Here is Mueller's letter to Barr on exactly this [2]. Once Trump is out of office, and several years have gone by without charges, then maybe you can claim these concerns were false, but they most certainly were not fabrications or lies. [1] https://www.politico.eu/article/mueller-refutes-trumps-no-collusion-no-obstruction-line/ https://www.politico.eu/article/mueller-refutes-trumps-no-co... [2] https://www.npr.org/2019/05/01/719004457/read-muellers-letter-expressing-concern-about-barr-s-summary-of-his-report https://www.npr.org/2019/05/01/719004457/read-muellers-lette...

the_drunkard 6y ago
> but they most certainly were not fabrications or lies. i'd strongly beg to differ. fake news was at its peak during the first two years of "Russia-gate" with networks reporting on hearsay and drawing wild conclusions irrespective of hard evidence. journalistic integrity was thrown to the wind. it seemed as if every week a "we got him" story broke only to fizzle as it turned out to be false. the linked article below offers some examples of these fake news stories about Trump. and I do recognize that the second quote is written by Barr, not Mueller. https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-mill...
- filoeleven 6y ago
  I don’t think parent comment should be downvoted. I pushed back too in another comment above about the validation of evidence. IMO the evidence is mostly untested, and the_drunkard is correct about the media’s premature response. Also, given current events, here’s a fun quote from the linked article: > The Special Prosecutor literally became a religious figure during the last few years, with votive candles sold in his image and Saturday Night Live cast members singing “All I Want for Christmas is You” to him featuring the rhymey line: “Mueller please come through, because the only option is a coup.”
  - cafard 6y ago
    Wow. How did the cast of Saturday Night Live make it through Senate confirmation?
- ChrisLomont 6y ago
  You present an opinion piece from Matt Taibbi on substack (where anyone can publish anything) as evidence of what mainstream news was writing? You might as well cite any fringe blogger. Your proof is like some idiot writing Trump is an Alien Unicorn on a personal wordpress site then claiming mainstream news was calling Trump an Alien Unicorn. No wonder you're convinced of wild things. I'm done with this level of dishonesty.

filoeleven 6y ago

> Nanci Pelosi tweet May 2017: Our election was hijacked. There is no question. Congress has a duty to #ProtectOurDemocracy & #FollowTheFacts. Which...they didn’t do. Republicans blocked having witnesses or documents appear during the Senate impeachment proceedings. So no, collusion was not largely proven to be false, because once it moved to the Senate, nobody was called to testify under oath since Republicans blocked it. The Mueller report remains largely unvetted, and while its conclusions are weak due to Justice Department policy on what a sitting president can be charged with (or accused of? I am not clear on this distinction), its evidence appears to be strong. We don’t know if it holds up or not. It was never rigorously examined, because Republicans blocked it.

the_drunkard 6y ago
> It was never rigorously examined, because Republicans blocked it. in my opinion, the objective person would likely agree that Trump and his campaign have been rigorously examined both formally (by Mueller and his team) and informally (by the media). i don't intend to change topics here, but in context of your usage of "never rigorously examined" one could point to Hunter Biden's international dealings as lacking rigorous examination, as stories on this topic have even been actively suppressed.
- creato 6y ago
  The Mueller report is pretty damning. Unfortunately almost no one actually read it, and Barr's "summary" was allowed to dominate the news before it was released.

unethical_ban 6y ago

> one that largely proved to be false and filled with fabricated stories. And that's bullshit. Mueller Report was a damning document that Mueller didn't have the guts to force Barr's hand, and Barr gleefully lied about and declined prosecution. Furthermore, the objections by many about the election being "hijacked" was not an actual claim to voter-box or voter fraud, but of disinformation and foreign interference. You should stop posting false whatabouts on HN, it's unbecoming.

the_drunkard 6y ago
please don't take my comment out of context. i was referring to the narratives spun by the media as largely being false and filled with fabricated stories, not the Mueller report (something you're clearly still clinging to). as recent as June of 2020 the NYT ran a piece about "Russian bounties in Afghanistan" that was effectively walked back shortly thereafter after it was deemed "less than conclusive". https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/us/politics/russia-afghanistan-bounties.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/us/politics/russia-afghan... https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/u-s-officials-say-intel-russian-bounties-was-less-conclusive-n1233199 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/u-s-offic... https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1282646230779285504 https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1282646230779285504 i hope you find this more... becoming :)