4 ms·

Speaking of coordinated reporting, what ever happened to the Trump colluded with Putin to hack the election story? It's been bugging me for a long time. It jus

Speaking of coordinated reporting, what ever happened to the Trump colluded with Putin to hack the election story? It's been bugging me for a long time. It just dropped out of existence all of a sudden. For a couple of straight that made up what felt like 50% of everything I heard of coming out of most news corporations and politicians, talkshows, twiter, everywhere. Then suddenly they all pretty much in unison stopped talking about it. This is going off topic I realize, but it's bugged me. Does nobody care to follow up on this or find out who knew what and when and what went wrong? We were assured many times there was ample evidence of this by many politicians and journalists. So either it's been kept secret and even seemingly hidden from special council Mueller, or else it doesn't exist and it was all a huge coordinated lie. I don't really see a 3rd option, so anything would be a huge story I would have thought. Nobody seems to care though. EDIT: I have to ask who is down voting this. Am I not supposed to be wondering about this massively weird thing that happened and has apparently been memory holed? Is it verboten to ask the wrong questions?

dash2 5y ago
> or else it doesn't exist and it was all a huge coordinated lie. Or people were gullible, keen to sell an anti-Trump story, overestimated the chances of something being true, were embarrassed about it later...? I think that story is mostly dead but Matt Taibbi will probably tell you about it, in between ranting.
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  Well I don't know I don't think it's dead at all, it's massively interesting. It's not just hack entertainers masquerading as journalists selling tabloid conspiracy theories here, it was an entire political party (maybe both parties) plus the state security and surveillance apparatus who were all saying there was evidence here and going to secret courts and all this crazy stuff. Where is it? The Mueller report says plain as day they did not find evidence to substantiate claims that Trump or his campaign associates colluded (conspired) in any way with Russia.
dmpk2k 5y ago
> Nobody seems to care though. It would be more accurate to say that nobody who matters cares. Manufacturing Consent was broadly correct, but now add the surprising power of the Twitter echo chamber, where most American journalists spend their time. That, and Trump got eyeballs.
rsj_hn 5y ago
Why would media come up with such an absurd, 4chan-style conspiracy theory that Trump was a KGB puppet or that somehow Russia brainwashed people into voting for him? The only thing I can think of is the governing class was shocked and terrified by Trump winning the election and was scrambling for some kind of narrative, and so a random accusation used in the campaign became a Schelling point for "the resistance". It was not the result of cool deliberation, or thoughtful investigation into the facts. It was a cry of panic. But once it became the thing people rallied around, the news couldn't just backtrack and say "Yeah, this is cringe. Please ignore." So they had to keep pushing it, or at least pretend to treat it like it was a real story, and it was used as the cloak for impeachment and other types of political battles. This was the time when independent reporters like Glenn Greenwald and Matt Taibbi went full WTF mode on US news media, and were responsible for some of the most enjoyable picking apart of this narrative. Much better than the whole propaganda surrounding the invasion of Iraq, which was a war completely prosecuted on word-association - in which "Saddam" was pronounced next to "Al Qaeda" over and over again, in press conference after press conference and news reports ad nauseam until many otherwise honest people started saying "Yeah, they must be colluding together." But that was nothing compared to hordes of angry New England soccer moms wearing pussy hats marching against KGB-puppets seizing control of their nation. Someone needs to make a movie. But now there is no need for the "resistance" narrative and I'm sure almost everyone who participated in pushing that hoax turns a bit red when they look back on it. That's why you are not hearing a lot about it, just as people would prefer you not spend a lot of time thinking about Saddam's ties to Al Qaeda.
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  > But once it became the thing people rallied around, the news couldn't just backtrack and say "Yeah, this is cringe. Please ignore." Well firstly, why couldn't they do that? And secondly, why would they do that? If/when they realized it turned out to be wrong, doesn't the story then become who got it wrong and why? Why did no media organization start asking those questions? But secondly it wasn't just the news corporations involved in this. People like Schiff, sitting on the powerful house intelligence committee, were coming out and saying they had "ample evidence" Trump had colluded with Putin. Of course this is a newsworthy thing to report on, but where is that evidence? Did Adam never have any, or is he now hiding it (maybe he's been blackmailed by Putin too?) Why did Mueller's investigation string out for years only to come out and say they found no evidence to substantiate the claim Trump or campaign conspired with Russians? Why was that never clarified that the investigation did not actually have any evidence yet? And why haven't any real journalists from actual news organizations seriously been looking into these things? Just really weird that there was this massive story that was front page news literally for years that pretty much got memory-holed overnight one day.
standardUser 5y ago
There was a ton of follow up. Many people were charged and jailed, including many of the people closest to Donald Trump. It was all over the news.
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  I know about those, and they were not "follow up" or really close the whole strange issue about the Trump Russia scandal at all. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/20/17031772/mueller-indictments-grand-jury https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/20/17031772/m... 1) George Papadopoulos, former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, making false statements to the FBI. He got a 14-day sentence. 2) Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chair, was indicted on a total of 25 different counts by Mueller’s team, related mainly to his past work for Ukrainian politicians and his finances. 3) Rick Gates, a former Trump campaign aide and Manafort’s longtime junior business partner, was indicted on similar charges to Manafort. 4) Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, pleaded guilty in December 2017 to making false statements to the FBI. 36) Michael Cohen: In August 2018, Trump’s former lawyer pleaded guilty to 8 counts — tax and bank charges, related to his finances and taxi business, and campaign finance violations 37) Roger Stone: In January 2019, Mueller indicted longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone on 7 counts. He accused Stone of lying to the House Intelligence Committee about his efforts to get in touch with WikiLeaks during the campaign, and tampering with a witness who could have debunked his story. It wasn't all that many people at all really and none of the ones vaguely related to Trump had anything to do with colluding with Putin or hacking the election. Where was the evidence that kicked all this off? Where was the evidence that kept it all going for nearly 3 years? Even right after the Mueller report was released nobody retracted anything and everybody falsely claimed that it did not exonerate Trump, (which it pretty clearly did of the main thrust of the investigation and media circus that had gone on which was of Trump colluding with Putin to hack the election, for which Mueller stated clearly they found no substantial evidence for). Then everybody just kind of forgot about it and moved on. None of that strikes you as slightly odd? All seems above board, no unanswered questions left. Not concerned that maybe Putin got to Mueller and Schiff as well? Doesn't strike you as even slightly strange that all the news corporations who were banging the "ample evidence" that Trump colluded with Putin drum for years were suddenly perfectly fine with the Mueller report which said that no such evidence had ever been found? Not strange that any of these trusted journalists and truth seekers were placated by that and all in unison decided that was the end of the story, nothing more to investigate?
skinnymuch 5y ago
It was talked about for a long time. People went to prison or got in trouble. People don’t talk about Trump that much any more either. That’s just how the world works. It moves on very, very quickly. Almost everything gets memory holed. Besides 9/11 and a few other major major things, past stuff doesn’t get talked about much. Why is no one talking about whatever it was with Hunter Biden any more? Or Hillary’s emails? What about those caravans that were all supposed to be coming countless different times. None of this stuff is discussed any more. I’m not sure if you’re pulling an elaborate troll job here. The way you worded portions of this post is exactly how certain politicians also speak. The feigned surprise of it being all the rage then dropping out of existence. The questioning of why no one is doing something, etc.
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  > It was talked about for a long time. People went to prison or got in trouble. Have you read the Mueller report? It explicitly says that they did not find evidence that Trump or his associates colluded (conspired) with Russia. There were people who who weren't Trump who went to jail for things that did not include colluding with Russia or attempting to cheat in the election. I can't see how that possibly "settles" the matter about Trump, what happened to Trump being a Russian agent? What happened to him colluding with Putin to hack the election? > People don’t talk about Trump that much any more either. Well they do strangely enough, but I'm talking about after the investigation _while Trump was still president_! Not just today. They certainly kept talking about Trump, it's just they memory holed the Russia thing and moved on. > Why is no one talking about whatever it was with Hunter Biden any more? Good question I guess, lots of unanswered things or weirdness happens, I'm not saying this is the only thing strange that has ever happened in politics. I'm talking about what I think is a much bigger and stranger recent issue. > Or Hillary’s emails? Well that was litigated. The FBI found evidence of violations of classified information handling statutes but decided not to pursue it. That's basically what was alleged by Hillary opponents, wasn't it? Do you not see the difference? They had some evidence of wrongdoing possibly a crime and certainly incompetence. It might have been politicized and exaggerated to some degree, but it wasn't like it came out of thin air. Imagine exact same Hillary email scandal playing out the same way with the only difference being being no emails ever leaked or stored on private servers and nobody seeing any suggestion of that happening. But they all insisted they had seen them. Wouldn't that be weird? > What about those caravans that were all supposed to be coming countless different times. None of this stuff is discussed any more. I'm not sure about caravans and stuff. > I’m not sure if you’re pulling an elaborate troll job here. The way you worded portions of this post is exactly how certain politicians also speak. The feigned surprise of it being all the rage then dropping out of existence. The questioning of why no one is doing something, etc. Ad hominem. And I'm not saying one or the other or both "sides" don't do it, or there has been no other examples ever of malfeasance or lying in government or news media. If you don't accept this was a massive thing for the country far far bigger and graver than Hillary's mishandling of classified information then fine, but you really can't accept that someone else might think that? It seems you have no curiosity about where Adam Schiff of the house IC committee has hidden all that ample evidence he said he knew about. If he covered it up, if he was lying from the start, doesn't really matter to you. Anybody who asks about it must be a trolle who "sounds exactly like certain politicians"?! That's just fine for you either way you don't want to know what the deal was and you get upset by other people asking about it. Strange attitude.

dash2 5y ago

> or else it doesn't exist and it was all a huge coordinated lie. Or people were gullible, keen to sell an anti-Trump story, overestimated the chances of something being true, were embarrassed about it later...? I think that story is mostly dead but Matt Taibbi will probably tell you about it, in between ranting.

throwawaylinux 5y ago
Well I don't know I don't think it's dead at all, it's massively interesting. It's not just hack entertainers masquerading as journalists selling tabloid conspiracy theories here, it was an entire political party (maybe both parties) plus the state security and surveillance apparatus who were all saying there was evidence here and going to secret courts and all this crazy stuff. Where is it? The Mueller report says plain as day they did not find evidence to substantiate claims that Trump or his campaign associates colluded (conspired) in any way with Russia.

dmpk2k 5y ago

> Nobody seems to care though. It would be more accurate to say that nobody who matters cares. Manufacturing Consent was broadly correct, but now add the surprising power of the Twitter echo chamber, where most American journalists spend their time. That, and Trump got eyeballs.

rsj_hn 5y ago

Why would media come up with such an absurd, 4chan-style conspiracy theory that Trump was a KGB puppet or that somehow Russia brainwashed people into voting for him? The only thing I can think of is the governing class was shocked and terrified by Trump winning the election and was scrambling for some kind of narrative, and so a random accusation used in the campaign became a Schelling point for "the resistance". It was not the result of cool deliberation, or thoughtful investigation into the facts. It was a cry of panic. But once it became the thing people rallied around, the news couldn't just backtrack and say "Yeah, this is cringe. Please ignore." So they had to keep pushing it, or at least pretend to treat it like it was a real story, and it was used as the cloak for impeachment and other types of political battles. This was the time when independent reporters like Glenn Greenwald and Matt Taibbi went full WTF mode on US news media, and were responsible for some of the most enjoyable picking apart of this narrative. Much better than the whole propaganda surrounding the invasion of Iraq, which was a war completely prosecuted on word-association - in which "Saddam" was pronounced next to "Al Qaeda" over and over again, in press conference after press conference and news reports ad nauseam until many otherwise honest people started saying "Yeah, they must be colluding together." But that was nothing compared to hordes of angry New England soccer moms wearing pussy hats marching against KGB-puppets seizing control of their nation. Someone needs to make a movie. But now there is no need for the "resistance" narrative and I'm sure almost everyone who participated in pushing that hoax turns a bit red when they look back on it. That's why you are not hearing a lot about it, just as people would prefer you not spend a lot of time thinking about Saddam's ties to Al Qaeda.

throwawaylinux 5y ago
> But once it became the thing people rallied around, the news couldn't just backtrack and say "Yeah, this is cringe. Please ignore." Well firstly, why couldn't they do that? And secondly, why would they do that? If/when they realized it turned out to be wrong, doesn't the story then become who got it wrong and why? Why did no media organization start asking those questions? But secondly it wasn't just the news corporations involved in this. People like Schiff, sitting on the powerful house intelligence committee, were coming out and saying they had "ample evidence" Trump had colluded with Putin. Of course this is a newsworthy thing to report on, but where is that evidence? Did Adam never have any, or is he now hiding it (maybe he's been blackmailed by Putin too?) Why did Mueller's investigation string out for years only to come out and say they found no evidence to substantiate the claim Trump or campaign conspired with Russians? Why was that never clarified that the investigation did not actually have any evidence yet? And why haven't any real journalists from actual news organizations seriously been looking into these things? Just really weird that there was this massive story that was front page news literally for years that pretty much got memory-holed overnight one day.

standardUser 5y ago

There was a ton of follow up. Many people were charged and jailed, including many of the people closest to Donald Trump. It was all over the news.

throwawaylinux 5y ago
I know about those, and they were not "follow up" or really close the whole strange issue about the Trump Russia scandal at all. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/20/17031772/mueller-indictments-grand-jury https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/20/17031772/m... 1) George Papadopoulos, former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, making false statements to the FBI. He got a 14-day sentence. 2) Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chair, was indicted on a total of 25 different counts by Mueller’s team, related mainly to his past work for Ukrainian politicians and his finances. 3) Rick Gates, a former Trump campaign aide and Manafort’s longtime junior business partner, was indicted on similar charges to Manafort. 4) Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, pleaded guilty in December 2017 to making false statements to the FBI. 36) Michael Cohen: In August 2018, Trump’s former lawyer pleaded guilty to 8 counts — tax and bank charges, related to his finances and taxi business, and campaign finance violations 37) Roger Stone: In January 2019, Mueller indicted longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone on 7 counts. He accused Stone of lying to the House Intelligence Committee about his efforts to get in touch with WikiLeaks during the campaign, and tampering with a witness who could have debunked his story. It wasn't all that many people at all really and none of the ones vaguely related to Trump had anything to do with colluding with Putin or hacking the election. Where was the evidence that kicked all this off? Where was the evidence that kept it all going for nearly 3 years? Even right after the Mueller report was released nobody retracted anything and everybody falsely claimed that it did not exonerate Trump, (which it pretty clearly did of the main thrust of the investigation and media circus that had gone on which was of Trump colluding with Putin to hack the election, for which Mueller stated clearly they found no substantial evidence for). Then everybody just kind of forgot about it and moved on. None of that strikes you as slightly odd? All seems above board, no unanswered questions left. Not concerned that maybe Putin got to Mueller and Schiff as well? Doesn't strike you as even slightly strange that all the news corporations who were banging the "ample evidence" that Trump colluded with Putin drum for years were suddenly perfectly fine with the Mueller report which said that no such evidence had ever been found? Not strange that any of these trusted journalists and truth seekers were placated by that and all in unison decided that was the end of the story, nothing more to investigate?

skinnymuch 5y ago

It was talked about for a long time. People went to prison or got in trouble. People don’t talk about Trump that much any more either. That’s just how the world works. It moves on very, very quickly. Almost everything gets memory holed. Besides 9/11 and a few other major major things, past stuff doesn’t get talked about much. Why is no one talking about whatever it was with Hunter Biden any more? Or Hillary’s emails? What about those caravans that were all supposed to be coming countless different times. None of this stuff is discussed any more. I’m not sure if you’re pulling an elaborate troll job here. The way you worded portions of this post is exactly how certain politicians also speak. The feigned surprise of it being all the rage then dropping out of existence. The questioning of why no one is doing something, etc.

throwawaylinux 5y ago
> It was talked about for a long time. People went to prison or got in trouble. Have you read the Mueller report? It explicitly says that they did not find evidence that Trump or his associates colluded (conspired) with Russia. There were people who who weren't Trump who went to jail for things that did not include colluding with Russia or attempting to cheat in the election. I can't see how that possibly "settles" the matter about Trump, what happened to Trump being a Russian agent? What happened to him colluding with Putin to hack the election? > People don’t talk about Trump that much any more either. Well they do strangely enough, but I'm talking about after the investigation _while Trump was still president_! Not just today. They certainly kept talking about Trump, it's just they memory holed the Russia thing and moved on. > Why is no one talking about whatever it was with Hunter Biden any more? Good question I guess, lots of unanswered things or weirdness happens, I'm not saying this is the only thing strange that has ever happened in politics. I'm talking about what I think is a much bigger and stranger recent issue. > Or Hillary’s emails? Well that was litigated. The FBI found evidence of violations of classified information handling statutes but decided not to pursue it. That's basically what was alleged by Hillary opponents, wasn't it? Do you not see the difference? They had some evidence of wrongdoing possibly a crime and certainly incompetence. It might have been politicized and exaggerated to some degree, but it wasn't like it came out of thin air. Imagine exact same Hillary email scandal playing out the same way with the only difference being being no emails ever leaked or stored on private servers and nobody seeing any suggestion of that happening. But they all insisted they had seen them. Wouldn't that be weird? > What about those caravans that were all supposed to be coming countless different times. None of this stuff is discussed any more. I'm not sure about caravans and stuff. > I’m not sure if you’re pulling an elaborate troll job here. The way you worded portions of this post is exactly how certain politicians also speak. The feigned surprise of it being all the rage then dropping out of existence. The questioning of why no one is doing something, etc. Ad hominem. And I'm not saying one or the other or both "sides" don't do it, or there has been no other examples ever of malfeasance or lying in government or news media. If you don't accept this was a massive thing for the country far far bigger and graver than Hillary's mishandling of classified information then fine, but you really can't accept that someone else might think that? It seems you have no curiosity about where Adam Schiff of the house IC committee has hidden all that ample evidence he said he knew about. If he covered it up, if he was lying from the start, doesn't really matter to you. Anybody who asks about it must be a trolle who "sounds exactly like certain politicians"?! That's just fine for you either way you don't want to know what the deal was and you get upset by other people asking about it. Strange attitude.