Yeah, I’d like to think the Nation has a standard of quality.
Well it would explain why the DNC and Obama didn’t act like they gave much of a damn about the “hack” until after the election.
I think the mainstream narrative – that they were a) complacent Hillary would win anyway, and b) completely terrified of appearing to improperly tip the scales in her favor – is fairly convincing.
Bear in mind that there is an element of crazy left wingers who are also russophiles… Hell, until like, LAST FUCKING YEAR, every russophile was a nutjob left winger like Jill Stein.
Also, this dude is tweeting stuff like how Seth Rich maybe WAS murdered. The guy’s a crank.
I’m not defending the piece or ignorant of the fact that there are crazy-ass lefties. The thing you keep passing over is that this is The Nation, a news source that while openly leaning left has for the most part been fairly sensible, and (AFAIK) isn’t prone to posting non-sourced conspiracy theories. This news item is insane and calls into question the official DNC explanation for what happened.
Not only is it clickbaitey as hell, it’s a story that supports the far-right Seth Rich bullshit. It’s a really weird thing for The Nation to publish.
Re: that Nation story. A tweet storm!
I honestly never really read the Nation much, so I dunno what kind of quality their reporting was.
Ok, I just decided to look back through that Patrick Lawrence’s stuff at the Nation.
The dude is a crank.
Here’s an example of his stuff from earlier this year:
This dude consistently writes about how US intel organizations, like the CIA, are the devil… going back years. He’s a nutjob.
I mean, I don’t know that he’s necessarily wrong about that.
But they’re pretty preferable to MechaHitler!
Not only that, but in the pieces linked here and in others written by him, his sources (former NSA experts) are all politically biased against the NSA and the Clintons/Obama, so far as I can tell.
Interesting. I wonder why The Nation decided to give this dude a platform?
Honestly, from looking at the Nation’s articles overall, they don’t seem to shy away from nutty opinion stuff.
Again, while right now this view from him falls in line with the crazy right wingers, being anti-CIA/intel orgs traditionally fits just fine within the views of the nutty left.
Haha. Fair enough then.
I guess i have to revise my (clearly not up to date) opinion of The Nation.
Just to be clear though, I’m not saying this guy’s article is garbage because he’s a nutjob, or because he doesn’t like the CIA.
That article is clearly, on its face, a piece of trash. It’s so bad on so many levels.
Even Popehat had a Clark.
It’s a terrible article; what it calls evidence is not. It’s probably in the Nation beecause there are a contingent of lefties who think the DNC story us the dastardly work of Russia Hawks (these people tend to be very anti-Clinton and pro-Assange and are easy marks for Putin’s stuff)
It’s supposedly based on analysis of information, not inside knowledge, but the people doing the analysis insisted on remaining anonymous? WTF?
More on Graff.
Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr demurred when asked whether his own committee would be seeking information from Graff. But it is unsurprising that Congress would want to talk to Trump’s right hand, who has played a pivotal role in his businesses for years. Graff has reportedly maintained her position in Trump’s orbit even since he became president, suggesting that she could be a wealth of knowledge for investigators.
Lawmakers’ interest in Graff is likely to infuriate Trump. Last month, the president—who has continually dismissed the Russia investigation as a “witch hunt” orchestrated by allies of Hillary Clinton as an excuse for losing the election—said that special counsel Robert Mueller would be crossing a line if he began to investigate the Trump family, their finances, and the Trump Organization in a way that exceeded the initial scope of the Russia probe. Calling Graff to testify before Congress, or otherwise requesting information from her, might fall into that category.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/11/politics/jared-kushner-security-clearance/index.html
(CNN) - The Senate Judiciary Committee is calling on the White House to provide new details about President Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner’s security clearance application, including whether he could be trusted with sensitive information after he initially failed to disclose meetings with Russian officials.
The committee, led by Republican Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa, sent a letter in June to the White House and the FBI asking for a detailed list of questions about Kushner’s security clearance form, which he has had to amend multiple times because of his initial failure to disclose meetings with foreign officials. In response, Kushner’s outside attorney sent the panel a letter, but the White House has not yet responded to the panel’s queries despite a July 6 deadline set by a bipartisan group of senators.
The committee’s spokesman, George Hartmann, told CNN Friday that the response from Kushner’s attorney does not satisfy the panel’s request for information from the White House.
Forgot to post this earlier. Among other things, “financial strain” tends to make the idea of flipping more appealing.
Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort parted ways with WilmerHale, the law firm defending him, earlier this week. That was largely because Bob Mueller’s 16-lawyer Russia probe—which is targeting him—has shifted its focus and is drilling down on tax issues, which aren’t WilmerHale’s specialty. But the parting of ways with WilmerHale was also in part because Manafort’s finances are increasingly strained, according to sources familiar with the situation.
“Paul Manafort’s resolve is limitless, but his resources are not,” said a person close to Manafort.
Manafort isn’t the only person facing financial challenges because of the legal costs of responding to Mueller’s probe. Michael Flynn, the retired general and deposed National Security Adviser, is struggling mightily with his mounting legal bills, according to a source familiar with his situation. The expenses has put his family’s finances under significant duress, the source said, and it’s expected he will soon create a legal defense fund to keep from going bankrupt.
Well, whatever happens, I love the idea of government money being used to fund an investigation that forces these people to lose money coming up with a defense. I also hate the idea, because it can so easily be turned against anyone out of prosecutorial malice, but in this one case I’m in favor.
I agree with the complacency but I think the secondary motivation was that they new the Republicans would be looking to paint her as illigitimate from day one and anything that undermined faith in the democratic process or call the election results into question would have given them four years worth of ammunition