Kevin Graham wrote:Markk wrote:Just give me a few of the Russian hacked e-mails that the press used, of the thousands, there should be some that are more damaging (by the press) than others...
Still trying to salvage this straw man huh? EA made it perfectly clear the damage was caused by a "drip drip" which is what the Right Wing propaganda machine loves to take advantage of. All they need is some sliver of evidence for a deeper, darker, more sinister conspiracy, and then they completely run with it and it takes over the news cycle until something more interesting comes along.
It is basically the same crap they tried to pull with the FBI "cell phone texts" which they tried to use to prove there was a massive conspiracy against Trump. If it weren't for the fact that we had those texts in context, that meme would still be alive and well.
Wikileaks started releasing hacked emails just a month before the election:
18 revelations from Wikileaks' hacked Clinton emails
The Strzok texts is almost perfect example of the same story has the hacked Clinton emails covered a little differently. On the one hand, you have slow release of texts leading to multiple stories where journalists could find interesting things to discuss, but aren't particularly important relative to the greater context in which the texts story resides. On the other, you have right-wing media misleading about those texts again and again, only to be shot down when greater context is provided.
The difference here is the mainstream press hasn't run wall-to-wall coverage with this story in a way that reinforces the inherent shadiness of Strzok/the FBI, so it isn't having a Clinton-effect.