I agree with all comments especially the comment about Hillary Clinton and her involvement that's not even mentioned in this interview. I find that very disappointing. I really feel journalists have insulated themselves so much so they can't see the error of their ways. Unfortunately not many of them were able to get past their "outrage" over Trump being elected. They were willing to commit Journalistic malpractice and convince themselves it was the right thing to do. I have lost complete trust in the system.
Trump hate was spewed by Democrats even before Trump was in office. I have never seen so much hate aimed at a guy who hadn’t done anything yet. It was sick and toxic.
Agree completely. The House and Senate are run by people who have been there for decades. Resident Biden never had a normal job in the last ~50 years. As a result, totally out of touch.
Well, he did spend a few years pushing the absolute fuckshit "birther" garbage. Plus the rest of his track record as a shitty human being. But sure, no one had a legitimate reason to dislike the guy and his politics other than fear of the outsider.
If by "the system" you mean this capitalist dystopia we're all trapped in, which nearly all journalists these days either loudly defend or meekly accept as insurmountable and impossible to overcome, I lost complete trust in that system over 40 years ago.
No that's not what I mean. The "system" meaning the Corporate Media in general but not in a capitalistic way but rather in a disingenuous way. I believe in Capitalism overall.
I was pretty sure you didn't mean that. But since you "believe in capitalism overall" you don't comprehend the contradiction you're caught in. Corporate media is a 100% capitalist enterprise--all of it. That "system" is centrally embedded in the "overall" capitalist system.
Capitalism as it's actually practiced cannot function without corporate media as its propaganda platform. When it's "disingenuous" it's simply doing its due diligence. It's there to promote the system of capitalism, which it was doing when the hideously complicated Steele dossier intrigue was being advanced all over corporate media to tie Trump to Putin, demonize Russia and set us on the new Cold War footing that could lead to the end of life on the planet.
It succeeded, even if all the actors involved then, Steele, Simpson and the rest of them, are thoroughly discredited. Corporate capitalist media did its job, with plenty of assistance from the Deep State. Trump, a hyper-capitalist if there ever was one, represented the WRONG kind of capitalism from what the deep staters demanded--the Clinton-directed DNC, the FBI, CIA, NSA, MSNBC, CNN, all network media, Hollywood, Soros, the "defense" industry, Zionist Israel, Obama, Biden and all their cohort--who all want *their* version of capitalism, not Trump's.
It's debatable which version is really worse, because there's nothing good about either of them. "Disingenuous" barely begins to describe how both versions of capitalism, Trump's entirely self-serving, narcissistic, fascistic, authoritarian style, or the Clinton-Obama-Biden style where a slightly different set of oligarchs and plutocrats run the world for their benefit.
Both of them serve no one but the top 1%. So if you're in that top 1% it's little wonder you "believe in capitalism." It's the only religion the wealthiest on Earth have ever believed in.
Capitalism is not my "religion", I don't believe in forced wealth distribution and one does not have to be a 1%'er to believe in Capitalism. My husband was a small business owner that didn't have to rely on the government to feed his family. Does that make him part of the deep state?
"Believing" in something means you have faith that it's true and good and noble and possibly divine. Most 1%ers believe those things about capitalism, whether you do or not, which in some sense you clearly do.
If your husband really was a small business owner, that really doesn't qualify as being a capitalist. I was also a small business owner, a small independent bookstore, which Jeff Bezos' Amazon promptly destroyed, mine along with thousands of others, back in the early 2000's. But I never considered myself a capitalist, because I wasn't. Just because someone operates a small business in a capitalist economy doesn't make him or her a capitalist. It's meaningless to equate someone making less than, say, $50,000/yr. (I made far less than that) with a CEO who hauls in $20,000,000. Or even a half million.
The latter group are capitalists. They run the world; small business owners do well to keep their families afloat. And they have no more to do with the Deep State than neighbors swapping stories over the backyard fence have to do with the panopticon surveillance state of which we're now all prisoners.
But don't worry: No one's coming after your wealth. Americans are so brainwashed by capitalism that a sane alternative to it (socialism) is no more possible here than unbiased reporting coming from either Fox News, CNN or MSNBC.
If people had lined up outside your bookstore every morning to buy your books, and your store was made a great success, causing your income to rise to say, a half million, would you have then been a capitalist? Or would your conscience have gotten the best of you, causing you to cut your margins for the good of society, and forcing yourself out of business?
The difference between capitalism and a market economy, is that markets need money to circulate, while people see it as the signal to extract and store. Meaning ever more has to be added and ever more metastatic methods of storing the excess are required. we are linear, goal oriented creatures in a cyclical, circular, feedback generated reality.
Since it functions as a contract, with the asset backed by a debt, this means manufacturing as much debt as possible.
For instance, could the capital markets function, without the government siphoning up trillions in surplus investment money?
The wars are just a way to make it go away, so more can be borrowed.
Econ 101 says money is both medium of exchange and store of value, but one is dynamic, while the other is static. Blood is a medium, fat is a store.
The functionality of money is its fungibility. We own it like we own the section of road we are using, or the air and water flowing through our bodies. It's a public utility, like roads.
Eventually the concept of the commons, as a store of public wealth, will have to be resurrected and updated.
The irony of our individualistic ethos is the resulting atomized society is more easily controlled and manipulated.
You make very valid points. I agree that there are alot of Cons to Capitalism but I also believe there are Pro's. I'm not a big fan of the alternative. I hate Amazon as much as you do and I never use their services. I always go to independent book stores and I empathize with your profession. I saw that happening right from the start. I don't believe in chasing money and I do believe that at some point enough is enough. You make alot of generalizations about alot of people..."brainwashed Americans". It's not so cut and dry.
Matt, this is the most blatantly blind and gutless essay you have written since joining Substack - I am incredibly disappointed. You and Barry Meier are analyzing this as if you have an unbiased media who were simple duped, or were a bit lazy in their reporting. ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME! The last 5 years of journalism has been one giant and shameless RESISTANCE movement trying to get Trump impeached - and d conservative ideology in general discredited.
The media is not interested in facts, they are interested in DELIBERATELY advancing a bull-shit progressive, WOKE narrative and demonizing all conservatives. They did not scrutinize this story just like they have not scrutinized any story that advanced their religiously tinged political ideology. You and Glenn (Glenn more aggressively than you, to be honest) have spent much of the last 4 years pointing out example after example of how the far left mob has advanced lies and suppressed truth in the advancement of their radical ideology.
Have you suddenly lost your nerve? Are you tired of not getting invited to liberal parties?
I agree with Jayhawk. This wasn't a simple case of omission - the failure to probe more diligently. This was a clear case of commission on the part of the media. They were active players in the drama. They not only swallowed what Steele feed them whole, they embellished, inferred, speculated, and stretched Steele's misinformation far beyond its outlandish purview. Does anyone think that Michael Isakoff is now contrite? Or that he harbors serious professional misgivings? Harry Reid said it best when asked about his fable that Romney had not paid taxes for the past 10 years - "it worked, didn't it." Well, the MSM wanted to break Trump, whatever it took. They didn't really spend any time thinking about professional standards. And they will do exactly the same thing if Trump runs in 2024.
Well said - and the blatant bias does not limit itself to demonizing Trump. They currently salivate over Biden and his shameless and phony (and “historic”) V.P.
First, replace your "Far left" with "Liberals" and you're closer to the truth. The entire Russiagate story was deflection of blame from Establishment Democrats failures to win an election to alleged Collusion. I'm sincerely not trying to pick a fight, but if you watch FOX news enough the line between culture war and substantive critique of the "left" (to any extent there is an actual left in the USA) gets very blurry.
We both share a loathing of the current iteration of the democratic party, but right wing news outlets purposefully obfuscate actual people on the left by calling Biden and Obama "socialists". It's not even remotely true. Also, no one dislikes the current dem establishment as much as Taibbi.
Would highly recommend Thomas Frank's book "Listen Liberal". If you still disagree with "left" policy, that's fine, but I think you would have a clearer picture of what it actually is. The current Democratic party is a conservative party that has adopted "woke" language to appeal to young, confused people who are well-intended, but have a tenuous grasp on history.
My outrage is not with the Democratic party, as both parties and 100% of politicians at the national level are completely corrupt, and have been for a long time. We expect them to operate from a completely self-serving bias that always serves their own desire to retain and exert power. My outrage is at the national media (and social media platforms) who have engaged with the Democratic Party and the “intelligence community” in a Faustian bargain for the last 5 years. So long as the intelligence community continues to leak “directionally accurate” phony stories to the press (and then lie about them as guests on CNN and MSNBC) the media in turn will allow them to abuse their power without critique. This same Faustian bargain was made with the “virology experts” in assisting China and the WHO to advance a phony narrative about the origins of Covid - and censor any debate that challenged that phony narrative. It was clear from the beginning that Fauci, Daszak and the “experts” who wanted to continue to get funding for gain-of-function research had a massive conflict in providing an objective opinion on the origins of Covid. And now, just as with the phony Russia-gate story, we are supposed to believe the media was just guilty of being duped by the experts vs. deliberately collaborating in the advancement of this phony narrative. We can’t let these people re-write history and avoid the shame and loss of credibility that comes from admitting this was a deliberate and coordinated effort to RESIST Trump specifically and discredit conservative ideology generally.
The current Democratic party is a conservative party? Please, defend that one. Abortion on demand, threatening to pack the court, outrageous spending, imposing woke ideology, etc... nothing conservative about it.
It's true. The entire US mainstream media acted like "oppo" research against Trump. It wasn't oppo research fooling "real" journalists. It's probably this polite fiction, that they ever were real journalists, that has led to the book's positive reception in print media.
I wonder if you would read this and give your “conservative” impression of the context surrounding the Ilan Omar remarks and how they are deliberately misconstrued to gin up controversy:
Actually she got to be a US resident and then citizen because her father made her (and him) members of the Omar family. That was in a refugee camp where the Omar family got approval to come to the US but the Elmi family had not. They were Elmi by birth.
~15 years later she married her brother so he could come to the US as husband of a US citizen. Curiously, they were married by an Anglican pastor.
Thanks. Actually my point is that active Muslims being married outside the Muslim religion normally are considered infidels. Somehow, this hasn't happened to Ilham (Elmi) Omar.
Chain migration/family sponsorship. Immigrant groups from various regions cluster b/c one family member sponsors another and they want to live near each other. Columbus, Ohio has the 2nd largest Somali community in the country and it causes a problem at many of the warehouse/e-commerce type places many Somalis work at, b/c the different Somali clans hate each other more than anyone else, and this causes numerous HR headaches with scheduling or hiring-they screw their enemy clan over if they can.
Have you ever heard Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the brilliant Somalia-born women's rights activist despised by the left (and Omar), describe how the African social structure developed? It's fascinating.
Oh yes, I read Hirs Ali’s latest book about the need for Islamic reformation and caught her appearance on Joe Rogan a couple months ago. She is one of the bravest people out there right now. She also called out Ibrahim Kendi by name for his nonsense.
I am not a fan of anyone bringing the Muslim brotherhood down our halls of Congress and into their private office as allies …. But that isn’t what she is being criticized for.
I don’t think we need to make shit up, there should be plenty of valid issues with a dangerous radical.
This distraction technique where they look down their nose with disdain and attempt to throw you off of your point and have you on the defensive regarding an entirely different topic is the first thing they throw back at you when you are over the target. Perfect example.
Kindly, a weak effort in the "I wasted my money" genre. I wish you had stuck around longer and made many more comments elaborating the degree to which your money was wasted upon Taibbi's reporting.
If the media decides to reform (and they won't) thinking they can just bury the past and start over fresh, they are mistaken. They have lost the trust of the American people and they will not be able to get it back.
New outlets such as Substack are replacing the discredited media and none too soon.
I think there is a simple answer to the series of question Mr Meier asks at the end of your interview “ Why didn’t we demand to see the evidence? Why didn’t we demand to be introduced to Steele’s source? Why didn’t we demand to know more about him, even if we weren’t being introduced to him? Why did we accept these things on faith, and without scrutinizing them? ”. And the answer is that their motivations will not be best served by seeking answers to these questions. And that is depressing.
Excellent interview. Sadly I believe that this practice of taking info from " authoritative sources- --with or without a British accent " befalls every area of life where a narrative is being constructed for the public to heavily buy into. Our COVID/ jab narrative uses the same methods-- no evidence --just believe the "authorities" -- e.g. non-elected public health officials with skin in the game and money/power to be gained.
I love this short "shit detector" set of criteria (not sure where I got it -clearly British based);
"I have five questions that I ask people who have power, and I recommend them to the House. If I see someone who is powerful, be it a traffic warden, Rupert Murdoch, the head of a trade union or a Member of Parliament, I ask myself these five questions: "What power have you got? Where did you get it? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? How can we get rid of you?" That last question is crucial."
Fusion GPS was a well known smear merchant and the character of the politician whose dirty work they were doing was even worse. Any “journalist” that bought this story wanted to believe it and should resign in disgrace as they have no credibility. No refunds.
Thank you Matt - I have a major quibble with this interview. Meier talks about how positively his journalism colleagues have responded to his book. If Meier had done his job they would be publicly apologizing to the American public on the front pages of all these newspapers. But Meier is just one more member of The Club of False Narratives who chastises his fellow members but not enough to get ousted. He's more Deep State than a Deep Thinker.
So Clinton funded this little excursion to Smearville? That probably means that the Democratic Party also knew that the provenance of the Russia story was tainted to its core. Yet that didn't stop Hillary & her sidekick Big Nance the P from harping on Russia for 4 fucking years.
I seem to remember Big Nance specifically saying, "Mr. President, with you, all roads lead to Russia." While in reality, she should have said, "Mr. President, with me, Big Nance, all roads lead to bullshit."
All I can say is, if the Democrats are this inept at running a smear campaign, why would I think they could run a country?
The politicians don't "run" the country. The bankers and other owners make most of the decisions, but really the system runs itself according to its own logic.
The imperial media never acknowledges its mistakes and outright lies. Those people are paid to mislead the public. Whether it’s the foreign interventions (invasions), false flags or rigged elections, we are not allowed to peer into the real agenda of the ruling class. Why do you think independent journalists are being de-platformed? Why is Julian Assange being tortured in a British prison? The only thing keeping them living like lords and ladies is narrative control.
When are we going to demand to see the evidence? That’s the same thing here. Why didn’t we demand to see the evidence? Why didn’t we demand to be introduced to Steele’s source? Why didn’t we demand to know more about him, even if we weren’t being introduced to him? Why did we accept these things on faith, and without scrutinizing them? These are the questions we have to ask.
Ooh! Strong, strong statement from Trump-deranged covidiot and "Biden-Harris" team and NYT supporter Barry Meier. He has no legitimacy and it's sad Taibbi pretends he does. Oh right, Matt's an insider too, as the loyal opposition.
Not just someone. The person the people elected to be president and by extension, the entire country for four years. “Journalists”: We made a mistake. Oh shucks. Sorry. But you can still trust us.
According to almost half of the USA adults, that was President Rodham-Clinton, and they know that The Usurper Orange Baboon was elected instead by Putin. It is like in the middle ages when there were Popes and anti-Popes.
Insiders don't prosecute one another, and insider journalists don't make an issue of it. Trump, btw, is an insider too. Remember all his chanting about putting her in jail?
“Trump was the real deal - he hated these pricks almost as much as we do, more in some cases.”—Trump is just for Trump. Only his needs matter to him. He hates them only bc it helps him to. i appreciate your first sentence AND that he did some actual good, but i think you’re presenting an elevated//skewed idea of his character.
The idea that journalists as a class are terrified of getting anything wrong is laughable. Maybe they're terrified of being criticized, which is something else. Almost every time I actually know the details of a "story" in a newspaper (let alone on TV), the "journalist" gets a lot wrong. I think if you ask your friends, they will say the same. What isn't outright wrong is weirdly distorted.
Basic PR training includes the information that when a "journalist" asks a question, he's often trying to get an answer that he's already formulated in his mind. Say what you want, and don't give him what you want, and your answer will disappear in smoke. Say what he wants, and your answer will be included, in some form or the other.
Do Matt's subscribers have different experiences? Have you been the subject, or has your firm or school or team or whatever been the subject of a newspaper article that didn't get anything important wrong? I'd love to see a global poll on that one.
These are 2 great points. I don't think they care about getting anything wrong at all - as the TDS years have shown. They ARE terrified of being criticized / kicked out of the Woke Progressive club, however.
Your other great point: I work in a school in the bad neighborhood. The local press never gets anything right. Ever.
I think your point is the answer to the all the "why" questions stated at the end of the interview. I would bet that every journalist chasing a story, has a version of that story in their head as they chase...they bite on what makes the story, and spit out what doesn't. I think this is where implicit (and even explicit) bias plays out. Maybe the question should be, "How willing is a journalist to drop a hot story that exists (to some degree) in their head?"
"I’m afraid that for some people it just bounces off of them, it’s not their fault.... That would worry me, if I thought it was a generational thing."
Face it, most of the new generation are exactly what the oligarchs want them to be, as can be seen by the voices that the oligarchs promote, incl. in places like the WaPo (e.g. Suzanna Walters) and the NYT (e.g. M.E. Dyson).
Yes -- so much time was wasted on "investigating" the Steele Dossier. It came at the expense of tough-minded investigative journalism into what the Trump administration was really doing with its power. We got a lot of prurient talk about pee tapes and so forth even as Trump was enriching the already rich and advancing his own insane version of nepotism. I still wince at Jared leading the "process" for peace between the Israelis and Palestinians.
The Steele Dossier was a great distraction from reality -- once again, thank you, Hillary Clinton, for your savvy and smart politics! :-)
"Trump was enriching the already rich" But he did the EXACT opposite. The tax reform law INCREASED the fraction of taxes paid by the top earners. The limit of $10,000 for the State And Local Tax (SALT) deduction alone caused taxes for the wealthiest 10% to go up, while the dramatic increase in the standard deduction caused the taxes on the middle class to go down (and many are saved by it from submitting a detailed tax return).
It is the DEMOCRATS who want to erase the SALT deduction limit, NOT the Republicans, because the wealthy largely support the Democrats.
Unemployment for minorities reached the lowest levels on record in 2019.
Cutting the tax on corporations to the same level as in most other developed countries mainly benefited people on government pensions, which have been vastly underfunded, by having more profits go into the funds, which largely are invested in stocks.
I am confused-- how is the Trump time in office different in anyway to any other modern day(post WW2) President- scandals - check, nepotism, check, enriching the rich (and themselves) check.... The ONLY difference is that he was orange so he insulted the elite view of what a President should act and look like. Enough about Trump-- look at the issues in the US
I look forward to Barry Meier furthering his investigative work and look at the Mueller report with the meticulousity he has exhibited in "Spooked".
I'm interested in particular in Konstantin Kilimnik claim that there are factual errors in the Mueller report concerning his visa and a trip he allegedly made to Madrid (cf interview with Aaron Mate).
Et tu Matt? You are helping "journalists" whitewash this whole event. Most of these writers are spooks themselves, they don't report anything but what their masters tell them too. If a few here and there report the actual truth we then hear "that's not a REAL news reporter, that's not a REAL news outlet". Wake up & look around, you are being played.
I agree with all comments especially the comment about Hillary Clinton and her involvement that's not even mentioned in this interview. I find that very disappointing. I really feel journalists have insulated themselves so much so they can't see the error of their ways. Unfortunately not many of them were able to get past their "outrage" over Trump being elected. They were willing to commit Journalistic malpractice and convince themselves it was the right thing to do. I have lost complete trust in the system.
Trump hate was spewed by Democrats even before Trump was in office. I have never seen so much hate aimed at a guy who hadn’t done anything yet. It was sick and toxic.
Exactly. All those Elitist's couldn't believe that an "outsider" could possibly win.
We need more outsiders in government. If we can get term limits we will get rid of entrenched elitists who have forgotten how real Americans live.
Agree completely. The House and Senate are run by people who have been there for decades. Resident Biden never had a normal job in the last ~50 years. As a result, totally out of touch.
Newbies get in from time to time but frantically accommodate themselves to the rules as they learn how the game is played. See: AOC, Sinema.
It's like LOGAN'S RUN. The old people in charge pretend to die, but don't actually.
Well, he did spend a few years pushing the absolute fuckshit "birther" garbage. Plus the rest of his track record as a shitty human being. But sure, no one had a legitimate reason to dislike the guy and his politics other than fear of the outsider.
Couldn’t have been that much of an outsider.
Where’s Snowden’s pardon,
and the release of JFK’s files.
He’s more like an un-anointed insider
Which is why I will NEVER vote for a Democrat again. NEVER.
If by "the system" you mean this capitalist dystopia we're all trapped in, which nearly all journalists these days either loudly defend or meekly accept as insurmountable and impossible to overcome, I lost complete trust in that system over 40 years ago.
No that's not what I mean. The "system" meaning the Corporate Media in general but not in a capitalistic way but rather in a disingenuous way. I believe in Capitalism overall.
I was pretty sure you didn't mean that. But since you "believe in capitalism overall" you don't comprehend the contradiction you're caught in. Corporate media is a 100% capitalist enterprise--all of it. That "system" is centrally embedded in the "overall" capitalist system.
Capitalism as it's actually practiced cannot function without corporate media as its propaganda platform. When it's "disingenuous" it's simply doing its due diligence. It's there to promote the system of capitalism, which it was doing when the hideously complicated Steele dossier intrigue was being advanced all over corporate media to tie Trump to Putin, demonize Russia and set us on the new Cold War footing that could lead to the end of life on the planet.
It succeeded, even if all the actors involved then, Steele, Simpson and the rest of them, are thoroughly discredited. Corporate capitalist media did its job, with plenty of assistance from the Deep State. Trump, a hyper-capitalist if there ever was one, represented the WRONG kind of capitalism from what the deep staters demanded--the Clinton-directed DNC, the FBI, CIA, NSA, MSNBC, CNN, all network media, Hollywood, Soros, the "defense" industry, Zionist Israel, Obama, Biden and all their cohort--who all want *their* version of capitalism, not Trump's.
It's debatable which version is really worse, because there's nothing good about either of them. "Disingenuous" barely begins to describe how both versions of capitalism, Trump's entirely self-serving, narcissistic, fascistic, authoritarian style, or the Clinton-Obama-Biden style where a slightly different set of oligarchs and plutocrats run the world for their benefit.
Both of them serve no one but the top 1%. So if you're in that top 1% it's little wonder you "believe in capitalism." It's the only religion the wealthiest on Earth have ever believed in.
Capitalism is not my "religion", I don't believe in forced wealth distribution and one does not have to be a 1%'er to believe in Capitalism. My husband was a small business owner that didn't have to rely on the government to feed his family. Does that make him part of the deep state?
"Believing" in something means you have faith that it's true and good and noble and possibly divine. Most 1%ers believe those things about capitalism, whether you do or not, which in some sense you clearly do.
If your husband really was a small business owner, that really doesn't qualify as being a capitalist. I was also a small business owner, a small independent bookstore, which Jeff Bezos' Amazon promptly destroyed, mine along with thousands of others, back in the early 2000's. But I never considered myself a capitalist, because I wasn't. Just because someone operates a small business in a capitalist economy doesn't make him or her a capitalist. It's meaningless to equate someone making less than, say, $50,000/yr. (I made far less than that) with a CEO who hauls in $20,000,000. Or even a half million.
The latter group are capitalists. They run the world; small business owners do well to keep their families afloat. And they have no more to do with the Deep State than neighbors swapping stories over the backyard fence have to do with the panopticon surveillance state of which we're now all prisoners.
But don't worry: No one's coming after your wealth. Americans are so brainwashed by capitalism that a sane alternative to it (socialism) is no more possible here than unbiased reporting coming from either Fox News, CNN or MSNBC.
If people had lined up outside your bookstore every morning to buy your books, and your store was made a great success, causing your income to rise to say, a half million, would you have then been a capitalist? Or would your conscience have gotten the best of you, causing you to cut your margins for the good of society, and forcing yourself out of business?
The difference between capitalism and a market economy, is that markets need money to circulate, while people see it as the signal to extract and store. Meaning ever more has to be added and ever more metastatic methods of storing the excess are required. we are linear, goal oriented creatures in a cyclical, circular, feedback generated reality.
Since it functions as a contract, with the asset backed by a debt, this means manufacturing as much debt as possible.
For instance, could the capital markets function, without the government siphoning up trillions in surplus investment money?
The wars are just a way to make it go away, so more can be borrowed.
Econ 101 says money is both medium of exchange and store of value, but one is dynamic, while the other is static. Blood is a medium, fat is a store.
The functionality of money is its fungibility. We own it like we own the section of road we are using, or the air and water flowing through our bodies. It's a public utility, like roads.
Eventually the concept of the commons, as a store of public wealth, will have to be resurrected and updated.
The irony of our individualistic ethos is the resulting atomized society is more easily controlled and manipulated.
You make very valid points. I agree that there are alot of Cons to Capitalism but I also believe there are Pro's. I'm not a big fan of the alternative. I hate Amazon as much as you do and I never use their services. I always go to independent book stores and I empathize with your profession. I saw that happening right from the start. I don't believe in chasing money and I do believe that at some point enough is enough. You make alot of generalizations about alot of people..."brainwashed Americans". It's not so cut and dry.
"a sane alternative to it (socialism) is no more possible here"
Frankly, I think you're going to get a much saner discussion here.
...not that I think the TK News comment section is going to change the world.
To help clarify what I'm saying, there's this:
https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2021/06/16/political-partisanship-is-a-propaganda-lubricant/
The FBI has a lot to answer for - what buffooons.
Matt, this is the most blatantly blind and gutless essay you have written since joining Substack - I am incredibly disappointed. You and Barry Meier are analyzing this as if you have an unbiased media who were simple duped, or were a bit lazy in their reporting. ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME! The last 5 years of journalism has been one giant and shameless RESISTANCE movement trying to get Trump impeached - and d conservative ideology in general discredited.
The media is not interested in facts, they are interested in DELIBERATELY advancing a bull-shit progressive, WOKE narrative and demonizing all conservatives. They did not scrutinize this story just like they have not scrutinized any story that advanced their religiously tinged political ideology. You and Glenn (Glenn more aggressively than you, to be honest) have spent much of the last 4 years pointing out example after example of how the far left mob has advanced lies and suppressed truth in the advancement of their radical ideology.
Have you suddenly lost your nerve? Are you tired of not getting invited to liberal parties?
I agree with Jayhawk. This wasn't a simple case of omission - the failure to probe more diligently. This was a clear case of commission on the part of the media. They were active players in the drama. They not only swallowed what Steele feed them whole, they embellished, inferred, speculated, and stretched Steele's misinformation far beyond its outlandish purview. Does anyone think that Michael Isakoff is now contrite? Or that he harbors serious professional misgivings? Harry Reid said it best when asked about his fable that Romney had not paid taxes for the past 10 years - "it worked, didn't it." Well, the MSM wanted to break Trump, whatever it took. They didn't really spend any time thinking about professional standards. And they will do exactly the same thing if Trump runs in 2024.
Well said - and the blatant bias does not limit itself to demonizing Trump. They currently salivate over Biden and his shameless and phony (and “historic”) V.P.
I know..the entire read I'm thinking...'Why are they struggling so hard to put lipstick on a pig? Are they really that far gone?'
Didn't see that reaction coming...
First, replace your "Far left" with "Liberals" and you're closer to the truth. The entire Russiagate story was deflection of blame from Establishment Democrats failures to win an election to alleged Collusion. I'm sincerely not trying to pick a fight, but if you watch FOX news enough the line between culture war and substantive critique of the "left" (to any extent there is an actual left in the USA) gets very blurry.
We both share a loathing of the current iteration of the democratic party, but right wing news outlets purposefully obfuscate actual people on the left by calling Biden and Obama "socialists". It's not even remotely true. Also, no one dislikes the current dem establishment as much as Taibbi.
Would highly recommend Thomas Frank's book "Listen Liberal". If you still disagree with "left" policy, that's fine, but I think you would have a clearer picture of what it actually is. The current Democratic party is a conservative party that has adopted "woke" language to appeal to young, confused people who are well-intended, but have a tenuous grasp on history.
My outrage is not with the Democratic party, as both parties and 100% of politicians at the national level are completely corrupt, and have been for a long time. We expect them to operate from a completely self-serving bias that always serves their own desire to retain and exert power. My outrage is at the national media (and social media platforms) who have engaged with the Democratic Party and the “intelligence community” in a Faustian bargain for the last 5 years. So long as the intelligence community continues to leak “directionally accurate” phony stories to the press (and then lie about them as guests on CNN and MSNBC) the media in turn will allow them to abuse their power without critique. This same Faustian bargain was made with the “virology experts” in assisting China and the WHO to advance a phony narrative about the origins of Covid - and censor any debate that challenged that phony narrative. It was clear from the beginning that Fauci, Daszak and the “experts” who wanted to continue to get funding for gain-of-function research had a massive conflict in providing an objective opinion on the origins of Covid. And now, just as with the phony Russia-gate story, we are supposed to believe the media was just guilty of being duped by the experts vs. deliberately collaborating in the advancement of this phony narrative. We can’t let these people re-write history and avoid the shame and loss of credibility that comes from admitting this was a deliberate and coordinated effort to RESIST Trump specifically and discredit conservative ideology generally.
What's your opinion on the role of the media in selling the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq?
I share your frustration with most of that. Cheers
The current Democratic party is a conservative party? Please, defend that one. Abortion on demand, threatening to pack the court, outrageous spending, imposing woke ideology, etc... nothing conservative about it.
Calm down, dude. It's a book review.
First, don’t call me “dude”. Second, common sense citizens remaining calm is how we got to this insane and dystopian place.
Dude. Chill.
Nice cat, Dude…
Thanks.😸
"Dude" is simultaneously a term of condescension and affection. Those targeted by "Dude" may take it how they please.
Hey, you want to go crazy? You do you. I'm just saying a book review isn't really the place to be going crazy.
There is a very large difference between justified outrage and going crazy, Dude.
Go out and do some red-leggin' if you need to blow off steam.
...this whole Kansas-Missouri thing is never going to get resolved, is it?
It's true. The entire US mainstream media acted like "oppo" research against Trump. It wasn't oppo research fooling "real" journalists. It's probably this polite fiction, that they ever were real journalists, that has led to the book's positive reception in print media.
I wonder if you would read this and give your “conservative” impression of the context surrounding the Ilan Omar remarks and how they are deliberately misconstrued to gin up controversy:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/06/what-ilhan-omar-actually-said/619196/
I found it compelling, persuasive and irritating to feel she was smeared.
If you don’t want to it’s cool.
I always get confused. Is she the one that became a U.S. citizen by faking a marriage with her brother?
How did we end up with such a large concentration of Somali voters in one district anyway? It's so weird...
Actually she got to be a US resident and then citizen because her father made her (and him) members of the Omar family. That was in a refugee camp where the Omar family got approval to come to the US but the Elmi family had not. They were Elmi by birth.
~15 years later she married her brother so he could come to the US as husband of a US citizen. Curiously, they were married by an Anglican pastor.
Fucking Anglicans will marry anyone.
Thanks. Actually my point is that active Muslims being married outside the Muslim religion normally are considered infidels. Somehow, this hasn't happened to Ilham (Elmi) Omar.
Uh huh. What about her comments being taken out of context?
Chain migration/family sponsorship. Immigrant groups from various regions cluster b/c one family member sponsors another and they want to live near each other. Columbus, Ohio has the 2nd largest Somali community in the country and it causes a problem at many of the warehouse/e-commerce type places many Somalis work at, b/c the different Somali clans hate each other more than anyone else, and this causes numerous HR headaches with scheduling or hiring-they screw their enemy clan over if they can.
Have you ever heard Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the brilliant Somalia-born women's rights activist despised by the left (and Omar), describe how the African social structure developed? It's fascinating.
Here's the link: https://youtu.be/ADIiPyaqyaA
Oh yes, I read Hirs Ali’s latest book about the need for Islamic reformation and caught her appearance on Joe Rogan a couple months ago. She is one of the bravest people out there right now. She also called out Ibrahim Kendi by name for his nonsense.
...not to mention a Somali illegal immigrant just knifed & killed three people in Germany...Ilhan Omar is a ridiculous & dangerous person
My response is that Ilan Omar is a dangerous radical (with the rest of the “Squad”) and has earned more scorn than could ever be heaped upon her.
I am not a fan of anyone bringing the Muslim brotherhood down our halls of Congress and into their private office as allies …. But that isn’t what she is being criticized for.
I don’t think we need to make shit up, there should be plenty of valid issues with a dangerous radical.
This distraction technique where they look down their nose with disdain and attempt to throw you off of your point and have you on the defensive regarding an entirely different topic is the first thing they throw back at you when you are over the target. Perfect example.
The subscription doesn't cost much but I'm thinking it's a waste of money. Bye Bye Taibbi
Kindly, a weak effort in the "I wasted my money" genre. I wish you had stuck around longer and made many more comments elaborating the degree to which your money was wasted upon Taibbi's reporting.
Bye!
If the media decides to reform (and they won't) thinking they can just bury the past and start over fresh, they are mistaken. They have lost the trust of the American people and they will not be able to get it back.
New outlets such as Substack are replacing the discredited media and none too soon.
I think there is a simple answer to the series of question Mr Meier asks at the end of your interview “ Why didn’t we demand to see the evidence? Why didn’t we demand to be introduced to Steele’s source? Why didn’t we demand to know more about him, even if we weren’t being introduced to him? Why did we accept these things on faith, and without scrutinizing them? ”. And the answer is that their motivations will not be best served by seeking answers to these questions. And that is depressing.
Excellent interview. Sadly I believe that this practice of taking info from " authoritative sources- --with or without a British accent " befalls every area of life where a narrative is being constructed for the public to heavily buy into. Our COVID/ jab narrative uses the same methods-- no evidence --just believe the "authorities" -- e.g. non-elected public health officials with skin in the game and money/power to be gained.
I love this short "shit detector" set of criteria (not sure where I got it -clearly British based);
"I have five questions that I ask people who have power, and I recommend them to the House. If I see someone who is powerful, be it a traffic warden, Rupert Murdoch, the head of a trade union or a Member of Parliament, I ask myself these five questions: "What power have you got? Where did you get it? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? How can we get rid of you?" That last question is crucial."
“shit detector" set of criteria (not sure where I got it -clearly British based)”
Tony Benn IIRC.
Thanks!
Follow the money
Yup agreed , that's in there--" to whom are you accountable"
Fusion GPS was a well known smear merchant and the character of the politician whose dirty work they were doing was even worse. Any “journalist” that bought this story wanted to believe it and should resign in disgrace as they have no credibility. No refunds.
Thank you Matt - I have a major quibble with this interview. Meier talks about how positively his journalism colleagues have responded to his book. If Meier had done his job they would be publicly apologizing to the American public on the front pages of all these newspapers. But Meier is just one more member of The Club of False Narratives who chastises his fellow members but not enough to get ousted. He's more Deep State than a Deep Thinker.
I couldn't agree more.
So Clinton funded this little excursion to Smearville? That probably means that the Democratic Party also knew that the provenance of the Russia story was tainted to its core. Yet that didn't stop Hillary & her sidekick Big Nance the P from harping on Russia for 4 fucking years.
I seem to remember Big Nance specifically saying, "Mr. President, with you, all roads lead to Russia." While in reality, she should have said, "Mr. President, with me, Big Nance, all roads lead to bullshit."
All I can say is, if the Democrats are this inept at running a smear campaign, why would I think they could run a country?
The politicians don't "run" the country. The bankers and other owners make most of the decisions, but really the system runs itself according to its own logic.
Then we should just save ourselves some time & money & just cancel elections. Seems like an expensive time wasting sham.
No. And no way. The Owners make predictable $ billions from the electoral machinery every 2 to 4 years. Gayronteed!
"Throughout the Trump years, it made sense that reporters chased sexy-sounding Russia stories. What journalist with a pulse wouldn’t?"
This is being extremely charitable.
The imperial media never acknowledges its mistakes and outright lies. Those people are paid to mislead the public. Whether it’s the foreign interventions (invasions), false flags or rigged elections, we are not allowed to peer into the real agenda of the ruling class. Why do you think independent journalists are being de-platformed? Why is Julian Assange being tortured in a British prison? The only thing keeping them living like lords and ladies is narrative control.
When are we going to demand to see the evidence? That’s the same thing here. Why didn’t we demand to see the evidence? Why didn’t we demand to be introduced to Steele’s source? Why didn’t we demand to know more about him, even if we weren’t being introduced to him? Why did we accept these things on faith, and without scrutinizing them? These are the questions we have to ask.
Ooh! Strong, strong statement from Trump-deranged covidiot and "Biden-Harris" team and NYT supporter Barry Meier. He has no legitimacy and it's sad Taibbi pretends he does. Oh right, Matt's an insider too, as the loyal opposition.
Why does Hillary get off Scott free for paying for a “garbage document” to destroy someone.
Not just someone. The person the people elected to be president and by extension, the entire country for four years. “Journalists”: We made a mistake. Oh shucks. Sorry. But you can still trust us.
«The person the people elected to be president»
According to almost half of the USA adults, that was President Rodham-Clinton, and they know that The Usurper Orange Baboon was elected instead by Putin. It is like in the middle ages when there were Popes and anti-Popes.
Well said!
Insiders don't prosecute one another, and insider journalists don't make an issue of it. Trump, btw, is an insider too. Remember all his chanting about putting her in jail?
Trump is not an insider. Trump was a disruptor. That is why insiders hate him.
“Trump was the real deal - he hated these pricks almost as much as we do, more in some cases.”—Trump is just for Trump. Only his needs matter to him. He hates them only bc it helps him to. i appreciate your first sentence AND that he did some actual good, but i think you’re presenting an elevated//skewed idea of his character.
Your first sentence has much historical prescience.
The idea that journalists as a class are terrified of getting anything wrong is laughable. Maybe they're terrified of being criticized, which is something else. Almost every time I actually know the details of a "story" in a newspaper (let alone on TV), the "journalist" gets a lot wrong. I think if you ask your friends, they will say the same. What isn't outright wrong is weirdly distorted.
Basic PR training includes the information that when a "journalist" asks a question, he's often trying to get an answer that he's already formulated in his mind. Say what you want, and don't give him what you want, and your answer will disappear in smoke. Say what he wants, and your answer will be included, in some form or the other.
Do Matt's subscribers have different experiences? Have you been the subject, or has your firm or school or team or whatever been the subject of a newspaper article that didn't get anything important wrong? I'd love to see a global poll on that one.
These are 2 great points. I don't think they care about getting anything wrong at all - as the TDS years have shown. They ARE terrified of being criticized / kicked out of the Woke Progressive club, however.
Your other great point: I work in a school in the bad neighborhood. The local press never gets anything right. Ever.
I think your point is the answer to the all the "why" questions stated at the end of the interview. I would bet that every journalist chasing a story, has a version of that story in their head as they chase...they bite on what makes the story, and spit out what doesn't. I think this is where implicit (and even explicit) bias plays out. Maybe the question should be, "How willing is a journalist to drop a hot story that exists (to some degree) in their head?"
"I’m afraid that for some people it just bounces off of them, it’s not their fault.... That would worry me, if I thought it was a generational thing."
Face it, most of the new generation are exactly what the oligarchs want them to be, as can be seen by the voices that the oligarchs promote, incl. in places like the WaPo (e.g. Suzanna Walters) and the NYT (e.g. M.E. Dyson).
Maybe Meier needs to brush up, e.g. on Matt's book on Hate Inc., and w/ Koppel's thoughts of a few years ago, at https://www.theblaze.com/news/ted-koppel-liberal-media-out-to-get-trump .
The success among young people of people like Saagar Enjeti, Krystal Ball, Aaron Mate on the Patreon/Substack model brings me hope.
Yes -- so much time was wasted on "investigating" the Steele Dossier. It came at the expense of tough-minded investigative journalism into what the Trump administration was really doing with its power. We got a lot of prurient talk about pee tapes and so forth even as Trump was enriching the already rich and advancing his own insane version of nepotism. I still wince at Jared leading the "process" for peace between the Israelis and Palestinians.
The Steele Dossier was a great distraction from reality -- once again, thank you, Hillary Clinton, for your savvy and smart politics! :-)
"Trump was enriching the already rich" But he did the EXACT opposite. The tax reform law INCREASED the fraction of taxes paid by the top earners. The limit of $10,000 for the State And Local Tax (SALT) deduction alone caused taxes for the wealthiest 10% to go up, while the dramatic increase in the standard deduction caused the taxes on the middle class to go down (and many are saved by it from submitting a detailed tax return).
It is the DEMOCRATS who want to erase the SALT deduction limit, NOT the Republicans, because the wealthy largely support the Democrats.
Unemployment for minorities reached the lowest levels on record in 2019.
Cutting the tax on corporations to the same level as in most other developed countries mainly benefited people on government pensions, which have been vastly underfunded, by having more profits go into the funds, which largely are invested in stocks.
Etc.
I am confused-- how is the Trump time in office different in anyway to any other modern day(post WW2) President- scandals - check, nepotism, check, enriching the rich (and themselves) check.... The ONLY difference is that he was orange so he insulted the elite view of what a President should act and look like. Enough about Trump-- look at the issues in the US
You think Steele dossier was a distraction. What do you think of the Mueller report?
Do you have more trust in it? Just because the same journos that sold us the Steele dossier told us it could be (and should be) believed as a gospel?
I look forward to Barry Meier furthering his investigative work and look at the Mueller report with the meticulousity he has exhibited in "Spooked".
I'm interested in particular in Konstantin Kilimnik claim that there are factual errors in the Mueller report concerning his visa and a trip he allegedly made to Madrid (cf interview with Aaron Mate).
Et tu Matt? You are helping "journalists" whitewash this whole event. Most of these writers are spooks themselves, they don't report anything but what their masters tell them too. If a few here and there report the actual truth we then hear "that's not a REAL news reporter, that's not a REAL news outlet". Wake up & look around, you are being played.