Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
As any lawyer will tell you (if being honest), few things are less reliable than a proceeding with no adversarial component. These hearings have zero.
One can assign whatever blame one wants for that, but perhaps it means journalists should be...skeptical...of assertions there.
If, yesterday, you followed conservative journalists or analysts -- and really, why would anyone do such a thing: just block and ignore them -- you'd have heard instant skepticism even over the physics of Hutchinson's claim that Trump was able to grab the wheel of the "Beast."
Maybe parts of Hutchinson's story is true (although the part that got the instant attention and calls for prosecution -- Trump assaulted his agents and grabbed the wheel of the Beast! -- was highly dubious on its face), but *journalistic* skepticism, not cheerleading, is needed.
This ( ) is exactly what happened: largely due to Twitter dynamics.
View attachment 14112
If, as a journalist, you don't *instantly* join the liberal mob -- if you wait to see how facts emerge -- you stand accused of sin.
But if you jump on board, applause, virality and cable bookings are yours.
It's literally impossible to count how many times during the Trump years some *blockbuster!* Russiagate event materialized - the thing that was going to be the fatal blow - and journalists spent all day on Twitter reflexively peddling it, only to watch it fall apart over and over
For many (I'd say: most) corporate journalists, "Twitter" = "liberal Twitter" = "the only constituency that matters."