Maybe Clinton Wasn't to Blame for Trump's Victory

[JHan]

68. yes the article is interesting...

However, mentioning the timeline doesn't refute any of the things I said:

- "Clinton rules" and how the NYTimes bungled the email server story and how the rest of mainstream media followed suit (and not only with regard to the email server story, there were also massive fails w.r.t the Clinton Foundation) still shaped how stories were covered even after it looked like Russia used her intelligence "arsenal" to target Americans.

- Russian interference didn't resonate with Americans from the get go: when the DNC was hacked. Possible Russian interference wasn't unknown until the Obama administration made an announcement , the talk began right after it was discovered the DNC was hacked. There were even books and articles written about this way back in August last year and I still remember a determination to throw cold water on the Russia story- whenever the Clinton campaign made a noise about it they were accused of making excuses. Maggie Haberman recently tweeted something to the effect that maybe The Clinton Campaign should have talked more about Russia to get the media to focus on it more last year - if Maggie could tweet that nonsense just weeks ago, I can't even begin to imagine the mindset among her colleagues last year.