As Twitchy reported, The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway got a nice credibility boost Monday by being called out by the Washington Post’s respected conservative opinion writer Jennifer Rubin. While Rubin was busy typing up her piece on people like Hemingway who “are not smart” and have “never had the respect of better-known conservatives,” Hemingway was busy naming names of people in the media who portrayed dossier author Christopher Steele as some sort of master spy.
The media justified Russia hysteria by claiming Christopher Steele was a "masterspy." The journos who reported that dangerously false narrative have gone silent as the recorded facts contradict what anonymous leakers spoon fed them. I name some names here. https://t.co/kVDgcdv2gZ
— Mollie (@MZHemingway) August 3, 2020
We remember one journalist who asked after BuzzFeed published the dossier in full how many of them had received it and passed on it because there was no way to verify any of it. It was opposition research paid for in part by the Hillary Clinton campaign, after all. But still, the dossier was taken seriously by plenty in the media who pointed to Steele’s reputation, which Hemingway takes apart:
It turns out Christopher Steele wasn’t 007.
Steele did not personally collect any of the factual information in his reports. The “vast network” was instead a “social circle” of an American-based former Brookings Institute junior staffer, recently identified for the first time as Igor Danchenko. The friends didn’t have well-documented claims so much as rumors, drunken gossip, and outright brainstorming, conjecture, and speculation. Even that information was “multiple layers of hearsay upon hearsay” before it got to Steele, who then hyperbolically overstated it. And the damning claims of “collusion” appear to have been scandalously misattributed or invented out of whole cloth.
Hemingway then begins to name plenty of mainstream journalists who played up the dossier’s author as “maybe the foremost expert in Russia matters in the world.”
OBJECTION! Any story about the FBI’s interview of the PSS and Chris “James Bond” Steele must include these two gems pic.twitter.com/UgAGjbbxEd
— Undercover Huber (@JohnWHuber) August 3, 2020
In case you can’t read that second one, here it is:
— Ken Dilanian (@KenDilanianNBC) January 13, 2017
It reminds me about the media’s infatuation with Michael Avenatti.
— Miguel M. Gallo (@mmgallo64) August 3, 2020
That’s exactly what it sounds like.
And they mock US as conspiracy theorists. Society has no critical thinking skills.
— REAWAKENING Mental Anomalies (@MentalAnomalie) August 3, 2020
Master manipulator is more like it. He knew how to build a report on junk and sell it to a willing political party. It was easy pickens for him.
— Terry (@TerryRyland) August 3, 2020
And, now that the leaks have been exposed as utter lies, I don't understand why the "journalists" don't reveal the names of the leakers. Why do they give cover to people who sent them out on a fool's errand?
— Brian O'Kelley (@BrianOKelley1) August 3, 2020
History has already recorded Steele as sloppy, unprofessional, desperate, and dismissed as an FBI source.
— Mike G. (@MikeKGilmore) August 3, 2020
This is what frustrates me the most, no accountability.
— Terra Wales (@Terrawales) August 3, 2020
You are doing a tremendous service by not letting this info get memory holed.
— $traight White Tupac (@Sean_in_Boston) August 3, 2020
Do they pull back the awarded Pulitzers since the stories have now been proven to be false. Otherwise doesn’t it diminish the Pulitzer?
— Roy More (@tspaRoy) August 3, 2020
Pulitzers huh? Not much credibilty in that prize.
— Salmon Unlimited (@SUIllinois) August 3, 2020
Serious comment here – do not underestimate the impact that James Bond has had on the impression that many uniformed Americans have regarding British Intelligence. Put on a nice suit, have an accent and mention "I'm from MI6" and the average reporter turns into a drooling fanboy.
— Timothy (@ElSnead) August 3, 2020
How is it that this happened 4 years ago all we have is a stock photo and this MFer has never been called to testify before any committee or grilled in an underground bunker?
— Thomas Skull 💀 (@thomstern) August 3, 2020
Curious that he hasn’t been picked up by CNN as an intelligence analyst.
Damage done. The fact that people are still expecting the media to have some degree of ethics is laughable.
— Publius 2.0 🇺🇸 (@WTP_1776) August 3, 2020
They're silent because they know most Americans have a 15 minute attention span and they're hopeful if they remain quiet long enough, no one will remember their lying and bogus reporting.
— Steve Friedman (@steve_friedman) August 3, 2020
MSM and Libs, when wrong:
B. Go silent
C. Never admit wrong
D. Never apologize
…so predictable and phony.
— john4USA (@johnc_finney) August 3, 2020
Oh my freaking god, there's journalism going on here. Holy crap.
— ClayTravisJewBeard (@ClayTravisJewBe) August 3, 2020
Again, it’s funny how the media turned Steele into some sort of super-spy in reports, and yet he wasn’t treated to in-person wall-to-wall interviews like Michael Avenatti was. Guess he was too busy being James Bond somewhere.
BRUTAL trip down memory lane: Drew Holden’s receipt-filled thread of media/Left pushing discredited Steele dossier a DOOZY https://t.co/u8vAYkdP2x
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) July 21, 2020