With the complete collapse of the Jussie Smollett case all but imminent, media firefighters are scrambling to spin their way out of the mess they’ve helped to perpetuate.
Right, @brianstelter, it’s not about the media.
Washington Post reported 3 times the attack happened without using allegedly. Great super bowl ad tho. pic.twitter.com/tsznW28QL9
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) February 17, 2019
Let’s check in on our pals at the Washington Post and see how they’re handling one of the most public yet of their many humiliations.
Opinion: I doubted Jussie Smollett. It breaks my heart that I might be right. https://t.co/Y35G8pNXbm
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) February 17, 2019
So, instead of trying to pretend they never ran with Smollett’s “hate crime” narrative, they’ve opted to turn the fact that there was no hate crime into a negative. Well, that’s certainly an interesting approach …
So glad to have been able to publish this piece from Nana Efua Mumford on the Jussie Smollett case, and what it feels like to wish a very bad thing might be true because the lie would be so much worse: https://t.co/v9ObKrZ8Cr
— Alyssa Rosenberg (@AlyssaRosenberg) February 17, 2019
You’re glad to have been able to publish a garbage opinion piece complaining about the lack of a hate crime ruining your hate crime narrative? You do you, WaPo. You do you.
Has there been any single retraction or apology by anyone who jumped on the Smollet story? Anyone?
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) February 18, 2019
does this count?https://t.co/PK33KuEqjp
— Jeryl Bier (@JerylBier) February 18, 2019
Definitely not.
Oh. My. Word.
"…that reason, more than any other, is why I need this story to be true, despite its ugliness and despite what it would say about the danger of the world I live in.""…I need this story to be true…"
PLEASE LET THIS HATE CRIME BE REAL!https://t.co/i1AGUgvMbU pic.twitter.com/rGH57CllSi
— Jeryl Bier (@JerylBier) February 18, 2019
Hopefully, you mean your heart is breaking because you trusted Jussie Smollett, and he let you down. Otherwise, it sounds like you desperately wanted two MAGA rednecks pouring bleach and attempting to lynch him to be true. That’s it, isn’t it? You’re mourning your failed bias.
— vbspurs (@vbspurs) February 18, 2019
What the eff WaPo do you even realize what this headline *isn’t* saying?
“It breaks my heart Trump supporters aren’t roaming the streets of Chicago lynching people because I’d rather be proven right than have to confront my glaring psychological blindspots.” https://t.co/YKKNG0fysr
— Bridget Phetasy (@BridgetPhetasy) February 17, 2019
Not gonna say I’m shocked but oh my god that’s the exact conclusion they come to—that and “it’s bad for the people who love the show” with zero self-reflection or sense that this is actually a *good* thing. jfc. pic.twitter.com/zpv5KUk9H8
— Bridget Phetasy (@BridgetPhetasy) February 17, 2019
You’ve got to be a special kind of twisted for this to be your takeaway from a hoax.
No. Wishing there was actually a hate crime commited against someone because the people you hate are exonerated is morbid & the author needs therapy. https://t.co/Z8erx3SSSt
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) February 18, 2019
This is the best nested comment I’ve read so far. “Victimhood fantasy” should be a new entry in the Webster dictionary. pic.twitter.com/NgorkfELpa
— vbspurs (@vbspurs) February 18, 2019