"Despite its brevity, the report makes many repetitive statements remarkable for their misplaced modifiers, mangled assertions, and missing words. This is not just bad English: this is muddled thinking and vague or entirely absent argument. Take, for example, this phrase: “Moscow most likely chose WikiLeaks because of its self-proclaimed reputation for authenticity.” I think, though I cannot be sure, that the authors of the report are speculating that Moscow gave the products of its hacking operation to WikiLeaks because WikiLeaks is known as a reliable source. The next line, however, makes this speculation unnecessary: “Disclosures through WikiLeaks did not contain any evident forgeries.”
Or consider this: “Putin most likely wanted to discredit Secretary Clinton because he has publicly blamed her since 2011 for inciting mass protests against his regime in late 2011 and early 2012, and because he holds a grudge for comments he almost certainly saw as disparaging him.” Did Putin’s desire to discredit Clinton stem from his own public statements, or are the intelligence agencies basing their appraisal of Putin’s motives on his public statements? Logic suggests the latter, but grammar indicates the former. The fog is not coincidental: if the report’s vague assertions were clarified and its circular logic straightened out, nothing would be left.""Wikileaks Press Conference Post Mortem: The CIA "Issued A Press Release, Not An Intelligence Report"".
"It’s time to retire the tainted term ‘fake news’". Ending a PR experiment that backfired rather seriously. Here's a photo of Bezos phoning Sulzberger to discuss the change in strategy.
Tweet (Tom Mills):
"Big pro-Israel expose story. BBC already leading with contrition of exposed parties, rather than the actual story.""Israeli diplomat worked inside Labour to discredit 'crazy' Corbyn". "Israeli diplomats cautioned against 'operating' British Jewish organisations". "Did Israeli embassy spy on Scottish National Party?" The Scots might have the courage to complain as they are not so much under the Khazar thumb.
Indistinguishable groups of violent racist supremacists: "The Alt Right is The New Jew". "Kahanist Won’t Defend Montana Jews Against Neo-Nazi March".
"Bomb threats reported at Jewish community centers around the country". Very carefully worded, as it's your career if you make a slip: "Many of those threats have been unsubstantiated and cleared, according to police--though some are ongoing. It is not clear whether or not the cases are connected."
Gramsci's Prison Notebooks.
"In Humiliation For Beppe Grillo, Pro-EU Liberal Group Blocks Alliance With 5-Star Movement". It is embarrassing to set fire to all your principles to join a group that won't have you as you have no principles.
Department of learning nothing from experience. "Against Meryl Streep". "Dear Meryl Streep, About That Golden Globe Speech". Tweet (EncyclopæDramatica):
"Remember when #MerylStreep pwned Trump? I don't. What I remember is Streep publicly supporting known pedo Roman Polanksi. That's just me."Tweet (Chris Arnade):
"This seems unhelpful""The Agony And The Ecstasy Of Kurt Eichenwald".
"Did a Ukrainian University Student Create Grizzly Steppe?". At least as much evidence than that the Russians did.
"Future Crimes". I enjoy the implicitly racist way in which American liberals invariably describe Barry, with words like 'urbane', witty' and 'elegant', as if he wins at life and the Presidency solely by virtue of the fact that he is an American black man who isn't a ghetto thug. Yet: "U.S. Bombed Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia in 2016" and "Barack Obama: The Nobel Peace Prize Winner Who’s Bombed 7 Countries" and "Pity the sad legacy of Barack Obama". Just now, suddenly, the next President will be a psychopath: "Welcome to Psychopathocracy".