Malcolm Fleschner interviews Michael Tracey on his skepticism on “Russiagate” and the investigation of the Jill Stein campaign for any ties to Russia.
0 seconds of 29 minutes, 0Volume 90%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
Keyboard Shortcuts
Shortcuts Open/Close/ or ?
Play/PauseSPACE
Increase Volume↑
Decrease Volume↓
Seek Forward→
Seek Backward←
Captions On/Offc
Fullscreen/Exit Fullscreenf
Mute/Unmutem
Decrease Caption Size-
Increase Caption Size+ or =
Seek %0-9
Comments
I’m not a “sophisticated” consumer of news. Thanks for the hack-splaining.
Malcolm; Russian heritage??
We have a west coast Internment camp ready for you.
This Russian-descent McCarthyism is such a wrong path. We’ve been at odds with Russia (USSR) for many many years.
It seems to me that they could easily bypass a simple Russian-decent criterion if they are committed to nefarious deeds within the US. They certainly have the skills for that level of infiltration and we have the Hollywood movies to prove it. :-)
So the profiling of contacts as Russian seems more a media ploy than serious investigative efforts.
Lastly, I’m glad for Michael’s voice on the issue between collusion versus Trump’s illegal business activities with Russia.
It seems that Wolff’s book corroborates the point-of-view that Trump wasn’t looking for the election win; rather he was looking for only a media/brand win.
I think a more powerful indictment of Trump would be to know if he’s taking marching orders from Russia/Putin while he has been in office now;
Collusion, money-laundering, and obstruction may not be enough to force Republications to act; [that last statement is insane, but those are the political waters in which we swim.]
Assuming that a certain viewpoint is “crazy” just because it would be extreme if true is a mainstream media tactic. Yes, it would be crazy if Trump was owned by Russian oligarchs who pulled illegal strings to put him in office. No, one is not crazy for believing it. I wish the interview had focused more on actual facts the media had gotten wrong, rather than one journalist’s opinion of the overall nature of how they got it wrong. Cause I’m still not convinced, based on these generalities.
Given that there is zero actual proof on any of the Russia hysteria assertions (except on the Trump jr meeting, but that does not seem to have actually connected to all the other stuff) and no “Russia dun did it!” person can actually say *what* they did (without getting debunked immediately), the tone Michael and Dave used was wholly appropiate.
Excellent interview. I wish, though, that *anybody* of the Russia sceptics at TYT had the balls to call out Cenk and the others who still promulgate this myth. Just have a debate where each side can present their arguments and the other side can try to refute them, without somebody screeching “Putin kills journalists!!!” after their argument gets obliterated, so as to move the goalposts to shut the other side up with a conversation killer argument.
It should be either Michael Tracey or Kyle Kulinski, although Dave Koller probably would also be excellent for the job. He has always been fearless in confronting Cenk on air. Jimmy sadly is not very good at debating and confronting people (by his own admission) and gets too shout-y.