How Russia's attack on Freeland got traction in Canada
Now that we’re well into the second week of an imbroglio that should be remembered as one of the most disgraceful, embarrassing, or at least hilarious events in the recent history of Canadian journalism, the “Chrystia Freeland Lied About Her Family’s Nazi Past” hoax is accruing to itself ever thicker layers of absurdity and silliness.
It was a hoax, we would all admit, if we were capable of resisting the inclination to double-down on the preposterous claims and dirty insinuations that have been allowed to muddy the significance of what has really happened here. It was a hoax, perpetrated on the Canadian public, in service of Vladimir Putin’s gangland regime in Moscow.
Chrystia Freeland, the journalist-turned-politician who was appointed Canada’s Minister of Foreign Affairs only two months ago, has not been shown to have lied about anything. And as the plot thickened, Freeland found herself being accused of engaging in her own hoax by blaming the Russians for her misfortunes.
Quite apart from the adorable Canadian naiveté involved in passive-aggressively permitting the Kremlin to headline-hack itself out of a national spotlight that should have been shining last week on Putin’s belligerence in Ukraine and the Baltics, there are a couple of things that distinguish this particular Kremlin caper from the run-of-the-mill jobs.
http://www.macleans.ca/politics/how-russias-attack-on-freeland-got-traction-in-canada/
For those who missed it, this was another classic lowlight for our intrepid, speaking-truth-to-power scribes at the Intercept... Espcially when Justin Ling of VICE pointed out that the Russians had been openly shopping this story to Canadian media so ol' Glennie was publishing 100% pure agitprop... Greenwald of course tried going to war with Ling before punking out...
Link to tweet
(I told you people a long time ago that I'd be proven right on the type of shill Greenwald is with his $250 million overhyped blog)
= new reply since forum marked as read
