Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, July 25, 2019

Former MSNBC host Krystal Ball took aim at her former network following special counsel Robert Mueller's marathon testimony on Wednesday, blasting MSNBC as "not journalism" and singled out "The Rachel Maddow Show" for floating wild "Russian conspiracy theories" that spectacularly blew up during former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's testimony.

"I dare to say some talent did drink more deeply of the Russia conspiracy waters than others, Rachel Maddow, you have some explaining to do," said Ball on her show "Rising." "This is not journalism, it is Infowars conspiracy theory," she added.

"CNN and many other outlets are clearly not blameless in this hype machine and the Democratic Party was plenty happy to engage in this speculation as well," she continued. "Individual members clearly loved that sweet cable news spotlight but I single out my former employer, in particular, in part because they were certainly the worst mainstream offenders."

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

How dare she take on Rachel, she's so dreamy....

-Danni

#1 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-25 08:14 PM | Reply

Maddow is the leading Russian Conspiracy nutter and spreader of hysteria.

#FakeNews

#2 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-25 10:28 PM | Reply

The US Senate just found that Russia has been interfering with US elections since 2014.
Mueller found that the Russians were helping Trump.

The only Russian hoax is that they didnt buy Trump.

#3 | Posted by bored at 2019-07-25 11:19 PM | Reply

That was a waste.

Ball didn't say anything compelling, or more importantly, cite an actual example.
She just kind of ranted and then did RoC's favorite "STS" calling out some guy I never heard of, and Chait who's on occasionally, and is fairly sane but biased. Irony (see Greek tragedy).

I wonder if Ball wishes she could redo that whole thing.

#4 | Posted by YAV at 2019-07-25 11:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Sounds like a disgruntled ex-employee that's auditioning for a job at Fox News.

#5 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-07-25 11:54 PM | Reply

I really thought this was classic ... the way the Rasha goes looney .. she's a law professor. ...

CNN analyst: Democrats should 'shut up' about impeachment
www.youtube.com

#6 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-07-26 12:11 AM | Reply

The only Russian hoax is that they didnt buy Trump.
#3 | POSTED BY BORED

But did the Russian oligarchs buy Hillary?

A donor to the Clinton Foundation, Russian oligarch Viktor Vekselberg, led the Russian side of the effort, and several American donors to the Clinton charity got involved. Clinton's State Department facilitated U.S. companies working with the Russian project, and she personally invited Medvedev to visit Silicon Valley.
thehill.com

I bet lots of oligarchs from all over the world donated to Hillary's "foundation".

#7 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-07-26 12:14 AM | Reply

I've never heard of this woman

#8 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-07-26 01:15 AM | Reply

I recall her name ~ but only just now. Now I know why she's an "ex."

#9 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-07-26 01:25 AM | Reply

#2 conspiracy theories don't have evidence, moron.

#10 | Posted by jpw at 2019-07-26 08:19 AM | Reply

"Is Krystal Ball's PAC a fresh approach or a get-rich scheme?"

www.mcclatchydc.com

"But thus far, nobody has benefited more financially from the group than Ball herself. Of the $445,000 Ball raised for the group, she paid herself more than a third of that -- $174,000 -- in salary, according to documents filed with the Federal Election Commission. The majority of her salary -- $104,000 -- came in the first three months of this year alone."

#11 | Posted by 726 at 2019-07-26 08:19 AM | Reply

Also, who cares what a stripper thinks.

And how can she not be a stripper with a name like Krystal Ball?

#12 | Posted by jpw at 2019-07-26 08:30 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Ms. Ball is offended by Maddow "stringing together" a long list of true answers given by Mueller and then making sure her audience understood what they meant, if they didn't already.

One conclusion of the Mueller report and Mueller's RECENT testimony is that Trump accepted Russian help getting elected in 2016 and coordinated its campaign with intelligence leaks provided by the Russians.

The ant-patriotic Right, the Russian Right, the Putin Fanboys (Chapter President: Donald Trump) are as busy as they can be attempting to erase this from history.

#13 | Posted by Zed at 2019-07-26 09:20 AM | Reply

No CraZed, Ms. Ball is calling Madcow out for months of Russia Collusion nonsense, not her spin from Wednesday night.

#14 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-26 03:33 PM | Reply

#14 what else do you call the extensive contacts and communication that occurred?

What if the meeting that was admitted to?

#15 | Posted by jpw at 2019-07-26 04:29 PM | Reply

What of...

Damn autocorrect.

#16 | Posted by jpw at 2019-07-26 04:36 PM | Reply

#15

The DNC calls it opposition research, how about you?

#17 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-26 04:48 PM | Reply

Are you serious?

#18 | Posted by YAV at 2019-07-26 05:10 PM | Reply

#18

Absolutely, and the word in DC is that things are about to get real for everyone who was relying on the Steele Dossier:

Over months of work, FBI agents painstakingly researched every claim Steele made about Trump's possible collusion with Russia, and assembled their findings into a spreadsheet-like document.

The over-under isn't flattering to Steele.

Multiple sources familiar with the FBI spreadsheet tell me the vast majority of Steele's claims were deemed to be wrong, or could not be corroborated even with the most awesome tools available to the U.S. intelligence community. One source estimated the spreadsheet found upward of 90 percent of the dossier's claims to be either wrong, nonverifiable or open-source intelligence found with a Google search.

In other words, it was mostly useless.

"The spreadsheet was a sea of blanks, meaning most claims couldn't be corroborated, and those things that were found in classified intelligence suggested Steele's intelligence was partly or totally inaccurate on several claims," one source told me.

The FBI declined comment when asked about the spreadsheet.

The FBI's final assessment was driven by many findings contained in classified footnotes at the bottom of the spreadsheet. But it was also informed by an agent's interview, in early 2017, with a Russian that Steele claimed was one of his main providers of intelligence, according to my sources.

The FBI came to suspect that the Russian misled Steele, either intentionally or through exaggeration, the sources said, with the intention that the information get passed to the Clinton Campaign.

The spreadsheet and a subsequent report by special prosecutor Robert Mueller show just how far off the seminal claims in the Steele dossier turned out to be.

Steele ran with his dossier, which the FBI is now claiming to be worthless, and the DNC and MSM ate it up.

Of course, everyone here was claiming that it was just opposition research, right?

The Hill: FBI's spreadsheet puts a stake through the heart of Steele's dossier

#19 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-26 05:30 PM | Reply

"The FBI came to suspect that the Russian misled Steele, either intentionally or through exaggeration, the sources said, with the intention that the information get passed to the Clinton Campaign."

Well that proves it.
Russia didn't meddle in our elections.
Trump exonerated, Steele exposed as the Alex Jones of pantsuits.

#20 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-26 05:35 PM | Reply

No one doubts that the Russians tried to meddle in our elections, Snoofy, they have been trying to do it for decades.

#21 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-26 07:35 PM | Reply

#15

The DNC calls it opposition research, how about you?

#17 | Posted by Rightocenter

Really. Members of the DNC set up a secret meeting, that they later tried to lie about, with Russians claiming to have dirt on Trump?

Cut the schitt with this garbage. Or at least stop making lame comments about others grasping at straws while you show it to be clear projection.

Of course, everyone here was claiming that it was just opposition research, right?

How does any of what you quoted suggest otherwise as opposed to showing it was a document of lies, possibly intentional lies?

#22 | Posted by jpw at 2019-07-26 07:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Russians tried to meddle in our elections"

"tried"

No thoughts on whether they were successful?

Jury still out on that, while you're demanding Pelosi impeach the fruits of their labor, and pretty sure 17 Republicans will flip?

That is sooooooo cute. Keep it up and I'll be forced to pinch your cheek!

#23 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-26 09:39 PM | Reply

- No thoughts on whether they were successful?

Only in creating hysteria. None of the cattle were actually bitten by the snake, they were all injured in the stampede.

Now Aborted_Monson and Danni sees snakes everywhere.

#24 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-26 10:10 PM | Reply

"Only in creating hysteria. None of the cattle were actually bitten by the snake, they were all injured in the stampede."

Hard to see how that's not meddling.
Maybe RightOCenter would like to tag back in.

#25 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-26 10:13 PM | Reply

I've never denied they meddled. I've called the collusion-treason-conspiracy accusations a political hoax.

#26 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-26 11:13 PM | Reply

Trump tower meeting was a hoax, never happened.

Got it.

#27 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-07-26 11:20 PM | Reply

Ir wasn't a conspiracy; Had there been a conspiracy to collude, Mueller would have said so.

"As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime." - The Mueller

#28 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-26 11:30 PM | Reply

"I've never denied they meddled."

You deny it every time you ask whose votes were flipped.

#29 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-27 01:45 AM | Reply

Mueller absolutely confirmed and swore under oath that Russia engaged in a systematic effort to help Trump win in 2016, that Trump and his campaign welcomed Russian aid, and that Trump lied to the American people about his business dealings in Russia.

Mueller also stated, flatly, that Russia is "doing it as we sit here, and they expect to do it during the next campaign."

And Trump has already said he welcomes their help with the 2020 campaign.

It was also clear that Mueller said Trump could be charged once he left office.

#30 | Posted by YAV at 2019-07-27 10:05 AM | Reply

You deny it every time you ask whose votes were flipped.
#29 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

You have evidence that votes were flipped?

Are you also on the Tony Bus that Mitch is a Russian asset? How deep does this rabbet hole go?

#31 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-27 10:36 AM | Reply

You have evidence that votes were flipped?

Clearly English isn't your primary language.

#32 | Posted by YAV at 2019-07-27 10:56 AM | Reply

Apparently you can't answer the question either.

#33 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-27 11:03 AM | Reply

Answer what?

Read what you quoted, read your response.
You figure out why it doesn't make sense.
If you can't figure it out, that's your problem.
I'll just sit back and enjoy.

Which reminds me.

How deep does this rabbet hole go?

Deep enough for the other piece to create a nice fit/finish. Duh.

#34 | Posted by YAV at 2019-07-27 11:07 AM | Reply

So then. You have evidence that votes were flipped?

#35 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-27 11:19 AM | Reply

You're either attempting to move the goalposts, or you don't comprehend the incongruity.

#36 | Posted by YAV at 2019-07-27 11:54 AM | Reply

Probably both.

#37 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-27 02:33 PM | Reply

It was thoughful of that BernieBro to try and stick up for that right-winger who was getting bullied, though.

#38 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-27 02:36 PM | Reply

Trump won. Hillary lost. Russia caused neither outcome.

If you have evidence otherwise, post it.

#39 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-27 03:06 PM | Reply

See? He's denying that Russia meddled in the elections again.

#40 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-27 03:33 PM | Reply

That they 'meddled' in no way supports the conclusion that Trump won as a result.

Russian meddling did not produce a Trump win or a Clinton loss.

Otherwise you'd be able to produce evidence that quantifies the affected votes.

#41 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-27 03:37 PM | Reply

{yawn}

#42 | Posted by YAV at 2019-07-27 03:40 PM | Reply

Russian meddling produced fear and uncertainty about the election system,

a DNC media-driven collusion - conspiracy hoax, and Russia-centric xenophobic hysteria.

#43 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-27 03:41 PM | Reply

"Otherwise you'd be able to produce evidence that quantifies the affected votes."

Is that the way it works?
Can you produce evidence that quantifies how many votes Walter Mondale affected with his "Where's The Beef?" line?

#44 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-27 03:51 PM | Reply

{yawn}

^
He's like a record that doesn't know it's broken.

#45 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-27 03:51 PM | Reply

"Ex-Employee disgruntled by employer! News at 11!"

#46 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-07-27 03:51 PM | Reply

Can you produce evidence that quantifies how many votes Walter Mondale affected with his "Where's The Beef?" line?
#44 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

I'm not the one claiming that Russian meddling affected votes. They did not.

Anyways, you just proved my point. Mondale turned off voters like Hillary did, and couldn't get enough voters to the polls.

No meddling required for that.

#47 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-27 04:03 PM | Reply

"Anyways, you just proved my point. Mondale turned off voters like Hillary did, and couldn't get enough voters to the polls."

Stop me if you've heard this before:
Can you produce evidence that quantifies how many votes Walter Mondale affected with his "Where's The Beef?" line?

#48 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-27 04:08 PM | Reply

"I'm not the one claiming that Russian meddling affected votes. They did not."

Oh I see.
You're claiming Russian meddling did not affect votes.
Did it affect voters, then?

Were any votes -- or voters -- affected when this happened, metaphorically? "None of the cattle were actually bitten by the snake, they were all injured in the stampede."

#49 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-27 04:10 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort