The AP in a new article narrates the path of the disinformation campaign related to the lie that Ukraine is the villain of the 2016 election interference in the US. Getting past it as a lingering media frame remains as the GOP keeps propping it up.

The problem remains that the AP, as an agent of MSM, is also rationalizing the disinformation campaigns, as if it ever was a matter of bothsideism.

The reality is that personal conversations between Putin and Trump have always been key to Trump’s thinking that the agency of Russia in the post-Soviet period can always hide behind conspiracy theories blaming Ukrainians.

Trump’s own experience with Ukrainian-American corruption (see Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen, The Shreks, et al) informs his own primitive thinking and manipulations, knowing the promises (and loans) made to him by Russia.

It is the nebulous nature of the Ukrainian theory, which leaves room for both direct and indirect interference, that has given the idea a shape-shifting, evolving form that has contributed to its staying power.

A Ukraine conspiracy theory embraced by President Trump has blurred the facts of the impeachment case against him for many Americans before it even reaches the Senate for trial. https://t.co/GWCTpVEHm5 — The Associated Press (@AP) January 12, 2020

The discredited theory, spread online by GOP allies in interviews and tweets, has been embraced by a president reluctant to acknowledge the reality of Russian election interference, and anxious to show he had reason to be suspicious of Ukraine as the U.S. withheld crucial military aid last year. The effect: blurring the facts of the impeachment case for many Americans even before it reaches a trial that could begin with days. Experts fear the strategy leaves the U.S. vulnerable to more misinformation campaigns in the 2020 election and signals to the Kremlin and other foreign actors that Americans are willing to cling to falsehoods. A review by The Associated Press shows that the Ukraine conspiracy theory traces back to Trump’s 2016 campaign, was spread online and later advanced by Russian President Vladimir Putin weeks after his own country was blamed for election interference. Finally, some of America’s own elected leaders made it their truth. apnews.com/… “These fictions are harmful even if they are deployed for purely domestic political purposes.” — Fiona Hill

Unfortunately IMPOTUS* is a main actor in the latest US legitimation crisis, and facilitated by MSM.

Legitimation crisis refers to a decline in the confidence of administrative functions, institutions, or leadership.[1][2][3] The term was first introduced in 1973 by Jürgen Habermas, a German sociologist and philosopher.[4] Habermas expanded upon the concept, claiming that with a legitimation crisis, an institution or organization does not have the administrative capabilities to maintain or establish structures effective in achieving their end goals.[3][4] The term itself has been generalized by other scholars to refer not only to the political realm, but to organizational and institutional structures as well.[3][5] While there is not unanimity among social scientists when claiming that a legitimation crisis exists, a predominant way of measuring a legitimation crisis is to consider public attitudes toward the organization in question.[2][6] […] …A legitimation crisis, on the other hand, is an input crisis that occurs when “the legitimation system does not succeed in maintaining the requisite level of mass loyalty.”[61] It is an identity crisis in which administrations are unable to establish normative structures to the extent required for the entire system to function properly.[62] As a result, the state suffers a loss of support by the public when the electorate judges its administration unaccountable.[40][63] This loss of public confidence is one of many characteristics of a legitimation crisis, among them issues such as policy incoherence and loss of institutional will.[64] […] During the Cold War era, most European Countries respected the authority of the United States as an international leader.[125] Europeans accepted the United States as the primary defender against the Soviet Union. After the Soviet Union fell, however, some scholars believe the United States was no longer needed by the Europeans for that purpose and therefore lost international legitimacy.[125 en.wikipedia.org/…