You know the media are a total and complete mess when writers start contradicting their own outlets to promote false narratives.

Thread on Politico/Fusion Natasha’s denial of Politico’s own reported facts to promote false narratives. https://t.co/nDG50RZXJq — Mollie (@MZHemingway) November 11, 2019

This thread from Tim Pool is priceless, especially considering he’s probably one of the least biased media types you’ll find on Twitter.

Hahahahahaha, ok ok Im so done These people are insane Journalism is dead cc @politico @NatashaBertrand @kenvogel You guys can duke it out pic.twitter.com/6NvyH8ynKS — Tim Pool (@Timcast) November 11, 2019

FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT!

Why is it we can’t get the scene from Godzilla where he says, ‘Let them fight,’ out of our heads?

Heh.

So lets break down the semantic debate Natasha writes that they think Ukraine conspired with the Clinton Campaign and the DNC Vogel writes that Ukraine's government was involved in sharing dirt with a DNC Consultant So Yes, evidence DOES exist to "support" that idea 2/ — Tim Pool (@Timcast) November 11, 2019

But you know, orange man bad or something.

The way Natasha characterizes what the conspiracy is gives them plausible deniability "oh no we KNOW Ukraine did this, but we meant that they thought it was DIRECTLY with Clinton's campaign" 3/ — Tim Pool (@Timcast) November 11, 2019

Don’t look at us, man, we dunno.

We just work here.

More for good measure What we know according to Politico Ukraine was feeding info to a DNC consultant to hurt Trump and boost Clinton The story was corroborated in May of 2019https://t.co/KdiEl60dYZ pic.twitter.com/mdK3G0aCEk — Tim Pool (@Timcast) November 11, 2019

This is all such a freakin’ disaster.

Essentially if you read in Politico and The HIll that a DNC consultant was working with Ukranian officials to hurt Trump it stands to reason that evidence exists to support the idea the the DNC and Clinton's campaign from the top was involved Support does not mean prove — Tim Pool (@Timcast) November 11, 2019

Support does not even mean prove beyond a reasonable doubt I'd say the Politico story from 2017 provides probable cause to investigate, which is exactly what Giuliani is doing — Tim Pool (@Timcast) November 11, 2019

Womp womp womp, Democrats.

Wonder if this is why Schiff’s eyes seem to be bugging out of his pointy little head more than usual.

If you trust media like Democrats tend to you will go insanehttps://t.co/TNmTluxiTW — Tim Pool (@Timcast) November 11, 2019

Ok, so what if you cover the media for a living … will that make you go insane because if so that would explain SO MUCH.

Not a great look, POLITICO.

Related:

Stay in your LANE! Soledad O’Brien tries defending whistleblower attorney Mark Zaid with dunk on Marsha Blackburn and yeah NO

‘Sheer CONTEMPT for members of Congress’: Byron York breaks down Vindman’s transcript making Schiff look even dirtier

‘She KNOWS she is misleading the public’: Mark Cuban decimates Elizabeth Warren in receipt-filled thread and WHOA NELLY