I don't read twitters so I can't speak to whatever fights Glenn gets into on there probably a hundred times a day as his hair trigger is Peter Daou level, but in his Intercept articles at least that touch on this Russia hysteria narrative, they're mostly about calling BS on media factual inaccuracies, narratives and sometimes Democrats who are pushing these. Rarely does he even have any kind of narrative except "they're fucking up yet again" to it.
His last one, for example, is mostly about Donna Brazille, but has the same form as the articles re: Russia he's been publishing all year. In one instance, the Washington Post misquoted something, "progressive/Democratic" twitter spread it endlessly and it got picked up further from there and jabbered about, all while the Washington Post quietly appended a correction and edited their article which completely destroys the story but none of the people who helped push the story out there bothered to walk it back or discuss it further that he could see. (Despite me putting this link here, don't take it as me having read it again since skimming a week ago:
https://theintercept.com/2017/11/05/four-viral-claims-spread-by-journalists-on-twitter-in-the-last-week-alone-that-are-false/)
Similar to that whole hysteria earlier about Russia hacking a power plant which the WaPo didn't bother to contact the company, and almost none of the story was true except that there was a laptop that may have been compromised by spyware that may have come within fifty miles of a power plant. Yet MSNBC experts and such were just retweeting the original headline and going AHA! PROOF!
Matt Taibbi (quiet Mandark) definitely has taken the "this is distracting Democrats from doing XYZ against Trump" line in his more friendly versions of these articles, but again from the articles only, Glenn's been mostly just shitting on the media/twitterati for falling for this crap over and over. And then spreading it. Which sure you can talk about glass houses and all, but that doesn't erase their stupidity.
