Thread

It’s a day that ends in y, which means there’s a new component of “Russian collusion” that has fallen apart.

Today’s is that Cambridge Analytica was the smoking gun, which was torn to shreds by a 3-year UK investigation.

I think some apologies are in order

This story starts, as so many Russian Collusion hoaxes do, with @HillaryClinton. As part of her efforts to pin her electoral defeat on anyone else, she suggested Cambridge Analytica might be the culprit.

And much like every other conspiracy theory that purports to tie Trump and Putin together, Congress quickly picked up her lead.

No surprises that @RepAdamSchiff led the pack down the same unverified rabbit hole.

But he wasn’t alone. @SenFeinstein also got into the mix, calling for additional investigating as part of the Russia probe.

Ditto that from @SenBlumenthal.

And this one was bipartisan. @TGowdySC jumped at the same shadows as his colleagues on the other side of the aisle.

The media quickly circled the wagons on the story. The real leader was @guardian, who dedicated an entire subset of their reporting to “Cambridge Analytica and it’s links to the Brexit Leave campaign in the UK and the Trump Team.”

Not sure that was a great use of resources.

Their key reporter on the beat was @carolecadwalla, who consistently told us that Trump, Putin, and Brexit were all linked by Cambridge Analytica, and insisted she was not a “crackpot conspiracy theorist.”

Well.

@NPR had her on to make the case about the supposed connection, too.

I’m not sure “shows” is really the right word, in retrospect.

The rest of the US media picked up the general story, too. Out in front was @VanityFair.

We had more speculation from other outlets who were already hot on the heels of the Russian Collusion white whale. Here’s @nytimes.

And I’m sure you’ll be as surprised as I was to see @CNN get into the mix as well.

@anneapplebaum had a piece about the whole thing for @washingtonpost

I think the tweet here from @AmerIndependent says it all.

And @KeithOlbermann went full conspiracy. Big shock.

It’s hard to overstate how deep some of the blue checks went with this conspiracy theory.

Here’s @tribelaw suggesting that @realDonaldTrump was only elected because of Cambridge Analytica and Russia, and that Trump paid Cambridge to get to Putin. Insane.

One of the most adamant supporters of this conspiracy theory was @Amy_Siskind. She said over and over again that there was a link, in the classic “the walls are closing in” style.

Every piece of commentary on Cambridge Analytica was basically just this meme.

Obligatory @SethAbramson mention. He had plenty of awful takes but this “the noose is tightening” one was too good to diminish with anything else.

And I can always count on @funder for bad takes. Today is no exception. He even stole my shtick a little bit here.

I really just don’t know what happened to @robreiner. What is it with these people and trails.

And last but not least, @Will_Bunch got involved with the Nancy Drew novel that our political discourse was for the last four years.

Cambridge Analytica was “the key” and “the nexus” and whatever all else.

(Also if you want to read about how this conspiracy theory was blown, this one from @FinancialTimes is quite good: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/43962679-b1f9-4818-b569-b028a58c8cd2)

The lesson here, as with every other part of the “Russian Collusion” narrative, is clear: don’t rush headlong into thinly sourced reports by people who really, really want something to be true. They’re often wrong for obvious reasons.

That was the case about Cambridge Analytica.

And we need to call these sorts of hypotheses by their rightful name: conspiracy theories.

They may be wrapped up in prettier words than suggestions that the moon landing was a hoax, but that doesn’t make them any more legitimate.