So is it the Russians or the media reaction that made the difference? If I recall correctly one of Greenwald's main theses is that click-thirsty coverage of exciting-sounding stories overwhelmed more substantial topics in the 2016 election.
So, I agree with Greenwald that a broken media environment made it possible. But I disagree with him that that casts doubt on Russian involvement, or invalidates Russian activity as a topic of national concern.
(Correct me if I'm wrong; if he's actually disputing the existence of the meddling he'd go down a few notches in my esteem).
https://medium.com/@ggreenwald/statements-about-possibility-...