My snark was perhaps uncalled for. It is a conversation that should probably be excised. Lazy mods. Bad!
2 Likes
But you could probably win a Polk award and then claim itâs a Peabody.
Excellent headline in the thread title, describes the state of affairs well.
https://twitter.com/kenklippenstein/status/1220132472953896960
2 Likes
Greenwald couldâve chosen to take on fascism in the US but instead he chose to cover for them and whine about Democrats. Of course he shouldnât be jailed for exposing corruption, thatâs some terrifying authoritarian shit.
2 Likes
Was not learning of the NSAâs mass surveillance of American citizens worthy? Didnât it transform the conversation?
Greenwaldâs bringing Snowdenâs info to light was a towering achievement. I put it as one of the two most important exposeâs in US history, along with the Pentagon Papers.
How can you bitches not be in awe of this heroism?
All this spite because he dared break ranks and say Russiagate was 90% air?
Yâall sound like 9/11 truthers when they lose it late in the conversation when we keep saying âthe beams didnât have to melt, just soften.â
3 Likes
Greenwald didnât really do much there, he was just a conduit via which Snowden published the information.
That was a lot. Snowden did more, but Greenwald and Poitras wrote up multiple stories and brought it to life. Few journalists would have touched it.
You can really separate people on the left using GG.
There are those who recognize the world, even among allies, has variability of opinion and those who honestly think holding a single idea counter to the orthodoxy, or ever criticizing the left, makes you a traitor.
Both camps are represented on this forum.
1 Like
He choose to cover Brazil because he fell in love with a Brazilian man and wanted to live with him.
lol
Iâm not saying he shouldâve stayed, Iâm saying if he was so concerned about fascism maybe he couldâve had some negative things to say about fascists coming to power in the US rather than providing cover for them? Just a thought.
Hard to figure out what you meant at first. Youâre suggesting that GG criticizes the left, correct?
I think heâs saying that people on the left canât tolerate any criticism âfrom their own sideâ and that doing so immediately leads to someone being branded a traitor. What Iâm saying and I think others would agree with is that his choices of coverage for the 2016 election were poor; he basically only had negative things to say about Democrats, which while accurate do not really jive with him never going after Trump and basically providing cover for him.
1 Like
He almost skipped on it because he was too lazy to install encryption so Snowden could send him a taste of the info he had. Snowden went to Laura Poitras with the info and she went back to Greenwald.
1 Like
Iâm suggesting he criticizes both the right and left. He is wrong sometimes (russiagate) but that doesnât make him a moron, no different than trump, as some would have you believe itt.
The Russiagate shit definitely makes him a moron.
The most generous way to interpret Greenwald is that heâs a well-meaning contrarian/libertarian bro whoâs dangerously incompetent.
1 Like
So? He still earned the Pulitzer. There are reasons Snowden wanted Greenwald â heâs consistently principled and courageous.
BTW, according to GG, the Brasilian attorney general and courts both quashed charges against him. The current ones represent an end run. Details
And the findings on Russiagate never came close to the Dem/pundit hype about pee tape-compromised agent of influence.
.
Hmmm, this must be fake news because 1) this forum loves AOC 2) but Iâve been told we canât tolerate any criticism of the Dirty Dem establishment.
My take on GG is that he is a complete moron whose idiocy sometimes caused him to do good things that others wouldnât.
being wrong on one thing doesnât make someone wrong on all things.