See related discussion:
"Media trust hits new low"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26508039
(I don't think that article itself is very good, but the HN discussion is interesting.)
Greenwald: Yesterday Journalists Spread a Significant Lie All over Twitter
101–110 of 137 posts
Re: Greenwald: Yesterday Journalists Spread a Significant Lie All over Twitter
#102Greenwald is certainly biased, on the one hand he says this: > Think about that: to a CNN reporter, evidence-free assertions from the U.S. security state are tantamount to “confirmation.” That they really do think this way is nothing short of chilling. On the other hand, the laptop produced by Guliani (of which how he got it is weird) is taken as absolute gospel by Greenwald. I mean, question both sides at least??
The DKIM signatures on the emails were verified. Whatever the laptop's sketchy provenance, the actual content being published from it wasn't a forgery.
AFAIK, only a single email was verified this way, and it is innocuous, only suggesting that a Burisma executive met Joe Biden sometime through Hunter. https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/hunter-dkim
Graham notes upfront: "Remember that while the email is validated, the context isn't. It's possible this reflects a secret meeting to conspire with Vice President Biden. Or, it's possible the guy attended one of the many Washington D.C. social functions whereby people shake hands with politicians and exchange pleasantries. As Richelieu is claimed to have said 'Give me six words by the most honest of men and I'll find something to hang him by'. Give me an email dump from the most honest of persons, and I'll pull one out of context to hang them in the court of social media."
Re: Greenwald: Yesterday Journalists Spread a Significant Lie All over Twitter
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gonna disagree there. I’ve worked with journalists (am not one) and it’s not BS as you seem to suggest.
I've worked with journalists and like anything there were different types of approaches to journalism like there are different approaches to any human endeavor. The ones with the most integrity started with an idea for a story but did their best to follow the evidence, and never discarded facts because they didn't fit their preconceived notions. The ones that people are typically frustrated with but get the most clic…
...and part of the reason for that is access.
Journalists who challenge narratives are not given access to people to interview. If you are asking the wrong question, you will simply get "no comment" - and if you do it too much, people will simply stop answering your calls.
That is why the media has effectively aligned with the political parties.
You simply cannot survive in journalism without political support.
Re: Greenwald: Yesterday Journalists Spread a Significant Lie All over Twitter
#104It seems it’s a very corrupt institution and probably always has been. For a while there they made people believe them to be the “fourth estate” the defenders of the democratic faith, etc. Sadly, it seems it was all a rouse and a bullshit narrative. They are not defending the constitution in any way. All they care about is whatever happens to be their particular agenda at a particular point in time which may coincide…
Here's an interview with Tucker Carlson and Greenwald. https://youtu.be/l8pkCZBjgrk?t=252 Where we hear about the CIA deep state in its long attempt to thwart Donald Trump, even before his election. Just part of the story of Greenwald leaving the Intercept. Accoring to Greenwald, the conspiracy goes deep. There is now a full union with the Democrats, the CIA, the Bush-Cheney operatives, Silicon Valley, and Wall Stree…
I would argue that the GOP is in that as well, and that it is Trump/alt-right and Progressives that are not part of the "club".
Re: Greenwald: Yesterday Journalists Spread a Significant Lie All over Twitter
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
The DKIM signatures on the emails were verified. Whatever the laptop's sketchy provenance, the actual content being published from it wasn't a forgery.
AFAIK, only a single email was verified this way, and it is innocuous, only suggesting that a Burisma executive met Joe Biden sometime through Hunter. https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/hunter-dkim Graham notes upfront: "Remember that while the email is validated, the context isn't. It's possible this reflects a secret meeting to conspire with Vice President Biden. Or, it's possible the guy attended one of the many…
I agree: the email reads to me as entirely innocuous.
The rest of the world doesn't seem to agree, though. Right-leaning media proclaimed it was a smoking gun that would destroy Biden's candidacy. But Left-leaning media wasn't any better: to the extent it covered it at all, it was that the email was part of a sophisticated forgery and disinformation campaign by Russian state security services intended to cement Putin's dominance over the USA, with Twitter and most mainstream sources going so far as to ban sharing it.
That's a far cry from innocuous.
Re: Greenwald: Yesterday Journalists Spread a Significant Lie All over Twitter
#106Wow. Just wow. I remember early cyberpunks talking about how the internet would enable infinite lies to spread and for the truth to be completely buried in the noise. And here we are. Now our entire reality has been taken over by people living in a fantasy world. No end in sight. Maybe they weren't nearly pessimistic enough.
I find it odd when people deny the extremely obvious signs that foreign allies are buying influence in DC. I'm sure that happens on both sides of the aisle.
Hunter Biden had zero relevant experience to be a member of the board to a Ukrainian oil company during a conflict with Russia that had huge oil assets at risk. It seems obvious to me that they paid him to have access to his father (then VP to Obama).
The same was true when the Clinton Foundation received tens of millions in donations during the ramp-up to the Syrian civil war while Clinton was the Sec of State. Clinton emails released confirmed weekly meetings with the Saudi Foreign Minister at the same time. It seems obvious that the State Dept & CIA participation in arming rebel groups was facilitated through the conversations had.
...and I don't mean to pick on Democrats. John McCain was part of that effort. I'm sure if we look closely, we'll find a "core establishment" group that holds members of both parties.
...and, arguably, both cases above were in the interests of the US.
It's complicated. A world power with big adversaries cannot operate transparently, so I would not expect the public to be told everything. On the other hand, it would be reassuring if there were private mechanisms whereby this "deep-state club" self-regulates to ensure that these covert actions at least benefit the US, and do not simply enrich those politicians taking cash. ...or maybe that does exist in some form and we just are not aware?
Re: Greenwald: Yesterday Journalists Spread a Significant Lie All over Twitter
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
The DKIM signatures on the emails were verified. Whatever the laptop's sketchy provenance, the actual content being published from it wasn't a forgery.
AFAIK, only a single email was verified this way, and it is innocuous, only suggesting that a Burisma executive met Joe Biden sometime through Hunter. https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/hunter-dkim Graham notes upfront: "Remember that while the email is validated, the context isn't. It's possible this reflects a secret meeting to conspire with Vice President Biden. Or, it's possible the guy attended one of the many…
It's not even clear to me that the tense of the message isn't distorted due to a language barrier.
It could just as easily be interpreted as a thank you for a promise to meet Biden at some point in the future. Something that it seems likely Hunter was promising to a lot of people.
Re: Greenwald: Yesterday Journalists Spread a Significant Lie All over Twitter
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
AFAIK, only a single email was verified this way, and it is innocuous, only suggesting that a Burisma executive met Joe Biden sometime through Hunter. https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/hunter-dkim Graham notes upfront: "Remember that while the email is validated, the context isn't. It's possible this reflects a secret meeting to conspire with Vice President Biden. Or, it's possible the guy attended one of the many…
It's not even clear to me that the tense of the message isn't distorted due to a language barrier. It could just as easily be interpreted as a thank you for a promise to meet Biden at some point in the future. Something that it seems likely Hunter was promising to a lot of people.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ek3QIIFXYAcApkg?format=jpg&name=...
It was pretty apparent Hunter Biden was engaging in foreign lobbying work.
You can pay a lobbyist to influence politicians but paying a politician directly is bribery. The question is if giving money to a politician's son is bribery since they indirectly benefit.
Then there is also the allegation that Joe Biden was taking a percentage of Hunter Biden's lobbying fees ("10% to the big guy"). Which if true is Ron Blagojevich level of corruption.
Re: Greenwald: Yesterday Journalists Spread a Significant Lie All over Twitter
#109people were happy to buy the medias distortions when it came to trump, so it's its only natural the media became accustomed to distort what they want. one cannot understand the news anymore without reading every sentence skeptically, as everything is obfuscated to fit the narrative.
Re: Greenwald: Yesterday Journalists Spread a Significant Lie All over Twitter
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not even clear to me that the tense of the message isn't distorted due to a language barrier. It could just as easily be interpreted as a thank you for a promise to meet Biden at some point in the future. Something that it seems likely Hunter was promising to a lot of people.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ek3QIIFXYAcApkg?format=jpg&name=... It was pretty apparent Hunter Biden was engaging in foreign lobbying work. You can pay a lobbyist to influence politicians but paying a politician directly is bribery. The question is if giving money to a politician's son is bribery since they indirectly benefit. Then there is also the allegation that Joe Biden was taking a percentage of Hunter Biden's l…
The question is if giving money to a politician's son is bribery since they indirectly benefit.
If that were true, every politician's close relatives would have to stay in some kind of economic suspended animation while they serve in office. But other sensible measures, like prohibiting a President or his children from maintaining control of a global business empire while he is in office, are probably warranted in light of recent events.
There is no evidence that the "big guy" quote is genuine.