61–70 of 137 posts
> 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??
This takes a very Boolean attitude to truth. Like if I said "the current president of the United States 's family name is Bidden" then that's as false as "Santa Clause's middle name Elvis, is in tribute to his mother's favourite singer". But you could argue that there's measures by which one is more true than the other. In this case, these "lies" all seem to be vaguely within shouting distance of the truth, and his r…
Greenwald 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??
> It is well worth examining how they function because this is how they deceive the public again and again, and it is why public trust in their pronouncements has justifiably plummeted. I wonder if that might also be due to the previous president repeatedly referring to them as "the enemy of the people".
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/437610-trump-cal...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
supposed laptop And you say Greenwald has lost credibility?
Yes. The better question is, how many years ago, exactly, did Giuliani lose the last shreds of credibility he had remaining? He's the supposed origin of it, right? He claims he received it from some sole-proprietorship independent Mac repair shop, which has now conveniently vanished?
For example, make the story about where the laptop came from, and avoid as much as possible the fact POTUS son has incriminating photos and videos (and more?) of himself in the hands of our foreign adversaries.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hunter Biden's laptop is an incredibly awful story. Fox reporters claimed to have obtained the hard drive, then lost it due to conspiracy from the delivery company, then found it, and now refuses to show the contents because Hunter Biden is a down and out man, and it's so sad to kick a remorseful man trying to turn his life around. This is the story according to Fox, and specifically Tucker Carlson — that we cannot s…
I’m sorry? Specific content of the laptop was released, the Biden team was asked if it was authentic and the answer was “no comment”. Why would they do that if it was fake news?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And what content was released? Tucker Carlson specifically stated that kindness for a "pathetic" man was his reason for not releasing "damning" criminal evidence to the public. Where would the Intercept go with that story, not getting to see any evidence, and having the story end on Tucker Carlson saying he won't publicize evidence on corruption? And that the FBI has no comment? What would The Intercept do with No Co…
Have you read the article Glenn wrote that was never published? I’m curious what part exactly you’d call dishonest or unworthy of publication? Glenn does write in an emotional way, but what I like is he tends to exhaustive reference and source his data points. You nicely danced around my comment that none of the content from the laptop has been denied by the Biden team. That’s relevant, no?
He calculatedly spun two ‘sides’ very differently and held the ‘evidence’ to different standards, including specifically omitting multiple source facts inconvenient to his spin while seeming to invite them.
Example, from the top level article today:
> In the weeks leading up to the 2020 election, The New York Post obtained that laptop and published a series of articles about the Biden family’s business dealings in Ukraine, China and elsewhere.
‘Obtained’? Really? That word is doing a lot of work there. It’s not false, but really? Everything he writes now is like this — no precise word is dishonest.
His schtick is super well done, imperceptible to or even hotly denied by smart anti-mainstream readers. He’s very good.
Greenwald 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.