American Politics Thread: The Hunt for Blue November

[Azure]

Greenwald is looking at this issue the same way he looked at the Pentagon Papers, WikiLeaks, etc.

[Red]

Originally Posted by Azure

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/u...n-ukraine.html

Biden's problem is that he had adult children while in office during internet age (read free propaganda platform).
Bush's (W) daughters were too young to be in "business". Of course W himself is a son of someone famous. Bush daughters both hold "public" jobs. Shocking.
Clintons, young kid while in office, same with Obama. Neither going to be a hairdresser or a waitress.
So we have Biden the candidate and Trump with adult kids.

Which of these kids went on to do their own thing without daddy's help? Don Jr a plumber? Ivanka a wedding planner? Wouldnt that be something?

It's understandably upsetting to regular shmoes like us, but silver spoon is a thing in politics and business.

[Senator Clay Davis]

This reminds me that their salvation last time wasn't any of the #### they tried to pull, it was Comey's report. But no shocker it has indeed been a wet fart and nothing more.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1319369105640665089

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by rubecube

And this is the other tactic used by people trying to suppress criticism from the left. Any member of the press who posts anti-Biden content is a Russian asset.

Dude, I warned you about Greenwald a few weeks ago. He's completely been compromised by Russia and its well known. Without a doubt. There's a reason why he is no longer living in the United States, and it ain't because his husband is a big bread earner. Greenwald's got blind spots, and anything to do with Russia and cyberwarfare are two of them.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Red

Biden's problem is that he had adult children while in office during internet age (read free propaganda platform).
Bush's (W) daughters were too young to be in "business". Of course W himself is a son of someone famous. Bush daughters both hold "public" jobs. Shocking.
Clintons, young kid while in office, same with Obama. Neither going to be a hairdresser or a waitress.
So we have Biden the candidate and Trump with adult kids.

Which of these kids went on to do their own thing without daddy's help? Don Jr a plumber? Ivanka a wedding planner? Wouldnt that be something?

It's understandably upsetting to regular shmoes like us, but silver spoon is a thing in politics and business.

Very true, and I'm not disagreeing at all.

I think the bigger issue here isn't whether or not political figures use their position to gain benefits for their family, etc....but the fact that the media is basically refusing to report on the Biden emails, something that concerns people like Greenwald who have been fighting government interference and restriction to information since the Bush years.

Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
Why it matters that the entire mainstream press is non-reporting the Biden emails (or falsely labeling them disinformation): they’re likely to be charged soon with challenging a Biden administration. If they’re already lying on his behalf, it makes them politicians, not press.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by New Era

Dude, I warned you about Greenwald a few weeks ago. He's completely been compromised by Russia and its well known. Without a doubt. There's a reason why he is no longer living in the United States, and it ain't because his husband is a big bread earner. Greenwald's got blind spots, and anything to do with Russia and cyberwarfare are two of them.

lol, this is such a load of crap it is actually hilarious.

"I warned you guys about that guy!!"

Unreal.

And for the record, Greenwald isn't the only 'journalist' with an issue here. If you wouldn't be such a partisan hack you'd see that.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

No, I'm literally asking because I have no idea. I haven't read a lot about them and don't exactly trust the editorializing of Post Millenial or whatever.

EDIT: Basically, WO said "uh oh" but I don't see the uh oh, so... I'm wondering what the uh oh is...

[Red]

Originally Posted by Azure

Very true, and I'm not disagreeing at all.

I think the bigger issue here isn't whether or not political figures use their position to gain benefits for their family, etc....but the fact that the media is basically refusing to report on the Biden emails, something that concerns people like Greenwald who have been fighting government interference and restriction to information since the Bush years.

I guess they don't have a reason to believe they are Biden's emails? Has a proof been produced? An actual proof, not somebody (not under oath) making a comment or sending a tweet etc?

Gonna add this for more contrast. Maybe the mainstream media has a reason to believe the story is fake?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Red

I guess they don't have a reason to believe they are Biden's emails? Has a proof been produced? An actual proof, not somebody (not under oath) making a comment or sending a tweet etc?

Gonna add this for more contrast. Maybe the mainstream media has a reason to believe the story is fake?

Yeah really.

Some news outlets actually have a standard to meet before they print what is essential the political equivalent of an E3 rumour from Eklund.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Red

I guess they don't have a reason to believe they are Biden's emails? Has a proof been produced? An actual proof, not somebody (not under oath) making a comment or sending a tweet etc?

Gonna add this for more contrast. Maybe the mainstream media has a reason to believe the story is fake?

There is no evidence that the emails are fake.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Azure

Greenwald is looking at this issue the same way he looked at the Pentagon Papers, WikiLeaks, etc.

The way he looked at the Pentagon Papers? Glenn Grennwald was four years old when the Pentagon Papers were spilled by Daniel Ellsberg. WTF are you talking about?

And then the great job that Greenwald did on Wikileaks? You mean not recognizing that that Wikileaks was a front for a Russian intelligence operation? Yeah, Greenwald was right on top of that one!

Originally Posted by Azure

lol, this is such a load of crap it is actually hilarious.

"I warned you guys about that guy!!"

Unreal.

And for the record, Greenwald isn't the only 'journalist' with an issue here. If you wouldn't be such a partisan hack you'd see that.

Please point out where I am wrong. Greenwald got sucked into helping a Russian asset get American intelligence information out in the open. He then got sucked into defending a Russian intelligence front operation. So where is the error smart guy?

Originally Posted by Azure

There is no evidence that the emails are fake.

Huh.... ??? There is a ton of evidence the emails are fake. Not being able to produce message headers is a pretty big red flag. Them not existing anywhere but on the laptop is a pretty good indication of them being bull####. This wouldn't pass an intro class intro forensic investigation class let alone FBI examination.

[FlameOn]

Originally Posted by Azure

There is no evidence that the emails are fake.

Did you not read how Guiliani got them? There's a crap ton of red flags right there.

[Red]

Originally Posted by Azure

There is no evidence that the emails are fake.

There is. It's in the metadata. Have you seen it?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

EDIT: Basically, WO said "uh oh" but I don't see the uh oh, so... I'm wondering what the uh oh is...

Ah, I see. I thought your post was rhetorical.

Short answer, you probably shouldn't care. There is some minor hint of something fishy about a couple of the emails but it's all very vague, which is pretty much the sort of thing you'd expect from a red herring story thrown out right before an election to try to smear your opponent. There are also, as noted, plenty of reasons to discredit the source. It isn't exactly pizzagate but it seems to me even less consequential than "but her emails" was last time, if you need to put it somewhere on a spectrum of scandals.

The argument though is less about whether the story itself matters than whether it matters that mainstream outlets won't talk about it at all - even to make it clear why it's silly - for fear that giving it air will help Trump’s reelection prospects. So the real question is whether you care about that. At the end of the day it's about ethics in political journalism.

... erm... Maybe I should have found another way to phrase that last part.

[Azure]

Because Lanny really likes Greenwald.

Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
Is there a single journalist willing to say with a straight face they believe the emails relating to the Bidens are either fabricated or otherwise fraudulently altered, but the Bidens just aren't saying so? There has to be some limits to your willingness to go to bat for them.

Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
When you report a huge archive, there's no way to prove the negative that none of it is altered. You investigate & confirm as much as you can, then use your journalistic judgment. The only way you get confirmation is when the subjects of the reporting don't deny the authenticity.

Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
Oct 19
When we reported the Snowden archive, we knew it was genuine, but breathed a huge sigh of relief when NSA didn't claim the docs were fake.

The same was true with our Brazil reporting over the last year: publishing private messages from corrupt Bolsonaro officials & prosecutors.

Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
Oct 19
As a journalist publishing private communications & docs that are incriminating, you know the subjects of the reporting will immediately claim they're fake *if the are*. Of course they will: that would kill the reporting!

There's a reason the Bidens aren't claiming they're fake.

Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
Oct 19
I don't think that the emails -- so far -- reveal a huge scandal. They so far just establish standard sleaze and DC corruption.

The huge scandal to me is the blatant rank-closing and cone of silence -- a prohibition -- erected *by journalists* around this story to defend Biden.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Ah, I see. I thought your post was rhetorical.

Short answer, you probably shouldn't care. There is some minor hint of something fishy about a couple of the emails but it's all very vague, which is pretty much the sort of thing you'd expect from a red herring story thrown out right before an election to try to smear your opponent. There are also, as noted, plenty of reasons to discredit the source. It isn't exactly pizzagate but it seems to me even less consequential than "but her emails" was last time, if you need to put it somewhere on a spectrum of scandals.

The argument though is less about whether the story itself matters than whether it matters that mainstream outlets won't talk about it at all - even to make it clear why it's silly - for fear that giving it air will help Trump’s reelection prospects. So the real question is whether you care about that. At the end of the day it's about ethics in political journalism.

... erm... Maybe I should have found another way to phrase that last part.

Personally I think the emails mean nothing, and if one could get private emails on other people in Washington, this type of behavior would be pretty standard.

The bigger concern is how the media is handling it, including Twitter shutting down the NYPost account.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Well, there you have it. A bunch of tweets from Glenn Greenwald. Case closed. We should definitely take this as the ultimate word, especially over the intelligence and law enforcement experts who give this zero credence. Glenn Greenwald speaks and Azure pulls a Guliani.

[Azure]

Hey if you think Greenwald is a Russian plant, fine but at least admit there are other journalists saying the same thing.

[Red]

Originally Posted by Azure

Personally I think the emails mean nothing, and if one could get private emails on other people in Washington, this type of behavior would be pretty standard.

The bigger concern is how the media is handling it, including Twitter shutting down the NYPost account.

You are only concerned about that because it's a story you want to believe.

You'd have no problem with Twitter shutting down The National Enquirer (equivalent of NYP) if they had a story that the 545 missing migrant children are not really missing, they are just slaving in Mitch Mcconnell's bourbon factory. Both stories are about as true.

If the story is confirmed to be true, twitter will allow it. It's on Rudy to prove its authenticity.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

This is actually a pretty good summary.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-bid....co/tOgiO1opZC