1984 is here.

[deckster]

amusingduck said:

Greenwald said:

the idea behind The Intercept: “editors should be there to empower and enable strong, highly factual, aggressive adversarial journalism, not to serve as roadblocks to neuter or suppress the journalism.”

The bit I've bolded is the point at issue here. What he calls "highly factual", the Intercept characterises as "the Tump campaign's dubious claims". I will freely admit that I have not read the article in question, but it seems clear there is more than one side to this particular story and to take Greenwald's words at face value is to miss at least half of what is going on.

[amusingduck]

deckster said:

The bit I've bolded is the point at issue here. What he calls "highly factual", the Intercept characterises as "the Tump campaign's dubious claims". I will freely admit that I have not read the article in question, but it seems clear there is more than one side to this particular story and to take Greenwald's words at face value is to miss at least half of what is going on.

So read the article and form your own view?

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-an...

greenwald said:

3) For almost every personal opinion you express about Biden that you claim I omitted, I actually already included it explicitly in the draft. Just a few examples:

• YOU: "But it’s very significant that the Journal found no corroborating evidence either of Joe Biden’s involvement in any such deals, or those deals being consummated. These are major issues that I feel undermine the draft’s thesis and are downplayed in the draft.”

• MY DRAFT: "Thus far, no proof has been offered by Bubolinski that Biden ever consummated his participation in any of those discussed deals. The Wall Street Journal says that it found no corporate records reflecting that a deal was finalized and that “text messages and emails related to the venture that were provided to the Journal by Mr. Bobulinski, mainly from the spring and summer of 2017, don’t show either Hunter Biden or James Biden discussing a role for Joe Biden in the venture.”

• YOU: "You can certainly note that Shokin’s successor let Burisma off the hook, but that’s not evidence he was installed by Biden in order to achieve that end."

• MY DRAFT: "It is true that no evidence, including these new emails, constitute proof that Biden’s motive in demanding Shokhin’s termination was to benefit Burisma."

• YOU: "A connected problem is that your draft asserts there is a massive suppression attempt by the entire major media to not report out these accusations, but then doesn’t explore how major news organizations have done significant stories, and those stories, such as the Journal’s, have not found anything of significance. The Times has also reported on the China deal and found the claims wanting."

• MY DRAFT: "The Wall Street Journal says that it found no corporate records reflecting that a deal was finalized and that “text messages and emails related to the venture that were provided to the Journal by Mr. Bobulinski, mainly from the spring and summer of 2017, don’t show either Hunter Biden or James Biden discussing a role for Joe Biden in the venture.”...The New York Times on Sunday reached a similar conclusion: while no documents prove that such a deal was consummated, “records produced by Mr. Bobulinski show that in 2017, Hunter Biden and James Biden were involved in negotiations about a joint venture with a Chinese energy and finance company called CEFC China Energy.”

I could go on and on.

[williamp]

I think it might be worth looking at this thread again. We wre told by everyone - including NBC that is was a Russian disinformation campaign. Now? NBC are reporting on it...


https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/133783763928264...

Its clear to me this looks like they did decide to bury the story before the election. That, in itself is worrying. Because if this bit is true, what else on the laptop is true? And how much is Joe invovled?

Will he never be President, and KH will be elected in January? And are we happy with, what has the potentil to be a masive and coordinated camapign to bury bad news

[paulguitar]

williamp said:

I think it might be worth looking at this thread again. We wre told by everyone - including NBC that is was a Russian disinformation campaign. Now? NBC are reporting on it...


https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/133783763928264...

Its clear to me this looks like they did decide to bury the story before the election. That, in itself is worrying. Because if this bit is true, what else on the laptop is true? And how much is Joe invovled?

Will he never be President, and KH will be elected in January? And are we happy with, what has the potentil to be a masive and coordinated camapign to bury bad news

"NBC News could not independently verify whether the email is authentic and unaltered..."

It's over, champ, Just drop it.

[anonymous-user]

williamp said:

I think it might be worth looking at this thread again. We wre told by everyone - including NBC that is was a Russian disinformation campaign. Now? NBC are reporting on it...


https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/133783763928264...

Its clear to me this looks like they did decide to bury the story before the election. That, in itself is worrying. Because if this bit is true, what else on the laptop is true? And how much is Joe invovled?

Will he never be President, and KH will be elected in January? And are we happy with, what has the potentil to be a masive and coordinated camapign to bury bad news

Here. Have another straw. On the house.

[williamp]

paulguitar said:

"NBC News could not independently verify whether the email is authentic and unaltered..."

It's over, champ, Just drop it.

Yes yes I know that. But dont you think it strange that they print the story now, after saying it didnt exist?? Arent you a little bit curious as to why? Why not, you know... not publish it at all?

Trump is over. This isnt about Trump. This is about the media. I dont think its over at all..

[paulguitar]

williamp said:

Yes yes I know that. But dont you think it strange that they print the story now, after saying it didnt exist?? Arent you a little bit curious as to why? Why not, you know... not publish it at all?

Trump is over. This isnt about Trump. This is about the media. I dont think its over at all..

The effort to create a 'Hunter Biden laptop' story was comically farcical and inept. I'd suggest anything related to it is likely just some kind of effort to create clicks/sell magazines etc.

[_dobbo_]

williamp said:

Trump is over. This isnt about Trump. This is about the media. I dont think its over at all..

You're right of course. The American news media (Fox, OANN, NEWSMAX) need to be reigned in and prevented from calling for the assassination of US politicians. That's defo what you meant right?

[Eric Mc]

williamp said:

Yes yes I know that. But dont you think it strange that they print the story now, after saying it didnt exist?? Arent you a little bit curious as to why? Why not, you know... not publish it at all?

Trump is over. This isnt about Trump. This is about the media. I dont think its over at all..

What’s not over?

Are you another Trumpette scrabbling in the dirt to see democracy destroyed?

Shame on you if you are?

[williamp]

Eric Mc said:

What’s not over?

Are you another Trumpette scrabbling in the dirt to see democracy destroyed?

Shame on you if you are?

Oh FFS Eric this isnt about Trump. Its about the press deciding NOW to start reporting on something which, a few weeks ago wasnt worth reporting on as its russian/ Trump/ whatever the reason was.

Is it not worth thinking that, maybe they would do it unless there was **something** there? Might this be considered investigative journalism??

And its not worth wondering why now, when they could keep quiet forever? Just about clicks and advertising (yes the replicans would lap this up), or something else at play. Do they not want Biden, but Harris?

I think its interesting. How the US media are working. But yes, shame on me for thinking about this...

Edited by williamp on Sunday 13th December 00:13

[Gameface]

williamp said:

Yes yes I know that. But dont you think it strange that they print the story now, after saying it didnt exist?? Arent you a little bit curious as to why? Why not, you know... not publish it at all?

Trump is over. This isnt about Trump. This is about the media. I dont think its over at all.

Huh?

[Chester35]

dasigty said:

Twitter, Facebook and now youtube have stepped up another level in censoring content following a story exposing the corruption of the Biden family by the New York Post.
Meanwhile, with the exception of the Wall Street Journal the MSM has not only refused to cover the story, but the far more troubling actions of the social media platforms.
There has been a continuing removal of conservative viewpoints for the last eighteen months or so but this is now the thought police at full throttle deciding what you can or can not read, many Doctors and scientists have already been censored for not following the narrative on covid and now it has gotten outright political in what is surely election interference.

Quoting the original post

Censorship in the old days

1884


You got a bee in your bonnet.

You decided to write a letter and sent it to the Times.

The Times editor decided you were a fruit cake and decided not to publish it.

You moaned about Orwells 1884 but nobody heard your moaning .....


Better times... pardon the pun.

[Chester35]

The mere fact this thread is posted shows that this is

NOT 1984.

The irony?