GREENWALD: 'Some call it aiding & abetting - I call it investigative journalism'

[kpete]

GREENWALD: The reason I've been reluctant to answer that question up until this point is because the theory on which those questions are based - and I'm not suggesting you're embracing it, but you're - you're referencing the theory that others have embraced - is really quite pernicious, that if you're a journalist and you work with your source and in - and in cooperating with them and in obtaining documents that you think ought to be released to the public that somehow that's called aiding and abetting. I call that investigative journalism. There is no investigative journalist on the planet who doesn't work cooperatively with their sources in order to obtain the information they need to inform their readers.

more:
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/news-is-what-somebody-somewhere-wants.html

[sabrina 1]

1. And the SC agrees with him. Which is why despite stenogropher David Gregory's pathetic opinion,

Yes, I know, he was 'just asking a question', this country has never successfully prosecuted a journalist for doing the job they are supposed to do. The SC rulings on cases involving journalist have always erred on the side of the free press.

Someone needs to take old Gregory aside and teach him some lessons on our democracy.

[railsback]

2. and teach Greenwald what a journalist is, too.

[sabrina 1]

4. Greenwald is giving lessons on what a real journalist is. Gregory will never attain the status of

'journalist', he is what he is and nothing can change that.

[railsback]

6. Ah, so, to be a 'real' journalist

you have to learn the art of Ad Hominem attacks on your detractors.. like FOX does, because they're 'journalists', too.

[sabrina 1]

7. You have to have a history, say ten years, of telling the truth regardless of the vicious attacks

you are subjected to by partisans, in his case throughout the Bush years, from the Far Right Lunatics. Greenwald has earned the title of 'journalist' which is why he went from being just a blogger, to an Internationally respected journalist on one of the more respected news media in the world.

Gregory otoh, is a wannabe, who will never achieve the status Greenwald has achieved. And as an Attorney whose specialty is Civil Rights he has a unique expertise, missing in so many of our Corporate Stenographers, to know what he is talking about.

Btw, did you disagree with him during the Bush years? I'm curios because he is saying not a single thing that is different than what he was saying then, and I have been reading him since he posted his first blog in 2005.

[railsback]

12. 'Respect' is relative

depending on wether you agree with him or not. If Greenwald put out a story that Snowden was actually hurting the U.S. on an international scale, and should turn himself in, then Greenwald would be a hack to those who now regard him as a 'journalist'.

[Thinkingabout]

3. Has Greenwald taking any action as to provide any outlet to enable Snowden to avoid returning

To the US to face his charges?

[sabrina 1]

5. Wikileaks attorneys are handling that. Why do you ask?

[Thinkingabout]

8. Did Greenwald facilitate Snowden along the trail of escape?

[sabrina 1]

9. What is the basis for your question? David Gregory? Corporate shill, right wing moron?

Present some reason, something that would even make such a question legitimate, and I will read it, consider it and make a judgement. But please, don't lower DU to the level of the Corporate Media and use Gregory's 'question' to justify yours. Is there something other than that which has prompted your question? I need facts to respond to, not CTs from the Corporate Media.

I will be happy to answer a question based on facts. CTs not so much, we have a forum for CTs.

[Thinkingabout]

10. The question could not be easier, might it be you refuse to answer and claim Greenwald's Fifth

Amendment Rights. So when Greenwald is doing "investigative journalism" and ask a question makes Greenwald a corporate shill and RW moron. Hope Greenwald will be investigated to the fullest. As far as Gregory asking a question Greenwald did not want to answer and here you are doing the same.

[sabrina 1]

11. Now we got the answer to my question. You have nothing other than the Corporate Shill, Gregory's

Rovian attempt to elicit a response to a question that had no basis in fact, to base YOUR question on. I thought so. And even more than I asked for, you confirm that some on the 'left' are going even further than the far right during the Bush era and demanding the prosecution of journalists.

Thanks, I was hoping I was wrong, to be honest. That maybe you had a sincere belief there was some reason for that question. As someone said, the depths to which the 'left' has sunk is likely to lose the election for the Dem Party in 2014, IF people perceive that this kind of witch hunting of journalists is a Democratic Value.

Do you even realize what you just said?

Oh, and Greenwald slaughtered Gregory to the delight of the entire rational, thinking world. It's way past time these puppets and propagandists got their heads handed to them, and no one does it better than Greenwald.

[Thinkingabout]

13. You really have problems, still did not answer a simple question and flying off at the handle does

Not answer the question. There are many ways for investigators to find the truth. BTW, you know they already have the phone records and maybe drones in the air, better be watching above. Heard something the other day the gubermint is placing clouds to conceal the drones.

[sabrina 1]

14. Gibberish. Nowhere to even begin to sort it out. Greenwald always had the ability to expose

the truth, he has outdone himself this time. Thanks, you did answer my questions and there were no surprises.

[Thinkingabout]

15. I can see it coming now, Greenwald will be charged with aiding Snowden and who knows where the

drones will appear next. It is time to break up this cause and send it away along with those who thinks they can bring down this country with scumbags like Snowden and Greenwald. Useless.

[sabrina 1]

16. Wow!

Did you know DU has a Conspiracy Theory forum?

[Thinkingabout]

17. You must be very familiar witb it.

[bemildred]

18. No. He's a lawyer, he knows that would be stupid. nt

[Skidmore]

19. So now he's a journalist? I thought he said he wasn't a journalist but

an advocate.