Here Comes the Glenn Greenwald Hit Piece

[Catherina]

Here Comes the Glenn Greenwald Hit Piece
Abby Ohlheiser Jun 26, 2013

Following a series of stunning revelations concerning the NSA's surveillance and data collection tactics, queries into Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald's personal life weren't on the top of the list of pressing questions for most. But for those who did have questions about the columnist, who broke the bulk of the stories so far out of Edward Snowden's leaks, the New York Daily News is here for you. Perhaps Rep. Peter King will take a break from calling for Greenwald's prosecution and glean some new material from the story.

Of all the reporters publishing material based on the Snowden leaks, Greenwald has faced the strongest and most public scrutiny in the media for his role in reporting the story — essentially the same treatment levied at Snowden himself almost immediately after he revealed himself as the source.

Essentially, the Daily News revelations boil down to three broad stories: first, Greenwald's involvement as a partner in Master Notions, a company that settled a lawsuit with a former client, which just happens to be a porn company, after the company's owner refused to pay Master Notions for business consulting services.

...

<quotes of idiotic asshole smear bullshit related to representing a porn company, backtaxes, and a lawsuit>

...

While newsworthy figures, and bombshell stories, are generally fair game for scrutiny, the Daily News doesn't exactly make the case for the relevance of any of their dirt the actual reporting that put Greenwald in the spotlight in the first place.

...

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/06/here-comes-glenn-greenwald-hit-piece/66635/

[ht]
That how the assholes drain people's fighting energy. They get you to step in their quicksand of lies so you can't do anything else.

IGNORE THEM. Don't entertain. Your freedom and the freedom of generations to come are at stake.

Prehistoric bullshit and repetitive cut'n'paste jobs, straight from Carney's office to the disreputable Daily News, are NOT worth any thinking person's time or energy.

Fuck any assholes trying to take our rights away.

[railsback]

1. Only attack the messengers of critical stories not supporting your cause.

such as, the people being critical of Greenwald are nothing but anti-Constitutional hacks.

Got it.

[grasswire]

2. "Got it"

Obviously not!

[railsback]

4. LoL!

Yeah, the hypocrisy is overwhelming..

[sabrina 1]

3. Did you support the smear campaign against Clinton? Do you support the

silencing of journalists? This is already backfiring, and I couldn't be more thrilled to see the reaction all over the internet tonight. Even people who are not necessarily in agreement with him, find these smear campaigns to be despicable.

It is only making people more interested in what they are afraid of. So maybe if they did nothing wrong they should focus their attention on informing the people of what they have a right to know, because attacking the messenger has never worked.

[railsback]

5. I'm just saying it stops no one here from criticizing the messengers of critical dissent.

I fail to see the cause of such confusion.

[sabrina 1]

9. Ordinary people are allowed to 'criticize'. We are not talking about 'criticizing'

we are talking about powerful people paying for smear campaigns against people like Clinton, and now journalists like Greenwald. There is a whole lot of difference between eg, The Chamber of Commerce who have already been exposed for hiring Spy Corps to target people like Greenwald, and yes they did it several years ago when he was writing about the Bank of America and the Chamber of Commerce.

Please do not confuse criticism, with lying, vicious paid for smear campaigns. I would condemn this in our country no matter who it is aimed at. This is despicable, and we will learn who is behind it. I know who my #1 suspect is.

[railsback]

11. Yeah, that's quite a dilemma you got going there

Greenwald brought scrutiny upon himself by being dismissive about his inaccuracies in the PowerPoint presentation, or that PRISM had direct access to private servers, and he called those who pointed out the inaccuracies 'WH cronies' and/or 'Obamabots'.

So, to claim that Greenwald should escape scrutiny while others should be put under a high magnification microscope, its just really amusing.

[sabrina 1]

12. No dilemma for me. I know the difference between right and le, I mean 'right and wrong'.

All Journalists are open to scrutiny. And you can stop with the old 'Prism' talking point, it's been debunked numerous times.

But back to what I think you are saying and you can correct me if I'm wrong. Are you saying that if a journalist writes an article and some people do not agree with what he says, that it is okay for powerful people to pay Spy Corporations (yes we have them and they have gone after Greenwald and others in the past, mostly paid for by the Chamber of Commerce, the Kock Bros among others) to conduct smear campaigns against them?

You're okay with paid for smear campaigns against journalists?

[railsback]

14. What PRISM 'talking point' was debunked?

The fact that PRISM doesn't have unfettered access to private servers that could watch 'ideas form as you type', as Greenwald 'reported'?

[bvar22]

32. NSA "Disappears" Its Own Fact Sheet on Spying Program

[font size=3]After public outing for posting false information, agency removes "fact sheet" from website [/font]

"The NSA moved quickly to cover its tracks Tuesday after being publicly exposed for posting a false "fact sheet" on the Prism internet spying program that deceptively portrayed U.S. privacy protections as stronger than they actually are."[/font]


http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023112611

[railsback]

33. Oooo!

That explains EVERYTHING

[bvar22]

35. I didn't think you would have a credible response.

If you did a better job of Keeping Up,
you could avoid embarrassing yourself in public like you did above,
but I also doubt that means anything to you.

For that to mean anything to you,
you would have to be an Honest Broker of Information,
but your response excludes you from that population.


Yes Mam!
You GOT to have that undercoating!
Trust ME!

[railsback]

36. I guess to be credible

I have to blindly believe you.

No thanks. I'll pass.

[bvar22]

38. No. If you are concerned in the slightest about your "credibility",

you have to check the sources I posted, and debunk THEM if you can.

Dude, your MAIN SOURCE (The NSA) that you have used all week long to attack DUers who are concerned about their 4th Amendment and the growing Spy/Surveillance/Security Apparatus of the government...
[font size=3]Just Got Busted for LYING,
and publicly humiliated into taking their FALSE CLAIMS down from their WebSite.[/font]

Now, if you can debunk Wyden, Udall, and the fact that the NSA had to remove their "Fact Sheet", have at it.

Otherwise, if you want to retain what remains of your "credibility" (LOL),
you would have join your friends at the NSA, and post a retraction and a public apology for posting their LIES at DU.

[railsback]

39. Your 'sources' require assumptions

You may like that ass, but I'm not willing to jump on that cellulite to get off.

[HardTimes99]

15. Have you no dignity, my friend? Have you when all is said and done no

sense of shame?

[MADem]

23. Yep...it's the companion piece to this, really.....

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/eichenwald/2013/06/errors-edward-snowden-global-hypocrisy-tour

Birds of a feather...

[grasswire]

7. If TPTB had been dismissive of Snowden from day 1, he would have gotten less traction.

But no.

DiFi and all the others went code red immediately, going for the labels and the character assassination. Driving the story and creating the drama that the media and the Internets have loved.

And now the frenzy to find the silver bullet that will stop him has become almost humorous in its ineptitude.

[sabrina 1]

10. I agree. The more they attack both Greenwald and Snowden, the more they advertise what they

are so desperate to hide.

[limpyhobbler]

6. I love this post. It makes some very important points

You are clearly a very well informed, thoughtful and passionate person on the internet.

[PSPS]

8. The media (including DU) is in especially full spin/deflection mode today

Outside this bubble, though, it isn't working. Not a day goes by that I don't hear many people make remarks highly critical of this "new reality" they're trying to ram down our throats.

[sabrina 1]

13. Same where I am. I haven't met anyone who is not livid about their government spying on them.

They know what the reaction is likely to be and that is the reason for the desperation to try to distract from it.

[nikto]

16. Oh no, I LOVE the gov't spying on everybody

And I just can't wait until we get a rightwing president with all this spying activity in place.

Won't things be great then?






"Your Honor, I am not now, nor have I ever been a member of Al Qaeda."





(Uh-oh. I used the words "Al Qaeda" in a web post. I guess I'm being watched now. At least
it's for my own safety. )

[HiPointDem]

18. you're laboring under the delusion that criticism of spying = criticism of obama specifically.

it doesn't.

spying went on under bush, continued under obama, and will continue under jebbie or whoever.

unless a big enough fuss is kicked up to at least quell it a bit.

[caseymoz]

17. Our government has to distract from Snowden

since his story has gotten embarrassing now that nobody is going to tell us where he is. We've had a few big news days with the Supreme Court, but watch now as the government, both Executive and Congressional, shut up totally about Snowden and switch subjects to Greenwald.

Greenwald might be in trouble. He probably should pull a Snowden himself, because I think the government will try to put it all on him (If for no other reason, to try to get Snowden to voluntarily surface.) They probably won't succeed though, because the press won't be wholehearted.

[Catherina]

25. Well this morning, I saw that this is backfiring big time on the smearers

The public reaction on twitter couldn't be more encouraging. Nobody cares that one of Greenwald's former clients didn't pay his bills and caused problems for Greenwald's firm.

Doctors, plumbers, self-employed people, all sorts of little people are particularly incensed because it happens to them often too.

This couldn't have backfired more spectacularly. It's not just DU that's sick of dishonest interpretations that leave out inconvenient facts.

Greenwald's not in trouble. It's all in some people's feverish fantasy.

[Demit]

29. I sure could use the money I've been stiffed of by former clients right now.

Occupational hazard for the self-employed.

[caseymoz]

30. Well, didn't I just predict this?

Last edited Thu Jun 27, 2013, 02:50 PM - Edit history (1)

Here's President Obama saying that getting Snowden is no big thing!

"I'm not going to have one case with a suspect who we're trying to extradite suddenly be elevated to the point where I've got to start doing wheeling and dealing and trading on a whole host of other issues, simply to get a guy extradited so he can face the justice system," Obama said at a joint news conference with Senegal's President Macky Sall. . . .

Obama said he hadn't personally called either Russian President Vladimir Putin or Chinese President Xi Jinping to request their cooperation.

"I shouldn't have to," he declared.

Obama said such matters are routinely dealt with at a law-enforcement level, calling Snowden's extradition "not exceptional from a legal perspective." He said the U.S. has a wide-ranging economic relationship with China that shouldn't be dwarfed by the hunt for one fugitive, and that the U.S. has had "useful conversations" with Moscow over efforts to return Snowden to the U.S. Putin has called Snowden a "free man" and refused to turn him over to Washington. . . .

But . . . but . . . ?

"I get why it's a fascinating story," Obama said. "I'm sure there will be a made-for-TV movie somewhere down the line."

Hey that's mere entertainment. Ask me about something important. He only wrecked our relations with the rest of the whole world and probably crippled our long-term economy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/27/obama-edward-snowden_n_3509070.html

And from the most loud-mouthed members of Congress, you'll hear crickets. I'm certain Julian Assange and Bradley Manning wish the government were as cool about them.

[ucrdem]

19. First they came for Eddie. . .

First they came for Snowden
But Snowden is a RW stooge and I did not give a shit about Snowden
Then they came for Glenn Greenwald
But he's a disgusting libertarian fink and and I did not give a shit about Glenn Greenwald
And then it turned out there wasn't anything to the story anyway
Just like I've been pointing out patiently since the day it broke.

[ucrdem]

20. ^^^SATIRE ALERT ^^^^ THE US IS NOT COMING FOR ANYONE AND THAT INCLUDES ASSANGE ^^^^

but go ahead and set up a defense fund, they could probably all use new cars.

[Romulus Quirinus]

31. You shouldn't explain your own jokes. nt

[dreamnightwind]

21. If you believe that...

there is a data center in Utah I'd like to sell you.

"And then it turned out there wasn't anything to the story anyway
Just like I've been pointing out patiently since the day it broke. "

[ucrdem]

22. I'd love to hear more about the data center but this is not about the data center.

It's really not about much except pumping up a "4th amendment" outrage among swing voters who haven't been paying attention and/or who have other "issues" with Obama that this story speaks to. In other words a dog whistle.

[dreamnightwind]

24. Wow.

In my mind, that says a lot more about you than it says about anything else. We are o far apart there is no point in a discussion.

[Democracyinkind]

26. Concern about an out of control private snooping industry

Is a "dog whistle".

Back to suqare one: If you oppose anything that Obama supports, you're a racist.

If the Repubs had only caught up on this, they would have made Clarence Thomas President. Don't give them any ideas.

[Octafish]

27. Thank you, Catherina!

Last edited Thu Jun 27, 2013, 12:17 PM - Edit history (1)

This is also a First Amendment issue. Freedom of speech and of the Press are at stake. Thanks to privatized and secret goverment, they are under attack and disappearing, including the Internet and DU.

[Catherina]

28. The Executive Director, Human Rights Watch is as disgusted

Kenneth Roth Verified account
@KenRoth

Executive Director, Human Rights Watch

Kenneth Roth ?@KenRoth 2h

Do these smears of @GGreenwald really have any relevance to the important issues raised by Snowden's disclosures?

[kelliekat44]

34. People who live in glass houses....well, you know the rest. nt

[backscatter712]

37. When ethics isn't on the side of the authoritarians, they bully, smear and spam.

Can't have us embarrassing their daddy figures, can they? They don't want us talking abut them violating our privacy and building the American Stasi.