I finally got around to reading the Greenwald emails and article and there's little doubt in my mind that it's much more complicated than his tweets let on and confirms my previous suspicions.
Other critical stories published by the intercept that relied on different levels of speculation earlier on this cycle (and were later more deeply verified) such as the Tara Reade story or the Alex Morse situation all had substantially more evidence than what Greenwald was trying to publish as it related to various quid pro quos.
This would've been a very interesting story if he could have connected a quid pro quo to an action Biden made that benefited Barisma as it related to his sons involvement there, but the entire story requires the reader to be connecting a lot of dots themselves rather than within the classic intercept (or even Greenwald style) that has incredibly meaningful citations that force the reader to be like well shit.
This shit is just standard bare corruption in government, and his editor was fine with him publishing a story both about that and how it was weird that countless outlets were surpressing this story. What they didn't like was that the article made leaps implying there was a quid pro quo when he hadn't investigated enough yet to reach that conclusion.
I understand why he was pissed about this, as he definitely wanted this story out in time to impact the election, the Biden admin will definitely be worse to whistle blowers he worked with closely than Trump has been. But the intercept is the same thing it always was, which is a left liberal outlet that aims to make the democrats a civil libertarian and succdem party.
This is not something I agree with, they're definitely both left wing journalists who just happen to come from that old school ACLU way of doing things. Glenn's husband is a member of the Brazilian congress in a socialist party.
These folks however do have huge egos and don't like being questioned by less accomplished journalists. Going independent is the right move.
This would’ve been a very interesting story if he could have connected a quid pro quo to an action Biden made that benefited Barisma as it related to his sons involvement there, but the entire story requires the reader to be connecting a lot of dots themselves rather than within the classic intercept (or even Greenwald style) that has incredibly meaningful citations that force the reader to be like well shit.
I agree, I also feel conflicted because it's a complicated story that... well, as Greenwald admitted, needs some editing. That said, I feel like the editors' response was also blown out of proportion and was incredibly hostile. I wonder if they were feuding before and this was the last straw...
I finally got around to reading the Greenwald emails and article and there's little doubt in my mind that it's much more complicated than his tweets let on and confirms my previous suspicions.
Other critical stories published by the intercept that relied on different levels of speculation earlier on this cycle (and were later more deeply verified) such as the Tara Reade story or the Alex Morse situation all had substantially more evidence than what Greenwald was trying to publish as it related to various quid pro quos.
This would've been a very interesting story if he could have connected a quid pro quo to an action Biden made that benefited Barisma as it related to his sons involvement there, but the entire story requires the reader to be connecting a lot of dots themselves rather than within the classic intercept (or even Greenwald style) that has incredibly meaningful citations that force the reader to be like well shit.
This shit is just standard bare corruption in government, and his editor was fine with him publishing a story both about that and how it was weird that countless outlets were surpressing this story. What they didn't like was that the article made leaps implying there was a quid pro quo when he hadn't investigated enough yet to reach that conclusion.
I understand why he was pissed about this, as he definitely wanted this story out in time to impact the election, the Biden admin will definitely be worse to whistle blowers he worked with closely than Trump has been. But the intercept is the same thing it always was, which is a left liberal outlet that aims to make the democrats a civil libertarian and succdem party.
Greenwald and Taibbi are what it will look like as gen x dumbasses slowly transform into Trump loving boomer brainworm people.
This is not something I agree with, they're definitely both left wing journalists who just happen to come from that old school ACLU way of doing things. Glenn's husband is a member of the Brazilian congress in a socialist party.
These folks however do have huge egos and don't like being questioned by less accomplished journalists. Going independent is the right move.
And boomers all claim to be old 60s hippies...
I agree, I also feel conflicted because it's a complicated story that... well, as Greenwald admitted, needs some editing. That said, I feel like the editors' response was also blown out of proportion and was incredibly hostile. I wonder if they were feuding before and this was the last straw...