• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blader

Member
Greenwald can fucking defend this?
It's next level entitlement and egotism.

You're surprised that Glenn Greenwald can defend egotism?

Are politicians afraid of people?

How many productive discussions have you had with 60 other people in the room?


I really can't get over the absurdity of how the far left has hitched their wagon to Nina Turner. She's a nobody! At least Ellison and Tulsi are actual members of Congress. Turner was a state senator...was! For one term! Greenwald saying that attacks on Turner reflect her efficacy is hilarious because it presupposes that she has ever had any efficacy in the first place.
 

Maledict

Member
I still can't understand ho reasonable Glenn Greenwald came across when he appeared on Pod Save the World, and yet how utterly insane and Russian stoogey he is in statements and twitter comments.
 

Blader

Member
I still can't understand ho reasonable Glenn Greenwald came across when he appeared on Pod Save the World, and yet how utterly insane and Russian stoogey he is in statements and twitter comments.

The difference between being actually challenged and talking into the echo chamber of your fanbase.
 
I still can't understand ho reasonable Glenn Greenwald came across when he appeared on Pod Save the World, and yet how utterly insane and Russian stoogey he is in statements and twitter comments.

The difference between being actually challenged and talking into the echo chamber of your fanbase.

One thing I really noticed in the PSTW interview was that Greenwald basically dodged speaking about Russia entirely. He had a whole bit on it, that as an American journalist his job was to critique and speak truth to American power and keep the American government in check.

If Tommy had really pressed the issue, I suspect this stuff would've come out. Greenwald is basically the poster child for the reflexive anti-American left at this point. America has problems ergo anyone who opposes America must be the good guys, in the broader picture. And if they're the good guys in the broader picture, surely we can excuse all of these little specific grievances!
 

jtb

Banned
I still can't understand ho reasonable Glenn Greenwald came across when he appeared on Pod Save the World, and yet how utterly insane and Russian stoogey he is in statements and twitter comments.

He's a troll who knows exactly what he's doing.

He knows the Democratic party is weak and the weaker the party is, the stronger the insurgency is.

Stop taking anything he says at his word. He's a disingenuous hack.

One thing I really noticed in the PSTW interview was that Greenwald basically dodged speaking about Russia entirely. He had a whole bit on it, that as an American journalist his job was to critique and speak truth to American power and keep the American government in check.

If Tommy had really pressed the issue, I suspect this stuff would've come out. Greenwald is basically the poster child for the reflexive anti-American left at this point. America has problems ergo anyone who opposes America must be the good guys, in the broader picture. And if they're the good guys in the broader picture, surely we can excuse all of these little specific grievances!

Greenwald, like every other 'omg stop talking about Russia' member of the left, also knows that the Russia case is the one glaring counterweight against their theory of the 2016 election.
 
He's a troll who knows exactly what he's doing.

He knows the Democratic party is weak and the weaker the party is, the stronger the insurgency is.

Stop taking anything he says at his word. He's a disingenuous hack.



Greenwald, like every other 'omg stop talking about Russia' member of the left, also knows that the Russia case is the one glaring counterweight against their theory of the 2016 election.

Eh, this isn't new behavior for him. I don't doubt that that's part of it, but the dude has been soft on Russia for ages.
 

jtb

Banned
Eh, this isn't new behavior for him. I don't doubt that that's part of it, but the dude has been soft on Russia for ages.

I don't disagree. And the Snowden thing is a huge elephant in the room - I think there are interesting questions to be had about that relationship vis a vis Russia.

Anyways, follow the money. The Intercept was a colossal failure until it because the mouthpiece of the Bernie left. Up until Bernie came along, the Intercept's highest traffic article was a terrible interview that shit on Serial, of all things.

The Democratic 'resistance' to Trump was the worst thing that could have ever happened to Greenwald - which is why he hates them so much. They've boxed him out of his own market, and blow a giant hole in his theory that 'Democrats are the real enables' when Democrats actually caught on surprisingly quick that they need to oppose everything Trump does.

Also I'm only halfway through reading/listening to Isaac Chotiner's interview with Greenwald, but it's a bit more confrontational than Tommy's: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...ypocrisy_over_trump_and_the_new_cold_war.html
 
Glenn Grenwald said:
I think you can be a fan of that leak in one way, in terms of the transparency it brings, as I was with the DNC and Podesta leaks, as I am for a lot of the leaks that have taken place—even the illegal ones like proving that Michael Flynn lied about his meetings with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. But on the other hand, I can recognize the harms and dangers that both of those pose.

This is so mind boggling.

Firstly, the DNC and Podesta emails were hacked -- not leaked.
Secondly, because of that, they're as illegal as the Flynn leaks.

He really comes off badly in that interview, imo. He's so frustrating to listen to. I almost agree with him then he just goes off the deep end. Like, yes, the US shouldn't really tolerate as many despots as we do; however, what Trump is doing is absolutely far worse than tolerating them.

Also Mubarak is probably not the worst despot in four decades, but anything to hit Hillary I suppose.
 
This is so mind boggling.

Firstly, the DNC and Podesta emails were hacked -- not leaked.
Secondly, because of that, they're as illegal as the Flynn leaks.

Yeah, so in some of the... progressive circles, they've been confidently circulating that the DNC hack was actually a leak, not a hack. So I've seen people like Shaun King perpetuate and like that stuff on Twitter.
 
Yeah, so in some of the... progressive circles, they've been confidently circulating that the DNC hack was actually a leak, not a hack. So I've seen people like Shaun King perpetuate and like that stuff on Twitter.

There was this bonkers article in The Nation that went in on it HARD. Basically made the argument that the people vouching that it was a hack are fundamentally untrustworthy so we should trust literally any other group of remotely credible experts over them.
 

OmniOne

Member
I'm sure it's probably a joke but did you guys see the tweet from Matt Iglesias showing he got sent VHS tapes anonymously his morning?

Haven't seen a follow up from him yet.
 

Maledict

Member
Yeah, so in some of the... progressive circles, they've been confidently circulating that the DNC hack was actually a leak, not a hack. So I've seen people like Shaun King perpetuate and like that stuff on Twitter.

The thing is, when you refer to the DNC stuff as a "leak" you're basically buying into the Seth Rich was murdered conspiracy. Which is one of the most evil, unpleasant things to come out of the last 6 months. Taking advantage of that poor guys tragic death, a guy who would *never* associate with people like that, is just awful.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Yeah, so in some of the... progressive circles, they've been confidently circulating that the DNC hack was actually a leak, not a hack. So I've seen people like Shaun King perpetuate and like that stuff on Twitter.

So the only reason Watergate 2.0 isn't being treated as such is that the stolen documents found their way to the press?

Fucking hell, we're all doomed.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
The thing is, when you refer to the DNC stuff as a "leak" you're basically buying into the Seth Rich was murdered conspiracy. Which is one of the most evil, unpleasant things to come out of the last 6 months. Taking advantage of that poor guys tragic death, a guy who would *never* associate with people like that, is just awful.

I... don't actually follow this? Information that was supposed to be secure got out, isn't this the definition of what a leak is? Isn't it both a hack and a leak?
 
Dylan Scott‏Verified account
@dylanlscott

Fun tidbit I heard today:

There is a legitimate fear among Rs that Trump would veto a bipartisan Obamacare stabilization bill.

Realistic, but I can't imagine the shitstorm it would create.
 

Blader

Member
I... don't actually follow this? Information that was supposed to be secure got out, isn't this the definition of what a leak is? Isn't it both a hack and a leak?

A leak implies it was released by someone internally. In this case, someone within the DNC or within the Clinton campaign.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
A leak implies it was released by someone internally. In this case, someone within the DNC or within the Clinton campaign.

I think that's being too prescriptive. To me, a leak is just the disclosure of information that wasn't meant to be disclosed. How it happened is sort of irrelevant. I wouldn't really be bothered if anyone says DNC leak, especially as that's how major International reporters refer to it (e.g. I can find many BBC articles stating DNC leaks, several Reuters pages, quite a few references from CNN, etc.).

If you mean they're actually insisting it was released intentionally by someone entrusted with responsibility for it, though, I see what you mean.
 
I think that's being too prescriptive. To me, a leak is just the disclosure of information that wasn't meant to be disclosed. How it happened is sort of irrelevant. I wouldn't really be bothered if anyone says DNC leak, especially as that's how major International reporters refer to it (e.g. I can find many BBC articles stating DNC leaks, several Reuters pages, quite a few references from CNN, etc.).

No, the assertion is that it was an inside job and the Russians were not involved. What you're assuming their intentions are is not correct.

The implications are starkly different.
 
Realistic, but I can't imagine the shitstorm it would create.

Trump will 100% veto a bill that stabilizes but does not repeal the ACA.

When he said he'd let the healthcare system blow up to get what he wanted I believe he was serious.

Only chance he doesn't is if you put the paper in a golden binder and engrave TRUMPCARE on the front.
 

Blader

Member
Is Sinema a big deal? I know almost nothing about her, outside of those promising-sounding blurbs in that link.

I'm not sure if this was posted already. I'm not very religious but I found this email kind of touching. Also it's insane that religious people back Trump over Clinton. What's wrong with them?!

They're fake Christians.
 

kirblar

Member
I... don't actually follow this? Information that was supposed to be secure got out, isn't this the definition of what a leak is? Isn't it both a hack and a leak?
No. Leaks are deliberate from someone w access to the material. Chelsea Manning leaked cables. Deep Throat leaked information.

Female celebrities do not have nudes "leaked" when their phones are hacked and nude pics go on the web. They are hacks.

Using leak instead of back deliberately dismisses the Russia narrative and empowers shit like the Seth Rich conspiracy theory.
 
I'm not sure if this was posted already. I'm not very religious but I found this email kind of touching. Also it's insane that religious people back Trump over Clinton. What's wrong with them?!

The email Hillary Clinton's pastor sent her the day after the election

They aren't actually Christian. The religion aspect of republicans only extends to further their bigotry/racism/hate.

Basically, they use it as a shield.

Otherwise, they couldn't give two shits about Christianity.
 
Guess you have your answer now
Unless the US has 3 carrier groups that can be yanked from an alternate dimension and has the ability to instantly teleport out all US citizens from South Korea (to say nothing of all the Korean civilians), we're not ready. ...And a magic box that can convert sea water to fuel and some cities on the west coast of Japan are actually camouflaged warehouses with endless stocks of bombs and other components. ...And all existing aircraft in the entire US are secretly Transformers that can turn into C-130s to move equipment and vehicles. ...And we have a magic button that creates huge temporary cities to house soldiers. ...And a secret satellite that has the ability to pave new runways with a laser from orbit. WAR IS COMPLICATED! I'm sure the generals just said "we're ready to strike if ordered," because it's their damn job to always be ready with something. Even if it's a really shitty thing, they're still always ready with some kind of thing.
 
Isn't Sinema an atheist?

Good luck.

No one gives a shit. She won a swing seat (which is not as swingy as it was in 2012) as a bisexual nontheist who first ran for the AZ House on the Green Party line. There's a reason none of that stuck and a huge reason why she's the one that the AZ GOP was desperately hoping didn't run.

But then who's our second best recruit for McCain's seat?!
Gallego or Mark Kelly.
 

mlclmtckr

Banned
Greenwald, like every other 'omg stop talking about Russia' member of the left, also knows that the Russia case is the one glaring counterweight against their theory of the 2016 election.

wait I'm sorry I'm not a glen greenwald fan at all but is your position here that russian interference is the reason trump won? or more importantly that if collusion is proven someone other than mike pence would become president?
 
Our President
Easier to be an atheist if you also say you'll stop all abortions from happening and ban gay cakes or stuff of that nature

But then again most people don't really buy any Dems are religious types anyways since democrats never really run using religious slogans or appeals. So to most people all democrats might as well be atheists anyway
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom