When you turn NSA lawyers like this into #Resistance heroes, what you get are attempts to justify severe press freedom attacks. NYT's Pentagon Paper lawyer said: "Obama will surely pass President Richard Nixon as the worst president ever" on press freedom. nytimes.com/roomfordebate/…
Obama made several valid points yesterday. But allowing him to parade around as a defender of press freedom - when he was in fact a grave threat to it - is a huge fraud. Here's what the Committee to Protect Journalists said in its comprehensive 2013 report cpj.org/reports/2013/1…
The Obama DOJ - aside from using the Espionage Act against sources fra more than all prior administrations *combined* - threatened for years to imprison my colleague Jim Risen. In December 2016, Risen wrote this in the NYT nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opi…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
CIA's spokesman at NBC, @KenDilanianNBC, expressed the same indignation. Amazing how often journalists concoct excuses to be angry the public will see & learn things. It's valid to object to Trump's motives & selectivity, but many US journalists hate transparency more than NSA
If you enjoy demanding that documents and other information be kept concealed from the public due to vague "national security" mantras, there are a lot of jobs for which you're suited: CIA, DOD, NSA spokesperson, etc. So weird to have that attribute, then become a *journalist*.
Remember when FBI, along with people like Adam Schiff, warned release of the Nunes memo would endanger national security & blow sources, and then it was released & everyone read it & saw that was a lie? "National security" is what people in DC yell when they want to hide things.
In late 2016, @RandPaul tried to stop the US from supplying Saudi Arabia with the bombs and other weapons it was using to destroy Yemen. Watch what @wolfblitzer suggested to him on CNN about why that was a bad and radical idea:
In the scheme of deciding who is good and who is bad: what weight do we give to those who assisted the Saudis in destroying Yemen and creating one of the world's worst humanitarian crises versus those who tried to stop that? What role has the heroic US media played in this?
Beyond @RandPaul, one of the other few consistent voices in Washington objecting to the US/UK/Saudi destruction of Yemen since it began in 2015 is @ChrisMurphyCT. The role of the US media, as always with US wars, has been to suppress, ignore, justify, or propagandize.
1/ Since international law & tribunals are in the news, it's a good time to review what happened when the International Court of Justice ruled that the Reagan CIA had violated the law, and the US Govt simply declared it would ignore the ruling & was immune from the judgment.
2/ In the early 1980s, the CIA, under Reagan, decided it would overthrow the government of Nicaragua. This was illegal because it lacked Congressional approval. They did it anyway. One of the steps CIA took was to put mines in the harbors of Nicaragua, endangering civilian boats.
3/ When Congress found out that the Reagan administration was using the CIA to overthrow the Nicaraguan government, even right-wing lawmakers were furious. Barry Goldwater vehemently denounced the program as illegal and immoral politico.com/story/2017/04/…
Media outlets pretend there are complex, deeply ethical, highly intricate considerations governing when they grant anonymity to powerful people to say things. It's a sham. The tortured debates are theater. The actual standard is: we grant anonymity when powerful people demand it.
Last week, The New Yorker - among the most flamboyant at feigning pained introspection over ethical anonymity quandaries - gave anonymity to "leading American progressives" (people over whom I have no power) not to reveal secret info about me but to hurl playground insults:
There is no singular reason people have lost faith and trust in media outlets. People often emphasize the reason they themselves find most offensive. But certainly, the promiscuous grant of anonymity to allow powerful people to spew crap *with no accountability* is a big factor.
Jair Bolsonaro, the fascist Congressman leading Brazil's 2018 presidential polls (once Lula is excluded), was stabbed today in the abandon at a campaign event and taken to the hospital for treatment. No further news on his condition yet:
Preliminary reports suggest that the stabbing caused no serious injuries. I hope he's physically fine and also hope that this stupid act doesn't generate sympathy or support for a truly dangerous and hateful demagogue.
Quando a caravana de Lula foi baleada, Alckmin explorou a situação, recusou-se a denunciar a violência e culpou o PT. Não afundem ao nível repugnante de Alckmin. A violência política sempre leva a resultados terríveis, não importa o alvo www1.folha.uol.com.br/poder/2018/03/…
1/ In the wake of the @NewYorker profile, several people recommended I look at the ugly 2003 hit piece that magazine did on Chomsky (on the even of the Iraq War) & 2008 attack on Naomi Klein after "Shock Doctrine." It is striking how they use the same expel-from-mainstream script
2/ Here we have: Chomsky used to be so beloved by mainstream liberals during the Vietnam War, but now even his own liberal allies have turned against him because he has no ideas to offer, is against their wars, as has become too dogmatic & anti-American newyorker.com/magazine/2003/…
3/ Next we have: Chomsky is guilty of double standards and inconsistent criticisms because he focuses too much on the evils of America while ignoring the evils of others, etc. etc.