From The Breitbart Collective, offered typos and all (and no link because fuck those people):
Glenn Greenwald: Breitbart News Has ‘Editorial Independence’ That ‘Left and Establishment Right Utterly Lack’I have nothing to add to this.
Asked for his opinion of Breitbart News, acclaimed journalist Glenn Greenwald praised the news site’s editorial integrity and said the site was “very impressive in terms of the impact they’ve been able to have.”
While Greenwald was clear that Breitbart contains content he “sometimes find repellant” and Breitbart writers and articles he’s highly critical of “just on political grounds,” he gave Breitbart News high marks for “giving voice to people who are otherwise excluded.”...
Except maybe this...
And this...Assange: It wasn't the Russians or Putin! You know the Dem party has hit rock bottom when the KGB is telling the truth & the DNC is lying.— Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) January 4, 2017
14!
— Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) January 5, 2017
With this accompanying explanation:
.@AnnCoulter Not that there was any doubt, but you're just admitting to be a white nationalist. pic.twitter.com/e52VyJnEwW
— Mikel Jollett (@Mikel_Jollett) January 5, 2017
17 comments:
Artistic economy in action.
A while back, Sir Driftglass and Knight of the Realm, I took issue with your disdain for Greenwald vis-a-vis his work with Snowden, Assange; for I viewed the exposure of nefarious activities by NSA, etc., as a good thing.
Since then, it has become clear that Wikileaks, and the once-sainted Snowden, and ever tainted Greenwald, have besmirched themselves, to put it kindly. Sharted, in the parlance of our times.
That was an apology.
Apropos of this, I'd like to make a prediction right here. Over the coming year, you're going to see a number of "progressive" figures - all white, most of them people who've self-applied the term "populist" in recent history - start to embrace Donald Trump and his army of fun-loving loyalists.
Most of them won't be stupid enough to come right out and say it* - it'll be too lucrative a period to throw it all away so soon - they'll be coy at first, throw out a little "I don't agree with everything, but he has a point" or a "well, does the establishment left have a better idea?" They'll suggest that it's high time that we backburner issues important to African Americans or the LGTB crowd or pretty much anyone except for those white Protestants with their famous "economic anxieties." And they'll tear into other lefties - some of them already do, but they'll do it more frequently and with more venom.
All of which is, ultimately, a lead-up to a realignment that could be downright devastating - one group obsessed with a rose-tinted view of the past and driven by a sincere belief that we can all hop in a time machine and go back to the early sixties and live there forever, the other group (containing many people for whom the past is not so sunny) more focused on trying to fix their own present problems to create a better future.
I hope I'm wrong, because if I'm right then we're completely fucked until the Great Boomer Die-Off begins.
*Greenwald is an exception because of his particular circle. He's become an icon in the techbro/libertarian sphere, a world driven by little cults of personality. Many of their leaders are the most repulsive human being you'll ever meet; others are plainly, flamboyantly insane. No one really cares, though. To their followers, these guys (or ladies, but let's face it) are more important as symbols onto which to project their own egos. Greenwald can say and do whatever the fuck he wants and it won't upset his fans; he's just one big tabula rasa to them.
well, if ANYONE would know about rocks, it would be crack-whore coulter.
The stupidity of Coulter and her ilk is proven in the fact their little bitty brains can't wrap themselves around the fact that the hacker collectives used a middleman to pass the hacked DNC and Podesta emails to ASSange for plausible deniability...
The evidence in the CERT report and info from a couple of private cyber security firms I trust far more than ASSange, the FBI, DHS and CIA combined all clearly show that Russian based and backed hacker collectives were behind the DNC and Podesta hacks, as well as GOP operatives (whose emails were never leaked by ASSange in his admitted vendetta against Clinton...), critical infrastructure servers, hospitals, governmental agencies and more.
And ironically enough, the one server the Russians couldn't get into was the Clinton email server...
Glenn Greenwald enjoys his imaginary life as a Journalist.
Greenwald's gossip (tweet) column has to reach a hand into the dirty diaper of Breitbart to know it is time for a change. When the rest of us have smelled it a mile away.
Let's do the math on this for Glenn, shall we?
"Breitbart News Has ‘Editorial Independence’"
-news
-editorial
-independence
_________________________
= Breitbart has
Is Glenn asking someone on the left to provide fake news? He is still seeking that bothsider story that will bring him the Wurlitzer Prize. Glenn hasn't displayed any notion of knowing the difference between a "Nobel prize verses Noble Cause.
I am sure when he does, he'll tweet someone about it.
Well, Ann, why is (h/t Bad Tux) Assange's website hosted in Russia?
Also, GG has more in common with Trump than he would ever admit, psychologically.
-Doug in Oakland
(operating on the assumption that my previous attempt to post this failed...)
Good morning, Mr. Glass.
"So there’s obviously a lot of things at Breitbart that are published that I vehemently disagree with and sometimes find repellant just on an ideological basis.
But what I find really interesting about Breitbart is that it captured the ethos of a significant part of the conservative movement and the right-wing electorate, and even independents that have been completely excluded from all of the organs of establishment thought in the Republican party. And not only did that, but it was so independent in how it did it."
Those conservatives and independents that Mr. Greenwald is happy Breitbart "captured the ethos of" are the same audience Breitbart publishes "repellent" and "disagreeable" material for.
Be seeing you.
Oh, I have this picture of Truth, rather like the Wicked Witch of the West, moaning "I'm melting! melting!"
so bad At what speed does the Earth move around the Sun
Just to review class:
"Conservatism" is about rule by an aristocracy.
Traditionally that has been an aristocracy of land-owning inheritance.
But in America, so modern in all things, it's about money, financialization, transnational corporations and off shore bank accounts.
It's sold to the rubes as "freedom" (and white Christian solidarity, "right to life", "liberals are evil", and all the rest of it).
But again,
"Conservatism" is about rule by an aristocracy.
Which is why conservative founding father Edmund Burke got so upset with the French Revolution for cutting the heads off aristocrats.
@ Andrew Johnson
I agree, but think there will be two groups.
First, their will be the "Progressives" who see more money/career enhancement in switching sides for now. Christopher Hitchens jumped sides in 2000 and then covered his tracks by hocking the atheist schtick once Iraq went tits up.
I think Greenwald/Assange et al. were never on our side, but wolfs in liberal sheep clothing being paid to sow division in the political Left and prevent New Deal v2.0-sque government rising after conservatives destabilized a third of the globe and tanked the world economy.
To paraphrase the punchline of a Very Old Joke:
We know what alt-righters are; we're just haggling over the terminology.
It appears that Greenwald's Sugar Daddy, Omidyar, must be a Trump fan, and/or Omidyar's in process of making some deal or another with Trump.
So Omidyar orders his poodle, Glenn, to go suck on the absolute worst, most repulsive, stinkest, skankiest, nastiest, sickest, vilest dick on the planet: Breitbart, et al. And GG, ever the agreeable lap dog, happily snaffles over to suck, suck, suck at the Breitbart canker-sore-laden, poxy proxy-Bannon dick, declaring it absolutely delicious.
There was a time when GG made some sense, even in regard to some of his criticisms of the Democratic party. But that time was long ago and far away. Clearly, GG has jumped the shark in order to roll in the dough-see-dough. F*ck Greenwald. I ceased paying any attention to him long ago. We know his kind.
As for the Coultergeist: she's always been disgusting, horrible, venal scum. Now that she's an aging hag - at least in the eyes of conservaworld, who only like youthful bimbos - Coultergeist has to go to ever more ugly and frankly ridiculous extremes to make herself seem relevant, trendy, up to the minute. The pathetic bids for attention would elicit some sympathy if she wasn't such an egregiously heinous excuse for a human. F*ck Coultergeist.
@traghan
This.
@Kevin Holsinger
"Those conservatives and independents that Mr. Greenwald is happy Breitbart "captured the ethos of" are the same audience Breitbart publishes "repellent" and "disagreeable" material for."
Those would be the same people who have paid GG to represent them in civil court.
And just because we can't keep the comments number to '14' here's my asshole opinion: It's funny but in all the years of having deep deep disdain and aggressively hateful feelings towards that hun bitch Coulter (sorry DG if I use naughty language, I've just had it with these people), never once did it cross my mind that she's a white supremacist. Not a dye in the wool kind of white supremacist anyway. We all know flame throwing fucknuts like Coulter, Rush and the rest say racist things all the time but I always kept a separation between them and someone who has an account with Stormfront. But with that '14!' tweet, her ludicrous ideas that lack even a scarce hint of truth that she couples with ugly shameless vitriol, makes so much sense in light of her being a white supremacist. For years I kept banging my head against the wall trying to figure out how anyone sells their soul so completely to an obviously false and grotesque narrative...a sweet paycheck aside. I get it now. She actually believes this garbage because she's not just a hateful hack but a truly lost soul. That doesn't make me feel sorry for her though. She can truly rot in hell.
"And ironically enough, the one server the Russians couldn't get into was the Clinton email server..."
I'm pretty sure that this bit of reality does not exist in the minds of Trump supporter. In fact, I'd lay odds that a large number of supporters believe that her server WAS hacked and that's how the DNC information was obtained.
Post a Comment