[mundo]

It seems impossible to hold a strong opinion on this without reading the article, and in particular, seeing how it is sourced.

The elephant in the room (which Greenwald barely acknowledges in this essay) is that many mainstream news organizations have concluded that the evidence for this story was too weak to publish, and some believe it was fabricated by Russian intelligence. If Greenwald has evidence to the contrary, great, the world wants to see it, and (claims of "censorship" notwithstanding) he will have no trouble getting the word out. If all he has is salacious hearsay, it's hard to fault his former editors.

[uncoder0]

>The elephant in the room (which Greenwald barely acknowledges in this essay) is that many mainstream news organizations have concluded that the evidence for this story was too weak to publish, and some believe it was fabricated by Russian intelligence.

Senate Homeland Security committee and DNI director both said that this was not an issue of foreign disinfo.

In addition there is an interview from one of the co-conspirators that's 45 minutes long and he's provided documents that could be easily verified if the journalists did the leg work and asked the people who received or sent those emails if they were legitimate.

[ciarannolan]

> Senate Homeland Security committee and DNI director [...]

Both of these are partisan, unreliable sources. The DNI used to be a nonpartisan that you could at least trust somewhat. Not anymore.

[parliament32]

Does this explain why the tried to stop him from publishing elsewhere? Relevant section:

>Worse, The Intercept editors in New York, not content to censor publication of my article at the Intercept, are also demanding that I not exercise my separate contractual right with FLM regarding articles I have written but which FLM does not want to publish itself. Under my contract, I have the right to publish any articles FLM rejects with another publication. But Intercept editors in New York are demanding I not only accept their censorship of my article at The Intercept, but also refrain from publishing it with any other journalistic outlet, and are using thinly disguised lawyer-crafted threats to coerce me not to do so (proclaiming it would be “detrimental” to The Intercept if I published it elsewhere).

[prawn]

Did you see them make that demand? Their wording that he published implied that it would be detrimental to The Intercept, which would be a fair claim.

I think you can suggest it was careful pressure or negotiation, but it didn't read as a demand to me.

[babesh]

Stupid circular argument. That is exactly the reasoning that he was arguing against. Based on this reasoning, you don’t publish unless mainstream news organizations publish first. Also you only publish what mainstream news organizations publish.

[eplanit]

The "Steele Dossier" was reported on ad-nauseum, and its bona fides were suspect from the start. There little real denying the authenticity of the materials involved in this Biden case, yet suddenly new standards emerge preventing reporting? I fault the editors very much.

[secretsatan]

Does it have to be fabricated by russian intelligence? Why not just Trumps campaign hoping to do another "But Hilary's emails!"

[__blockcipher__]

It is undeniably not fabricated Russian intelligence. We have:

- e-mails which have been confirmed by the others on the e-mails

- videos of hunter biden engaging in sexual activity while doing hard drugs

- text messages between hunter and various family and associates

- audio tapes of Hunter Biden's voice talking about his Chinese business partner disappearing

- financial documents of the agreement between various parties (Hunter Biden, Bobulinski, and others)

It is so obviously not "fabricated by Russian intelligence". By the way, the original claims of Trump being compromised by Russia have been proven absolutely false - something Greenwald himself has written about. Greenwald is incredibly critical of the democrat establishment for the entire Russia Hoax - and it is a hoax - and he is equally critical of their coverage of the laptop story which is at this point undeniable.

[mundo]

Oooh! What kind of sex? Which drugs? ...yes, that would be the salacious hearsay I was referring to. If there's evidence that Joe Biden did something corrupt, I'd like to see it, but without the rest of the chaff.