Newscaster utterly destroyed

[sbrettt]

Watch if you want to see Glenn make David Gregory his bi***

 

[Moot]

Whoa. That was a pretty good take down, alright. It was "extradorinary" that Gregory would even suggest that another journalist was aiding and abetting a source and makes me wonder whether or not a source could trust him.


Obama's adminstration has been very vindictive towards whistleblowers. Which is hypocritical considering he promised more transparency when he was campaigning and really hasn't delivered. Who knows, maybe the NSA will be his Waterloo.

 

[WCH]

Gregory's 'investigative reporting' mostly involves the inside of Obama's colon.

 

[DiAnna]

Watch if you want to see Glenn make David Gregory his bi***

I'd be more impressed if the clip hadn't been abruptly edited before Gregory could reply.

 

[sangha]

Watch if you want to see Glenn make David Gregory his bi***

No great accomplishment

Gregory is a complete moron.

 

[sbrettt]

I'd be more impressed if the clip hadn't been abruptly edited before Gregory could reply.

So David could ignore his point and spew more bs?

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Watch if you want to see Glenn make David Gregory his bi***

does anyone have a link to the McClatchy article?

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

I'd be more impressed if the clip hadn't been abruptly edited before Gregory could reply.

you can find the video in it's entirety on youtube. but he pretty much gives a non-response to greenwald saying he doesn't support the reasoning only repeating what others have said. Which is a bit of a copout after asking a question with that level of controversy behind it and directly implicating him of various crimes.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yUR3uaLhN0

 

[DiAnna]

So David could ignore his point and spew more bs?

No, so that selective editing that didn't allow for any reply or context could be an honest look at reality.

 

[Superfly]

I like David Gregory, and I don't see this as his being "utterly destroyed." Not even close, really. He accuses Greenwald of aiding and abetting, and Greenwald gets butthurt about it. If Greenwald was too upset, he could have went after Gregory for libel, but I don't see that happening.

 

[sbrettt]

No, so that selective editing that didn't allow for any reply or context could be an honest look at reality.

My bad, I will pick the longer video next time. Someone else here posted it in full, check it out.

 

[sbrettt]

I like David Gregory, and I don't see this as his being "utterly destroyed." Not even close, really. He accuses Greenwald of aiding and abetting, and Greenwald gets butthurt about it. If Greenwald was too upset, he could have went after Gregory for libel, but I don't see that happening.

I don't blame Greenwald for being annoyed when a so-called journalist is saying he should go to jail for being a journalist.

 

[Superfly]

I don't blame Greenwald for being annoyed when a so-called journalist is saying he should go to jail for being a journalist.

I haven't followed this guy Greenwald - did he actually aid and abet? And seeing as how I am not a journalist, if he did aid and abet, does the fact that he is a journalist give him immunity?

Just curious. Never really given much consideration to this before, but I do know that there are journalists out there that feel so strongly about what they do, that they're willing to go above and beyond to "get the story" or whatever.

 

[sbrettt]

I haven't followed this guy Greenwald - did he actually aid and abet? And seeing as how I am not a journalist, if he did aid and abet, does the fact that he is a journalist give him immunity?

Just curious. Never really given much consideration to this before, but I do know that there are journalists out there that feel so strongly about what they do, that they're willing to go above and beyond to "get the story" or whatever.

Well, our government has failed to prove that Edward Snowden's leaks threatened national security in any way shape or form. Point is, what kind of journalist are you if someone comes to you with information that your government is spying on Americans, South Americans, and Chinese if you say no I'm not printing that story. Someone else will print it anyways. You'd have to be out of your mind, as a journalist, to turn a story like that down. The premise of him aiding and abetting is laughable in my opinion, because Snowdens leaks didn't harm anyone or our national security. They just made the fed look bad. Oh, yeah and he also leaked info that the fisa court ruled that what the NSA is doing is in violation of the 4th Amendment. We would not know this is if not for them. The most ridiculous part is now Obama's saying he wanted to discuss the leaks along, and he was totally going to share this info, but Snowden beat him to it. That's bs if you ask me.

 

[Kobie]

Well, our government has failed to prove that Edward Snowden's leaks threatened national security in any way shape or form. Point is, what kind of journalist are you if someone comes to you with information that your government is spying on Americans, South Americans, and Chinese if you say no I'm not printing that story. Someone else will print it anyways. You'd have to be out of your mind, as a journalist, to turn a story like that down. The premise of him aiding and abetting is laughable in my opinion, because Snowdens leaks didn't harm anyone or our national security. They just made the fed look bad. Oh, yeah and he also leaked info that the fisa court ruled that what the NSA is doing is in violation of the 4th Amendment. We would not know this is if not for them. The most ridiculous part is now Obama's saying he wanted to discuss the leaks along, and he was totally going to share this info, but Snowden beat him to it. That's bs if you ask me.

Well, from a strictly journalistic standpoint, that depends on how credible said information is.

 

[sbrettt]

Well, from a strictly journalistic standpoint, that depends on how credible said information is.

LOL turns out it was credible. The government hasn't even denied it. :lol:

 

[Kobie]

LOL turns out it was credible. The government hasn't even denied it. :lol:

You have to know that going in. I'm certainly not going to bat for Greenwald here; just saying that "if we don't run it, someone else will" is certainly not how you should approach ANY story. Again, simply speaking from a strictly journalistic standpoint.

 

[sbrettt]

You have to know that going in. I'm certainly not going to bat for Greenwald here; just saying that "if we don't run it, someone else will" is certainly not how you should approach ANY story. Again, simply speaking from a strictly journalistic standpoint.

I can agree with that. I imagine Snowden had some proof it was credible considering Greenwald clearly put himself in danger publishing it.

 

[Superfly]

Well, our government has failed to prove that Edward Snowden's leaks threatened national security in any way shape or form.

Well, I wouldn't expect the government to admit it if they were harmed by Snowden. It'd be a lot like the kid on the playground, battered and bloody, wiping his nose and saying, "That didn't hurt!" after someone beat him up. I have honestly lost all faith in our government, and have felt this way for years and years. I honestly don't believe, for one minute, that our government is doing anything to better our country. I don't believe that they act upon anything, unless it can be considered beneficial to them, politically, monetarily or otherwise.

 

[Superfly]

And Kobie - love the avatar.

 

[sbrettt]

And Kobie - love the avatar.

Me too! :lol:

 

[sbrettt]

Well, I wouldn't expect the government to admit it if they were harmed by Snowden. It'd be a lot like the kid on the playground, battered and bloody, wiping his nose and saying, "That didn't hurt!" after someone beat him up. I have honestly lost all faith in our government, and have felt this way for years and years. I honestly don't believe, for one minute, that our government is doing anything to better our country. I don't believe that they act upon anything, unless it can be considered beneficial to them, politically, monetarily or otherwise.

I try not to think that way because it's very depressing, but there's no two ways around it.