>nyt reporter knows the truth about leaking because shes acting out a house of cards fantasy/plotline irl
>blames drumpf anyway





This post was edited by excellence on Jun 8 2018 09:56am

I'm trying to imagine the life of male journalists who do some gritty war correspondent work overseas or pore over decades of financial records or conduct investigative journalism and spying to get their scoops. And then when they apply for an opening at the New York Times, it instead goes to a girl with only 2 years experience out of college who makes sure to be very upfront with her interviewers about how she's having an affair with a high ranking and trusted senate intelligence committee staffer who is 'not a source', if you know what I mean.

the male reporters do the same thing

Couldnt have happened to better people.

when reading this the only word that comes to mind is vindicated. those same war hardened journalists wouldnt want to do the same anon source gossip rag stories that she did anyways. so they didnt have to write bullshit for a paycheck and she's exposed as a slut, which will invariably expose more sluts, and scare future sluts from being sluts.

too bad they're now driving ubers for a living while she was working at the NYT

This is just how humans are. This is the chimp in us. We use violence and sex to get whatever we want.

Hilarious stuff.

thats the idiot journalists fault for applying at one job, and that one job being a gossip rag like the NYT.....

maybe he should have instead applied for more than one job like a non-moron, perhaps considered tangential fields and positions. it sounds like you created a fantasy of one moron who put all his eggs in the NYT basket then flew into a depression that only Uber could cure.

otherwise good journalists don't have an excuse, they should flee traditional media outlets and never look back. likely leave the field tbh. and i dont wanna hear the pendulum bullshit, journalism is never going back by-and-large. it's done. Walter Cronkite only ever did good journalism because that's what people wanted. thats done, over, finished with.

anyway how do you lot think this shakes out for press freedoms
any time the gubment is seizing materials from a journalist it should send a chill down the civil libertarians back. But for the historical context, bush doj locked up judith miller for 3 months to get her to reveal her source on valerie plame and spied on her. Obama doj threatened one journalist to get his source and named another unindicted co-conspirator to pressure him but didnt actually lock up either, but seized records and spied relentlessly. Here we have the trump doj spying on watkins, but presumably only after they knew the identity of her source and their relationship from other spying / internal investigation and just wanted proof. And her records are definitely material to the case. And she wasnt targeted or threatened by the doj, they went only after the leaker without coercing her. And they obeyed proper disclosure like informing her.

Id say its not as bad but its still cause for concern. It could be chalked up to the actions of cautious prosecutors who took pains not to violate the freedom of the press while narrowly seizing evidence in a case instead of fishing for sources.

It's amazing to me how much you are willing to speculate and theorize on something like a leaker's relationship with a journalist, or FBI/DOJ agents going rogue, yet at the same time seem to think all of the Russia/Special Counsel revelations are nothing.

That's part of the reason I thought you were just playing devil's advocate for fun. But now you're trying to minimize the Trump administration seizing records from a reporter... and one of your main talking points against Obama and Clinton are about how they are authoritarians, and you're a strong supporter of civil liberties.

It's hard to take you seriously anymore. This example, along with your post about what your political positions are, just shows me that you don't have any real positions here, beyond writing long posts parroting the Trump supporting line. It's sort of boring to debate/discuss with someone who doesn't have authentic beliefs.

This post was edited by IceMage on Jun 8 2018 06:54pm