This is repulsive. The Intercept was founded during the Snowden story to defend privacy rights & oppose the security state. Now, the liberal DNC hacks who "edit" it are boasting they got personal data from Gab users & are sorting through it, doing FBI's work to find "extremists."
Bold Adversarial Journalism: serving as mouthpieces for the CIA and acting as monitoring cops for the FBI. Liberal political hacks ruin everything. The Intercept is shit.
The people who run the Intercept now had nothing to do with its founding -- they just leech off those who did -- and are authoritarian shit liberals so this is what they do. They only saving grace is that outside like 3 writers, nobody reads that rag:
The fact that Facebook has courts that decide who can and can't be heard on monopolistic speech platforms is tyrannical. Here's a reminder that leaders around the world -- many of whom dislike Trump -- condemned Facebook's removal of Trump:
Leaders in the democratic world -- unlike US liberal journalists -- are able to see past their emotions about Trump and recognize the grave danger to democracy that tech censorship of political speech poses:
And for the newly libertarian-ed liberals who say Facebook is a private corporation and therefore can do whatever it wants, here's a reminder that the Dem-controlled House Antitrust Subcommittee issued a great report on why Facebook is a classic monopoly:
Or travel back to 2006 and tell liberals that their favorite pundits and operatives would be David Frum, Bill Kristol, Nicolle Wallace and Rick Wilson; that they'd see the CIA & FBI as noble allies; that George Bush would be popular among Dems; and they'd be honoring Liz Cheney:
During Trump era, liberals aligned - not temporarily but permanently - with anyone and everyone who opposed Trump. The most effective anti-Trump forces weren't liberals but CIA, FBI, Bush officials, Lincoln Project scumbags, and hawkish Dems like Adam Schiff. So they became that.
It's always been true that civil libertarians have no permanent loyalty to a party or faction because any human entity, once it has power, becomes authoritarian. That happened to Dems not only because they acquired power but also they aligned with the most authoritarian entities.
Which cable networks can one go on where one doesn't end up talking to architects of GITMO and the War on Terror? A super-popular MSNBC host was the *Bush/Cheney spokesperson*. CNN & MSNBC have more CIA/NSA/FBI/DoD operatives on their payroll than one finds at Proud Boy meeting.
A huge portion of digital media outlets does nothing but sit in front of their TV taking pictures of what they see. I can't imagine a sadder existence. But it's not my fault that the security state went from clandestinely controlling news outlets to doing it on their payroll.
Hey, Glenn Greenwald, if you really were serious about your condemnations of the War on Terror, you would go on CNN and MSNBC instead. Gotcha!
Journalists with major outlets know they spread a false, now-retracted story about the FBI and Giuliani, but many refuse to remove it, because their real job is disinformation.
The question they won't address: how do they keep "independently confirming" the same falsehoods?
This is an obvious scam — they have not “independently confirmed” anything but rather merely acted as servants to the same lying security state agents who planted the original false story — but they do it over and over.
Remember this humiliation? That's how it was done:
They absolutely should delete those false tweets. Unfortunately, there are dozens of CNN, NBC, MSNBC & WPost reporters and even "disinformation activists" who have left up their false tweets about Giuliani's FBI briefing & refuse to correct or delete it even when asked to.
That's why these self-serving claims from the CNN/MSNBC/NBC/WPost/NBC axis that their false stories are somehow superior to what they call "Fake News" is complete bullshit. The employees of these outlets constantly spread false stories without any accountability.
Look at what is still up. Remember: these are the only outlets you should trust because they have layers upon layers of careful editorial scrutiny and fact-checking rigor.
Also, compare how viral the original WashPost false story went to how little interest there was in the subsequent retraction (and I'd bet most who spread the retraction weren't the ones who spread the original false story):
Here's one of the countless ex-security state agents who now work for MSNBC, the FBI's Clint Watts (@selectedwisdom), who virally spread this fake news and never bothered to remove it. These are disinformation specialists hired by media outlets.