The largest media outlets in Brazil this week had to retract their articles on the Rittenhouse case because they claimed it was a case of a white youth having shot and killed two black men. They got this from the US media, which deliberately cultivated this false narrative.
I'd be willing to bet that roughly 75% of the people sitting on social media spewing hatred and rage over the verdict did not bother to watch much or even any of the trial.

You can tell in what they're claiming that, like @NYCMayor, they have zero mastery of the most basic facts
Just look at how many people were radically deceived about this case - and still are! - including people paid to follow and "report on" these matters for a living.
Brazil's biggest newspaper, last week:
Another major Brazil news outlet last week. Where do you think they all get this from? How did news outlets around the world all make the same major mistake?

It's because they relied on the US media, which purposely spread this racially inflammatory lie for 18 months.
Anyone who gets their news from CNN, MSNBC, NYT, or online digital media outlets believed this for most of the last 18 months:

From the Dutch paper @telegraaf earlier today:
É verdade, como alguns afirmam, @JornalOGlobo hoje cedo (como Folha e UOL na semana passada) disse falsamente que as pessoas que Kyle Rittenhouse atirou eram negras? Muitas pessoas estão compartilhando o "screen shot," mas eu não vi o tweet original ou uma retratação.
Just confirmed that yet another major Brazilian news outlet -- @JornalOGlobo -- announced in its headline today that the person Rittenhouse killed was a black man.

What do you think explains that so many major media outlets around the world were deceived into believing this?
Eu realmente quero saber quantos brasileiros me chamando de fascista, racista e nazista por minha crença de que os promotores não conseguiram provar a culpa de Rittenhouse assistir a qualquer parte do julgamento, saber de qualquer coisa além do que a Globo contou eles (via NYT).
Se você está gritando que alguém merece ficar na prisão pelas próximas 4 décadas, mesmo que não tenha se preocupado em assistir ao julgamento, não saiba nada sobre a lei e tenha todas as suas informações da CNN, então o autoritário é você, não eu.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Glenn Greenwald

Glenn Greenwald Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ggreenwald

21 Nov
On the same day as the Rittenhouse verdict, two other major criminal cases were decided. One was a conviction by a jury in Missouri of a white police detective who fatally shot a black man, Cameron Lamb, 26, after entering his property without cause:

nytimes.com/2021/11/20/us/…
The other was the acquittal on the major charges by a Central Florida jury of a black man, Andrew Coffee IV, who shot at SWAT police officers, resulting in them shooting his girlfriend to death. He claimed legitimate self-defense, and the jury agreed:

wptv.com/news/region-in…
No reasonable person can deny that there are still major inequities in the US criminal justice system based on class and race. But there's a reason Kyle Rittenhouse is a household name, while Eric J. DeValkenaere (the now-convicted police detective) and Andrew Coffee IV are not.
Read 4 tweets
21 Nov
There are still a few NYT journalists who follow their reporting wherever facts lead, even if it runs afoul of liberal pieties. They're the ones attacked the most. @powellnyt is one of the best: read this great interview on race, class and free speech:

persuasion.community/p/powell
I'm hesitant to post excerpts because I hope you'll read the whole interview. But here he explains how much the liberal-left has changed when it comes their views on free speech, how just a couple decades ago it was sacrosanct. Now it's viewed as trivial or, more so, pernicious:
Powell has been covering labor and class issues for a long time. One of the most interesting parts of the interview is his explanation of how censorship is so often used by the liberal-left against the working class. In this passage, he describes the degradation of the @ACLU:
Read 4 tweets
20 Nov
Part 2 of the video produced by the brilliant @0rf:
"Kyle Rittenhouse didn't illegally bring a gun across state lines and 5 other myths surrounding the trial debunked" -- from @YahooNews/@BusinessInsider:

yahoo.com/news/kyle-ritt…
Read 4 tweets
19 Nov
ACQUITTAL ON ALL COUNTS
Kyle Rittenhouse collapsed upon hearing the verdict in tears, as any 18-year-old would be in such a heavy situation.

Shame on those who tried to claim his tears were fake. A completely disgraceful performance by the national media. The verdict was just if you watched the trial.
I'll be going live on Rumble in a few minutes to discuss the Rittenhouse verdict, take all questions, analyze the implications. Will post the link shortly
Read 4 tweets
19 Nov
Ex-WSJ reporter @Srubenfeld publicly demands that the NYDN not publish articles by @MTracey about the Cuomo/James case -- a case Tracey has covered as much as any journalist in the country: don't "platform" Michael Tracey! -- then locks his account as if he's the victim:
The attempt by journalists to insist only credentialed "real journalists" (as determined by them) are entitled to 1st Am rights -- seen in the FBI/O'Keefe matter -- tracks their attempt to declare themselves a special caste: they criticize whomever, but nobody can criticize them.
It's scary how many people have come to believe the press freedom guarantee of the 1st Am is available only to "real journalists," so if you point out how attacks on Assange & O'Keefe jeopardize press freedoms, huge numbers will say: they're not journalists, as if that matters.
Read 6 tweets
19 Nov
Leaving aside debates about China, the WTA is far more dependent on China than the NBA, yet they're explicitly saying they're willing to lose it, while NBA cowers in fear.

Yet somehow, NBA and its players are credited with bravery for spouting views their corporate sponsors love
Political courage means you're wiling to take positions that will likely result in sacrifice of your own material interests: what the WTA is now doing.

But in liberal discourse, it's completely inverted: "courage" means spouting popular, mainstream liberal orthodoxies.
To apply this framework to a different realm:

Journalistic courage: Julian Assange.

Journalistic cowardice: Jim Acosta.

Yet in mainstream liberal circles, this is completely reversed. They've distorted "courage" into a propaganda term for coercion and conformity.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(