Seth Abramson, re NYT Headline:

[dajoki]

Link to tweet

[uponit7771]

1. K&R, Why isn't that one line a full blown story with top headline in all the M$M ?! They don't under

... stand how they're enabling Red Don with not putting his shit on blast.

[empedocles]

3. The NYT is 'the' national newspaper, it's not appropriate for NYt to put 'shit on blast'

[The legendary Cronkite, could be criticized, and was, from perspectives across spectrums. However, the moderate Cronkite was known, especially in times of crisis, as who the public looked to - Walter was a respected, responsible leader].

[empedocles]

4. The NYT, like Mueller and Pelosi, have a sense of where their strength is, and what is needed.

Wrong at times, sure, - but a sense of values and seasoned experience.

Leave the shit blasting for better suited others.

[pangaia]

10. Shit blasting ?? My god, this is treason !!!!

[thesquanderer]

6. Abramson's revised headline does not reflect what the story actually says.

Believing Trump will leak is very different from worrying about the possibility that he might leak.

But yes, it's an important story. It's gotten some more traction here...

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/pentagon-trump-cyber-attacks-on-russia-848695

[pangaia]

11. " Believing Trump will leak is very different from worrying about the possibility that he might leak

Not to me it isn't.

WHY should it even be an issue with an American president...??

[thesquanderer]

13. Accuracy in reporting (and headlines) still matters.

I understand, your concern is the same either way. I'm just talking about how it's described in the press. The situation is bad enough, without exaggerating it to make it worse, which in turns gives opponents an excuse to say things like "fake news" or "the other side does it too." Over-stating your case weakens it in the long run. In this case, the story essentially says his advisors are worried that he might leak, it doesn't say that they believe he will leak, and while you are right to be concerned either way, they don't mean the same thing.

[LiberalLovinLug]

20. Yes they technically aren't the same meaning

But it's also context.

Treason is a serious issue. So is something like child abuse. I'd be pretty well just as concerned if a child was returned to, say, a shady step father because, they phrased their decision as being that they did not BELIEVE the stepfather would abuse, they were just WORRIED he would, based on past behavior

[stopdiggin]

25. and accuracy still matters

Share your concern .. but I'd still like the accurate headline (and reporting).

[dajoki]

19. No difference to me either n/t

[Achilleaze]

2. The republican Draft-Dodger-in-Chief is noted for his loyalty...

to himself. So he and his republican cronies are slap happy to sell out the USA.

Disgusting

[dlk]

5. Trump has Already Betrayed Our Country, Repeatedly

Sadly, this is the normal way Trump operates.

[triron]

7. And no one stops him.

[Javaman]

8. because beyond the headline, the orange asshole stops reading.

but they certainly could have moved it up to at least the second or third paragraph.

[Duppers]

15. My thoughts too.

Will no one tell him? Not even Hannity?

[ffr]

9. K&R

We're not even in the Intelligence business and we could have told the world that. Fox Snooze drones are traitors for allowing their traitor in chief access to PDBs. We're all in danger.

[Scurrilous]

12. K&R

[Duppers]

14. K & R

[randr]

16. So if the information is so sensitive that even Trump can't handle it

Why the hell does the public know anything now, unless it is a breach of national security?

[stopdiggin]

23. our intelligence wants this as a shot across the bow

The NYTimes wrote a broad brush article that gave an overview of what the program involved, what the history was, and what was new in terms of stepped up efforts, sanctioning and authority. We can assume this was done with the tacit approval of the intelligence community and details and specifics were not included. What we'd prefer the public (and president) not be privy to is specific targets, specific capability, methodology, etc. It was a good article, and everyone should take the time to read it .. if for no other reason than to acquaint yourself with the scary possibilities and consequences inherent. This is the new front for old Cold War "mutually assured destruction."
(anybody want to gamble on brinksmanship with this POTUS?)

[BlancheSplanchnik]

17. Impeach the MUTHAFUCKA!!!! 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬&#

[FakeNoose]

21. Preach it

[BlancheSplanchnik]

22. 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾

YASSSS! Hallelujah!

[Fla Dem]

18. Was the article written by Maggie Haberman?

[OMGWTF]

24. PENTAGON BELIEVES TRUMP WILL BETRAY COUNTRY AGAIN IF GIVEN CHANCE

[spanone]

28. Thank you Seth!!!!

K&R...

[Cha]

29. PENTAGON BELIEVES TRUMP WILL BETRAY COUNTRY IF GIVEN CHANCE

Link to tweet

Retweeted!

[MasonDreams]

30. The Pentagon also sees the coming effects of climate change

as a very real and serious threat. They are making plans.
LIST: Pentagon should explain to Senate Rethugs
1 The pResident is a threat to National Security, remove him from office immediately.
2 USA & the World need the Green New Deal
3 The Domestic or Internal security of the USA is increasingly precarious because of insane Rethug policy. A Marshall Plan of infrastructure and humanitarian assistance and development is needed. Nation building if you will. It worked pretty good for Germany and Japan.