Glenn Greenwald, journalist who helped Edward Snowden expose NSA spying, once was a lawyer who owed

[FarCenter]

Glenn Greenwald, journalist who helped Edward Snowden expose NSA spying, once was a lawyer who owed thousands in taxes and was sued over porn business

The reporter who broke the story about the NSA’s secret wiretaps has a little secret of his own.

Before he was a reporter and commentator for the Guardian newspaper, Glenn Greenwald was a lawyer — and had a part-time job in the porn business.
...

Filings also show he’s had some money problems — his law license was suspended for failing to pay his registration fee in 2009. He’s said he started winding down his law practice in 2005 to focus on writings, but he still has some financial ghosts from his previous career.

The New York County Clerk's office shows Greenwald has $126,000 in open judgments and liens against him dating back to 2000, including a total of $21,000 from the NYS Tax Dept. and the city Department of Finance.

There’s no record of those debts being paid, but Greenwald said he believes he’s all caught up — although he’s still trying to pay down an old IRS judgment against him from his lawyer days.

Records show the IRS has an $85,000 lien against him.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/greenwald-reporter-broke-nsa-story-lawyer-sued-porn-biz-article-1.1383448

[JaneyVee]

1. I occasionally disagree with Greenwald, but that NY Daily News article is shit, nothing but

character assassination.

[lumpy]

4. No. Character exposure.

n

[TheMadMonk]

67. Does his character or past activities put the lie...

...to what he is currently reporting?

[Spider Jerusalem]

70. ...

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

(since you are clearly ignorant of logic)

[FarCenter]

5. What parts of it are false?

[JaneyVee]

12. Not necessarily false, just not newsworthy. What is the reason for that author to even write it?

Just my opinion.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

74. i think the line of thought is along the lines of

that since greenwald is currently quite relevant news wise then information about him is relevant as well, its a fairly common thing that when people are in the limelight for others to dig into their past to find out just what kind of person somebody is(for good or bad).

Do i really need the information reported? Personally i would have to answer 'not really', but knowledge is power so I'm happy to have learned something new regardless since i can make future decisions in a more informed manner.

[MADem]

81. Come on...if that was Dick Cheney's CV, or Bill O'Reilly's, this place would be on fire.

It goes to judgment, associations, responsibility...you can learn a lot about people by how they conduct themselves in business, and what sorts of businesses he engages in...to say nothing of the fact that he is suspended from the NY bar...

It's ENTIRELY newsworthy, because Greenwald made himself such an integral part of this tale.

[BlueCaliDem]

101. It's also a good explanation why GiGi literally *hates* government that taxes its people

and that's why he's a Libertarian and loathes Democrats.

GiGi is in it for GiGi, and that just totally destroys his credibility with me and most people.

This guy, who has tax judgments against him, has a shady past in the porn industry, has defended a White Supremacist as his only claim to civil rights issues, and who appears to want to take down the Federal Government {supports "Libertarians" like Ron Paul and Gary Johnson - two big time anti-Federal, pro-State-supremacy government} froths around the lips when attacking President Obama who is squeaky clean in comparison.

Unbelievable. On the other hand, I'm happy that GiGi thought it was necessary to make the news because he became it and now he's being looked over with a fine-tooth comb - just as he did with President Obama. Turnabout is fair play.

[MADem]

111. I will admit, I didn't know much about this guy at all, but the more I read, the more I say

"What's to like?"

He does come across as a mean, selfish, angry poseur. His long association with the CATO Institute--and his weaselly (and inaccurate) downplaying of that association, is what did it for me. As I learned about his attitudes towards things, like the social safety net, that Democrats hold dear, I am, to use a term popular across the pond, right gobsmacked that people here put on their GiGi sweaters and wave the GiGi pom-poms for the guy. Being "anti-war" isn't enough--that's another one of those issues that crosses party lines. This asshole doesn't like the government, unless the government can do things that HE wants. That's a selfish attitude, at best.

Your last paragraph is spot on. What goes around comes around!

[Ian David]

6. I agree. And haven't we all considered going into the porn business at some point? n/t

[BlueToTheBone]

9. Especially to pay our back taxes

lol

[BenzoDia]

14. haha

[flamingdem]

50. It's one way to get started in the

entertainment business

[closeupready]

2. I don't care. He's a good journalist.

EOS.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. Well what do you know...

Next step in character assassination.

So what about the Tempora program? How about we talk a tad Stelar Wind..

[OilemFirchen]

33. This is NOT the "next step in character assassination".

This is a craven reporter chasing a useless story in an attempt to gain some notoriety.

Now... if it turns out that he's been secretly maintaining a giant ignore list... SHITFAN!

[emulatorloo]

86. Agreed - tacky tabloid journalism that is a huge fail

[FarCenter]

90. People should read orignals, rather than second hand accounts

There was a post "Here Comes the Glenn Greenwald Hit Piece".

This is the actual Daily News article.

[nadinbrzezinski]

91. I am just amused by the predictability of all

Sorry if you are missing the irony

[Pale Blue Dot]

7. Could Bush have stopped 9/11, had he listened to his intelligence briefings?

nt

[dkf]

8. I don't understand why I am supposed to care.

[neverforget]

16. Because it's Greenwald and his character must be impeached to cast doubt

on what he reports.

[dkf]

17. Oh sorry...must march in lockstep.

[neverforget]

21. Absolutely. The NSA loves us.

I like my spies to be military just like Thomas Jefferson would have wanted.

[MNBrewer]

36. It's because Glenn Greenwald is gay and ran a porn business and gay sex is ICKY

ICKy I say. Pay no attention to "The Clapper" behind the curtain.

[cthulu2016]

10. Greenwald has made money from porn so the NSA doesn't spy on us?

This OP is an incredible new low, but sure to be exceeded by tomorrow.

[LeftInTX]

11. Greenwald responds:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/26/nsa-revelations-response-to-smears

I see this as a non-story and pretty much a personal smear on Greenwald. This is pretty low.

I personally wish that Greenwald would have taken the leaked documents to a congress critter prior to splattering them in the Guardian. He's smart and he would have known what to do and who to contact. He might not have gotten anywhere, but maybe the mess with Snowden yacking to the Chinese about our foreign intel etc. may have been prevented.

[UTUSN]

87. So his responses are:1)It was SO long ago. 2)A reporter "SOMEHOW" found some things - imagine THAT!1

3) He's led "a complicated and adult" life.

Just Replying to expand the post title, "Greenwald responds:", that might give the impression that he completely disposed of the reporting on him.

When GREENWALD was involved in some kind of flap during Campaign '12, the content of which I don't remember, I had no earthly idea who he was and when I posted a mild disagreement with whatever he had said I was totally flamed and called homophobic. Repeating, I knew nothing about him beyond the content of the then dispute and my two cents were totally minor and content-driven, yet the flaming was vociferous, the point being (moreso now) that there is some thinking, sometimes, that if somebody is a member of one of our coalition groups it means a total get-out-of-jail-free card. Nope, not for me: If a member of the Democratic party screws up, such as a politician taking cash or whatever, it's not a matter of his or her political label, it's their personal failing. I'm not comparing GREENWALD to the level of the politician-taking-cash, my point being NO Gold Card absolution based on being a Hispanic, Black, woman, union, Gay, whatever.

That said, when Bill CLINTON screwed up, putting his PERSONAL FAILINGS first in front of just WORKING ON OUR AGENDA, I both condemned his selfishness while also attacking the hypocritical Rethugs and their FAKE impeachment. My regret was the WASTE of all that energy we had to spend defending instead of on our agenda.

[LeftInTX]

88. I don't hold reporters in the same esteem as I hold elected officials

I do hold Greenwald somewhat accountable for the manner in which he reported the NSA leaks. He could have been more responsible with his story. I tend to see Greenwald as the messenger instead of Snowden.

However as to Greenwald's personal life, I see nothing here. He didn't commit a crime. He's a former corporate attorney. There are a lot of excellent reporters who have done much worse things in their personal lives and I continue to read them.

[UTUSN]

13. st glen?!1 can.t be!1 nt

[MNBrewer]

37. Wha1t's!1wro08ngwithpo111!11n?

[frylock]

15. epic fucking fail..

keeping flinging that poo!

[Gravitycollapse]

18. PORN?!?! O NOZ...

http://mlkshk.com/r/3AJ

[frylock]

19. you know what? imma kick and rec this..

more people need to see what this place has become. stay classy.

[sabrina 1]

20. Lol The DAILY NEWS!

When the Daily News attacks you, you know you are doing something right.

A Rightwing Rag.

Btw, who cares if he owed taxes and likes porn?

He is interesting only because he is a journalist who revealed some very disturbing information about the massive Surveillance State we are apparently living in.

[Autumn]

22. At least he's not a values based US Senator who pays hookers to change his diapers,

or a U.S. Secretary of the Treasury who had a slight tax boo boo.

[treestar]

23. But it's not about him!!!!

It's about the stuff he exposed to us poor lied-to, spied-upon Americans! And we are to take his word for it and respect his opinion no matter what!!!!!!!!111

[railsback]

24. The message is NEVER reflective of the messenger

unless, of course, when its coming from a source like FOX. Then its all bullshit.

[frylock]

26. rec this shit up of you support it..

cmon, let's get this on the front page for all to see. show the courage of your conviction.

[Waiting For Everyman]

25. Well this certainly convinces me that Greenwald

is NOT being paid off by Big Money. That is a plus for a journalist, not a minus.

[Th1onein]

27. THIS IS NOT ABOUT GREENWALD OR SNOWDEN. STOP CHANGING THE SUBJECT.

This is about the surveillance state. PERIOD. Got that.

[ucrdem]

28. Yes, this thread is about Greenwald. Read the OP. nt

[deurbano]

29. "On Glenn Greenwald, and Shooting the Messenger"

by Joe Pompeo


http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2013/06/8531323/glenn-greenwald-and-shooting-messenger

[last1standing]

30. So you've proved your ability to spread hurtful, yet pointless, gossip.

How does that help enlighten us as to whether the government is spying on US citizens without firm protections against abuse? In fact, doesn't this gossip prove the opposite, that the government and its allies will use any information it can get its hands on to destroy anyone who dares to speak up against it?

The more I see of this kind of thing, the more I realize how important it is for us to have a full accounting of the NSA program.

[dkf]

32. You should post here:

https://mobile.twitter.com/search?q=%23ggscandals&src=hash

[MelungeonWoman]

44. OMG those are hysterical.

[lunasun]

48. good ones there Thanks :)

[Luminous Animal]

52. So great. And so great to see so many people supporting him. Thank yooooo!

[ucrdem]

34. Par for the course and no surprise. Thanks for the heads up. nt

[Hissyspit]

41. No, the intelligent response is:

"That's it? Oh, for fuck's sake..."

[kentuck]

35. "Records show the IRS has an $85,000 lien against him."

I thought your IRS records were secret and no one could get into them? The subject was discussed in regards to Mitt Romney's last campaign.

[MADem]

83. I think it came out in "court papers" as a result of a lawsuit.

When people are yelling about money, the court usually wants to know who owes what to whom.

Those papers aren't secret.

[Narkos]

38. Don't like Greenwald...however, he's not the traitor here.

[99Forever]

39. Who gives a flying...

... monkey turd about another lameass attempt to shoot the messenger.

You authoritarian/police/surveillance state apologists are sounding downright desperate.

And very very weak.

[MNBrewer]

40. Reccing for pure, unadulterated BULL SHIT SMEAR MACHINE ProPaganda!!!

[Hissyspit]

42. That's it?

Oh, for fuck's sake...

[jmowreader]

43. A counterintelligence officer wouldn't laugh this off

You have a source with a lot of unanswered questions about his background and an intermediary with significant financial problems. And the source fled to two countries that are packed with intelligence officers who don't like the US very much.

I realize this goes against the "Snowden and Greenwald are heroes" theory so popular here, but these two men are what spies look like.

[ucrdem]

45. ^ thanks. nt

[Demit]

80. I always wondered what spies look like.

"These two men are what spies look like." LOL, what a statement. You should work for the NSA! Then taxpayers wouldn't have to pay for all this electronic surveillance. The NSA could just ask you which American citizens are spies based on you knowing what spies look like.

That's the attitude George Zimmerman had when he was patrolling his neighborhood. He had that talent too, to know what bad characters looked like.

[jmowreader]

113. I have worked for the NSA

In the pre-Dubya days, even if we'd have wanted to spy on Americans we couldn't have because we didn't have the assets to do it.

Army strategic signals intelligence is run by NSA. Your equipment belongs to them, your pay comes from them, your tasking and mission comes from them, the award for best unit (the Travis Trophy, otherwise known as the Stanley Cup because it looks like the top foot of the Stanley Cup) is presented by DIRNSA, and your unit has an NSA address. Unfortunately, your drug test requirements come from both NSA and the Army, so we pissed in cups about once a month.

They require you to attend Operations Security training at least once a year if your site is in a Safe location, as listed in the Directory of SIGINT Facilities. Risky sites are trained every six months, and Dangerous sites every quarter. I worked at a Dangerous site. Most places are Risky. A lot goes into the determination, and the number of enemy agents is very high on the list.(I don't know if the Agency has a site in Vienna - this isn't a plausible deniability thing, I really don't know - but Vienna, for some reason, draws spies like honey draws flies so Vienna, peaceful Vienna, would have been Dangerous.)

One very long part of this training is in recognizing someone who works for the other side. There are several big indicators that someone is vulnerable to an approach.

The big one is financial problems. This goes two ways. One is debts no honest man could pay. The other is living beyond your means. Most spies are motivated by money.

Next is ideology, which is Jonathan Pollard's deal.

Another is revenge. There's a theory out there that Booz Allen was planning to get rid of Snowden before his probationary period was over, and he found out about it. I don't think revenge was the only factor here; with the amount of information he has, he couldn't have collected it all in just a couple of weeks.

The big one in Snowden's case is blackmail. Homosexuality, in the days the Army would throw you out without question for it, was a huge one..."you do what we say or we'll tell your commander you're gay" worked even if you weren't gay. Hetero sex worked too. Remember Clayton Lonetree, the Marine security guard who went to Leavenworth for letting the Soviets into the Moscow Embassy cipher room? He was screwing KGB majors without realizing who they were, and they threatened to expose him. Snowden's got colleges on his CV that deny he went there and who knows what else. If someone threatens to expose you if you don't go along and tells you you'll go to prison if you're exposed or even if you report contact, you'll likely go along.

Greenwald looks like a straight money approach; Snowden, some mix of blackmail and revenge.

[MelungeonWoman]

46. Another recommend...

Light is the best disinfectant.

[Comrade Grumpy]

47. This place is really turning rank. Cheap, ugly little smears.

I hope you are proud of yourself.

[Duer 157099]

49. BFD. Doesn't change my opinion of him at all. n/t

[Hissyspit]

51. @jeremyscahill: This smear campaign against @ggreenwald is utterly despicable. All of the "reporters

@jeremyscahill: This smear campaign against @ggreenwald is utterly despicable. All of the "reporters" who participated should have *their* lives scrutinized

[ucrdem]

56. Now there's a surprise. nt

[Dragonfli]

61. Someone pointing out the smear campaign surprises you?

Or more likely ...
Don't tell me let me guess, Scahill hates Blackwater and has exposed Eric Prince's questionable activities working as a mercenary force for Bush. So naturally, you hate him as an unpatriotic traitor that hates kittens, has halitosis and may possibly be fucking a rat or sheep or whatever the beastiality crowd of smear agents is going with today.

That is the sort of thing one would expect from an "80's Republican" now registered Democratic.

In other words, you might be a right winger if... (use your imagination to fill in the rest of the joke)

[ucrdem]

62. He is what is he is and I don't hate anyone. Example: '"80's Republican" now registered Democratic'

as it pertains to me is a baseless accusation (IOW, lie) and over-the-top violation of DU Community Standards, but you are what you are and I don't hate you.

See how that works?

[Dragonfli]

63. I was refering to a politician that told us outright that his views would be considered those of an

80's Republican back in the day. You do not want to be associated with him? Are you a racist or something? Just because he is a black President you think that was a slander he made against himself or as you appear to think, you? very narrow minded.

Did I guess right about Scahill being on your shit list or not, a simple yeas or no will do, but you can also elaborate as to why he is or isn't on your shit list.

[ucrdem]

64. Yes, on my list since 2008. I've discussed him here before. Here are two links

in case you're interested:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022795685#post37

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022893405#post18

And thanks for your explanation. For the record, I've never in my life voted for a GOP candidate, and that includes nonpartisan and judicial races. And as I say, I don't hate anyone, least of all you, but I don't like being jerked around, so if you don't mind I'm going to put you on full ignore to avoid future misunderstandings. Peace out.

[Hissyspit]

73. More baseless slanderous accusations from you.

He's paid by The Nation. You know, the Liberal-oriented magazine?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Scahill

And he makes some interesting points.

More faceless ad Hominem attack from you just because someone says things you don't like. Calling investigative journalists Nixonian "ratfuckers," seriously?

[nadinbrzezinski]

93. This is the same guy who puts civil libertarians

Like I don't know Wyden and Udall, in the same boat as Ron Paul, and then says he's been harassed when shown the history of libertarian thought in the US.

He is not harmless either.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

122. This one is a piece of work --

Anyone who calls Amy Goodman a "ratfucker" is nothing but a troll in my book. This one stinks to high heaven.

[frylock]

108. as does every "nothing to hide" surveillance suckup on this board

[Narkos]

53. Fuck this shit. He can publish whatever he wants. Snowden is the problem.

[Cali_Democrat]

54. So Greenwald is a tax cheat who peddled porn

Greenwald called Haas“a little bitch” and “a good little whore.”

WOW!

I don't have a problem with his entry into the porn business, but his tax cheating is very revealing.

Greenwald still hasn't answered Joy Reid's question about Snowden getting the BAH job after he was in contact with him. Of course Greenwald snapped at her and called her an Obama administration operative and never answered the question.

Now after reading this article, I'm becoming more convinced Greenwald conspired with Snowden to steal loads of classified documents. Greenwald probably thought it would help advance his career so he can pull in additional money.

Thanks for the thread, FarCenter. I'm sure additional articles revealing more info about Greenwald and Snowden will pop up and I'll try to post them here. Of course some people here are gonna cry about it, but they will just have to deal with it.

Thanks again.

[Hissyspit]

68. Where did Greenwald snap at Reid and call her an operative?

Last edited Thu Jun 27, 2013, 05:09 AM - Edit history (6)

Please provide a link.

Are you talking about the debunked thread where SOMEONE ELSE called her an Obama operative on Twitter but the OP left it implied that Greenwald did? Reid asked her question of Greenwald, about him supposedly not responding to questions about Snowden getting the Booz Allen job, and he responded with links to interviews showing he clearly did, in answer to her question. Her implication that Greenwald had not addressed the issue was false. That's all. There was no more Twitter conversation as the OP implied.

Then, she referenced being called an 'Obama operative,' which apparently comes from this earlier Twitter conversation where Greenwald does NOT call her an Obama operative, but, rather, makes an argument about automatic assumption of validity of journalists: http://www.mediaite.com/online/glenn-greenwald-blasts-joy-ann-reid-msnbc-for-blind-acceptance-of-obamas-narrative-on-nsa

...and then someone else in the later Twitter thread called her that, repeating HER words.

It was pointed out in the OP that much in the thread was confused, misleading or misrepresentative.

(He may have called her an 'Obama operative' somewhere else, but I can't find any evidence of it. Those seem to be HER words. If you can find an incident where he did, please post it.)

Also:

http://m.guardiannews.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/26/nsa-revelations-response-to-smears

Upon calling him, I learned that he had somehow discovered two events from my past. The first was my 2002-04 participation in a multi-member LLC that had an interest in numerous businesses, including the distribution of adult videos. I was bought out of that company by my partners roughly nine years ago.

The lawsuit he referenced was one where the LLC had sued a video producer in (I believe) 2002 after the producer reneged on a profit-sharing contract. In response, that producer fabricated abusive and ugly emails he claimed were from me – they were not – in order to support his allegation that I had bullied him into entering into that contract and he should therefore be relieved from adhering to it. Once our company threatened to retain a forensic expert to prove that the emails were forgeries, the producer quickly settled the case by paying some substantial portion of what was owed, and granting the LLC the rights to use whatever it had obtained when consulting with him to start its own competing business.

The second item the reporter had somehow obtained was one showing an unpaid liability to the IRS stemming, it appears, from some of the last years of my law practice. I've always filed all of my tax returns and there's no issue of tax evasion or fraud. It's just back taxes for which my lawyers have been working to reach a payment agreement with the IRS.

You do realize you are proving the OP's point?

[Douglas Carpenter]

78. don't pay any attention to these human rights Nazis who divert attention away from the real issues

- Greenwald's and Snowden's weirdness. They want people to focus on irrelevant points like how the intelligence services have developed or are developing a system that can track who and when everyone you and I and everyone else communicates with -whether by phone or E-mail or the Internet. Who the fuck cares? What could possibly go wrong with having an all encompassing intelligence service monitoring all of us 24 hours a day/7days a week? Those issues are nothing compared to Snowden's poll dancing girl friend and Greenwald's affinity for porn. Why do they keep trying to change the subject?? I'll tell you why! With cranks and crackpots like Al Gore, and Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson and several former senior members of the clandestine services trying to shove the fourth amendment down the throats of the American people - These human rights Nazis as I call them think they can deny us the right to live in country where intelligence services have a free hand to do what they want. They think they can force us to live in a country where the right to privacy is treated like some kind of sacred privilege. The think they can make us live in a society where political intimidation thru the intelligence services cannot happen. So they try to divert our attention away from what is really important - the weirdness of Glenn Greenwald and Edward Snowden - hoping we won't notice that they are trying to force their god damned human rights and fourth amendment down our throats!! But we will not stand for it!!

[adric mutelovic]

89. Greenwald says the emails are not from him

Why do you believe one of the parties in a he said/she said exchange? Is it that you WISH the emails were genuine because you dont like Greenwald's leak?

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. I will give you a free kick

To point out this did not go at all the way you expected.

[Bonobo]

57. Boy the IQ level on DU sure has dropped. nt

[Dragonfli]

59. It's quite disillusioning for those here that have been around longer than a few months isn't it?

[Bonobo]

60. Yeah, it really is.

Or it would be if I hadn't already known how pathetically stupid people have become as a result of relentlessly idiotic TV, movies combined with a second-rate educational system.

[nadinbrzezinski]

92. Third rate

USA,USA, USA

So we clarify. I wish it were that good.

[Major Hogwash]

94. Yeah, right, like you didn't watch Gilligan's Island when it first came out!!

You did, and you know you did!!
And now you know that I know that you did!!

[ucrdem]

58. One thing that makes this administration a standout: swiftboat campaigns crash and burn fast.

With SBVT it took what seemed like the whole summer, but was actually just August, to get that lousy trash off the front pages. I think the lesson has been learned and GOP ratf#cks are going down in flames in record time these days.

Coincidence I'm sure, but I'll say it again: I think Holder is doing an outstanding job.

[Hissyspit]

69. So Swiftboat tactics are offensive against Obama

But a-o.k. against Greenwald? Got it.

[backwoodsbob]

65. are you sure you are at the right forum?

I thought mindless hit pieces were the product of the right wing

[nadinbrzezinski]

95. The NY Daily news trends RW

Not as bad as the Post though

[avaistheone1]

66. So what Timothy Geithner didn't pay his taxes and Obama made him Treasury

Secretary. Obama smoked pot. And IRS and Pentagon employees watch and pay for porn with our tax dollars.

What in hell does this have to do with the government violating our Constitutional right to privacy?

[HiPointDem]

76. penny pritZtker's hotels have pay per view porn and she profits.

[JoeyT]

71. That's funny.

The people that are horrified that Greenwald is such a terrible person that he'd be behind on taxes are the very ones that screeched at everyone that complained about Geithner. The. Exact. Same. People.

[AzDar]

75. So fucking what?

[MotherPetrie]

77. Like you would give a shit about it if BUSH were still president

[Quantess]

79. How does this excuse the spying on citizens,

paid for by our own tax dollas?

[Cha]

82. Yeah, like we didn't know the NSA was spying and Greenwald needs money..

that's obvious.

thanks FarCenter

[Thinkingabout]

84. Isn't it interesting so many post defends Greenwald by accusing someone else of misdeeds. I don't

Think pointing out misdeeds of others will be a defense in courts of misdeeds of the person on trial.

[emulatorloo]

85. Lame story. Huge NY Daily News Fail n/t

[dionysus]

96. i think GG is a douche but i don't see how this article is relevant to anything...

[ucrdem]

97. It's relevant. Goes to motive (tax deadbeat, needs money) and method (dishonesty).

Also explains his take-down-the-government "Libertarian" shtick if owes several hundred thousand to the IRS. Explains it to anyone who didn't figure out that "Libertarianism" is all about not wanting to pay your taxes years ago, that is. Just like the GOP.

[FarCenter]

98. It goes to GGs trustworthyness and integrity

For example, the assertion that NSA has direct access to Internet businesses servers.

GG seems typical of that subspecies of lawyer who become very adept at determining which infractions of laws and regulations are likely to be prosecuted or not. This talent may have been sharpened by his days in mergers and acquisitions on Wall Street.

Fully developed, this results in the attitude that laws apply to other people, but not to them.

[dionysus]

99. maybe i don't care because i never thought he was trustworthy or very credible.

[Whisp]

100. lol. yes.

that's why I don't find this post shocking or whatever GG has in his past either bad or good - don't make no difference to me because I just plain don't trust him.

[Hissyspit]

117. But you trust other people who post false or misleading information

About Greenwald despite it being disproven?

[Whisp]

119. it is not false or misleading that GG is an obnoxious self agrandizing Libertarian Paul lovin' freak

it's an opinion I and many others hold.

end of message.

[Hissyspit]

120. Nothing, hunh?

As I often tell my students, opinion based on crap is a crap opinion.

End of message indeed, so attack the messenger instead.

[Whisp]

121. when Snowden and Glenn cough up that example

of getting into the President's email or phones, and not just throwing words about it against the wall, then I will listen.

Until then, yah, opinion that they are telling the truth, without evidence, is a crap opinion.

[Demit]

105. Oh well lookie here. Talking about integrity, the back story on Darah Gregorian:

Billmon fills you in on the Daily News 'reporter':

"...But method of operation in story that led to defamation case against NY Post and Darah Gregorian looks familiar: as if someone handed Gregorian & Co a fat dossier on their target.

If you read case against Darah Gregorian and NY Post t.co/9Jds41lbO0 not too hard to guess who might have passed them the dirt on the plaintiff.

Plaintiff in defamation case against Darah Gregorian had earlier sued this guy: t.co/LdSSRNSh9C Sounds like a lovely fellow.

So woman sues wealthy Wall Street bankster, claiming sex abuse. PDQ, damaging personal info about her shows up in Darah Gregorian story in NY Post. t.co/9Jds41lbO0

I report, you decide. But to me, Darah Gregorian looks like a gutter scuttling parasite who feeds off the filth fed to him by his “sources.” "

http://storify.com/billmon1/a-look-at-a-smear-merchant

[FarCenter]

106. As for Greenwald, the question is, "Do his stories sell newspapers?"

[Demit]

109. Oh dear. And here I thought the topic was trustworthiness and integrity.

I thought you were indicating that incidents in Greenwald's past were relevant to his integrity. I wondered if you would consider this principle applying to everyone, such as Darah Gregorian and how he comes to report things. Apparently not, if your switch to another topic is any indication.

[FarCenter]

112. The Guardian is fairly desparate for controversy to boost circulation and hits

Guardian 'seriously discussing' end to print edition

Senior figures at Guardian News & Media are seriously discussing the move to an entirely online operation, it has been claimed, leaving Mr Rusbridger increasingly isolated.

The longstanding Guardian chief wants to develop the Guardian’s digital-only US operation before pulling the plug on the print edition, in the hope that it will provide a useful blueprint for the online business in Britain.

However, trustees of the Scott Trust, GNM’s ultimate owner, fear it does not have enough cash on its books to sustain the newspapers for that long, according to More About Advertising, the website run by former Marketing Week editor Stephen Foster.

The Guardian publisher has spent the last few years battling to stem losses of £44m a year. However, it has been slow to make savings and any money that it has clawed back has been spent on expanding its US and online operations.

The investments helped to fuel a 16pc increase in digital revenues to £45.7m last year, but this was not enough to balance GNM’s operating losses which widened from £31.1m.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/media/9614953/Guardian-seriously-discussing-end-to-print-edition.html

A little muck-raking never hurt either the Guardian or the Daily News. Guardian supported the Lib Dems in the last election, and Daily News is owned by Mort Zuckerman, who I think is sort of centrist Democrat, depending on the issue.

[Demit]

114. So you're not that concerned about trustworthiness & integrity after all.

Somehow I got the impression that when dionysus said he didn't see how the article was relevant, your (pretty prompt) answer was that it goes to Greenwald's trustworthiness & integrity. But somehow Gregorian's trustworthiness & integrity do not qualify as having any relevance at all, this "reporter" who has a history of going after people in defamatory (and actionable!) ways. Okeydokey.

[FarCenter]

116. Maybe it's all about "truthiness" after all.

All I know for sure is that I'm looking at a backlight through an LCD shutter mask.

[Hissyspit]

118. What about the trustworthiness and credibility

of people trying to smear him?

I have debunked many of the lies and/or misrepresentations about him posted here and people just ignore that and keep repeating them.

[Vinnie From Indy]

102. The agenda to smear Snowden and Greenwald is quite breathtaking

here on DU and somewhat predictable in the general press. I am a bit surprised by the amount of it here however.

I find it mildly amusing that so many here hold themselves out as critical, independent thinkers when they are, in fact, unwitting lackeys of the 1%'ers and the security state.

Keep 'em coming if you must, but I refuse to be distracted from the real issue of total information awareness.

[Waiting For Everyman]

103. Apparently, "trial by ordeal" has been replaced with "trial by credit report".

It's typical conservative thinking -- that anybody who owes money is dishonest and worthy of contempt.

Those who evaluate credibility that way, would have no idea what credibility looked like if they tripped over it.

[mike_c]

104. character assassination is the new rhetoric....

Smear smear smear smear.

[SomethingFishy]

107. And what skeletons are in your closet?

An abused spouse? Tax problems? Booze? Drugs? Honey Boo Boo? Oh wait, you must be perfect.

What ever happened to "you can't let perfect become the enemy of the good"? Does that only work for people you agree with?

[KamaAina]

110. Barack Obama, first black President, once was a community organizer

who went to a church where the pastor said mean things about America.

[markiv]

115. Four legs good, two legs better! nt