[Peace-discuss] censored article at the INTERCEPT news magazine that caused Glenn Greenwald to resign.

Mon Nov 2 22:41:35 UTC 2020

Those who are interested in hearing the"left case" for Trump can Google
articles by Benjamin Studebaker and Anis Shivani.

On Mon, Nov 2, 2020, 1:03 PM David Johnson via Peace-discuss <
peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:

> Absolutely Midge !
>
>
>
> It was the corporate media that created Trump ( TV program THE APPRENTICE,
> etc. ) and helped elect him. Trump received billions of dollars in free
> 2016 media coverage and often times, from my observations, his name was
> mentioned twice as often as Clinton’s and Sander’s name was rarely
> mentioned.
>
> And since the election, you are  again absolutely correct. As one female
> comedian stated at the correspondents dinner a few years ago ‘ “ All of you
> say you hate Donald  Trump but in reality  you love him because of the
> billions of dollars you have made off of covering him nonstop “.
>
>
>
> Many people have a very difficult time believing the reality that U.S.
> presidential elections as well as most of U.S. politics in general is
> kabuki theater. One big nonstop episode of WWF  wrestling.
>
>
>
> David J.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Mildred O'brien [mailto:moboct1 at aim.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, November 02, 2020 12:54 PM
> *To:* davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net
> *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] censored article at the INTERCEPT news
> magazine that caused Glenn Greenwald to resign.
>
>
>
> I had the same problem trying to get Tom & family to vote--for the "Fair
> Tax"--the 1% is spending so much to counteract the issue people have been
> intimated by the TAX INCREASE fear PAC ads).
>
>
>
> I'm of the opinion that it was dislike of Hillary that "elected" DJT
> instead of his dynamic personality.  Biden as a man may not be perceived by
> some voters as much of a threat as an aggressive woman like H.
>
>
>
> You might call DJT the "man made president by the MSM."  In spite of their
> supposed aversion to him, he has been a big money maker for the Media who
> open every leading newscast about him 24/7 for the past 4 years.  If he
> goes, they'll probably follow him in the news to the extent that he will
> attempt to run again.
>
> I've got to pay attention to the SENDER address of emails when I mean to
> respond only to the sender, otherwise they go to P-D when I don't intend,
> as last night when I wanted to address my rant to you about Socialism
> instead of to P-D, and failed to close a parenthesis after "Capitalism"
> instead of after "Communism" in my comment, making it appear to equate the
> two.  Oh well, I suppose no one reads my emails on P-D anyway.
>
>
>
> Midge
>
>
>
> Please God let Nov 2 be over soon
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Johnson via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> To: 'J.B. Nicholson' <jbn at forestfield.org>
> Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> Sent: Mon, Nov 2, 2020 10:04 am
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] censored article at the INTERCEPT news
> magazine that caused Glenn Greenwald to resign.
>
> Thanks for your response and commentary-analysis Jeff.
>
> I must say that I agree 100 % with everything you wrote.
>
> Yes, I think you are correct about Abby Martin. Having a child for the
> first time of course makes most people more insecure. And I agree with you
> that what Aaron Mate said about excusing journalists who compromise their
> principles for a career is unacceptable. There is always work somewhere for
> a talented journalist, and even if you have to work at something else for a
> while to pay the bills, so what. I did it for a while when I was
> blacklisted from the Carpenter's Union for my activism, at a time when my
> daughter was 5-7 years old. The only thing that will  be standing in her
> way if that is what she might need to do, is her ego.
>
> Speaking of my daughter who is now 25 years old. It took me a LOT of
> persuasion to get her and her husband to vote. They both hate every
> candidate running and  / or are not interested in the local county
> candidates. They both voted for Sanders twice and Jill Stein in 2016.
> The winning argument I made to convince them to vote was the importance of
> the FAIR tax ballot initiative. I told them that they could leave
> everything else blank if they wanted.
> So, as you mentioned, I wonder how many other young people ( and older
> people too for that matter ) are feeling the same way as my daughter. Last
> time in 2016 I believe it was 90 - 100 million eligible voters who did not
> vote or voted for 3rd parties. Biden may be ahead in the polls nationwide
> by 10 points, but if a lot of people don't vote, Biden may just barely
> squeak a win or maybe not.
> Regardless which asshole wins, we will be subjected to the same horrible
> policies.
>
> David J.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On
> Behalf Of J.B. Nicholson via Peace-discuss
> Sent: Monday, November 02, 2020 11:20 AM
> To: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] censored article at the INTERCEPT news
> magazine that caused Glenn Greenwald to resign.
>
> David Johnson wrote:
> [Regarding
> https://theanalysis.news/interviews/biden-is-not-on-the-left-but-there-is-a-difference-that-matters-abby-martin/
>
> where Paul Jay interviews Abby Martin]
> > I am really surprised and disappointed that Abby Martin has also
> succumbed to the
> > scare tactics of the Democrats and the corporate owned media. She should
> know
> > better.
>
> I think Martin does know better but I'm left wondering if she thinks
> differently
> because of what came at the top of this interview -- she now has a child.
> I'm not
> sure what the point of mentioning that was except for us to connect it to
> something
> else, something they don't clearly state. I'm sure that she sees the
> enormous amounts
> of money one can get for echoing the establishment line that Joe Biden is
> significantly different or not objecting to evidenceless speculation that
> things will
> be better for most Americans with a Biden presidency (which, for all we
> know, could
> turn into a Kamala "Top Cop" Harris presidency). People usually won't turn
> down
> economic security. I don't offer this as an excuse (like Aaron Maté does
> and most
> recently did in https://youtube.com/watch?v=Nig6c1WEc-0 to Jimmy Dore's
> chagrin), I
> offer that as a description of what might motivate someone to do as they
> do. The cost
> of that choice is a public that has no reason to trust what that person
> has to say.
>
> The issues you listed are far more likely to be the issues on which
> Americans (who
> vote for POTUS at all) will base their vote. And therefore it's telling
> that we don't
> see proper explication of those issues in this Jay/Martin interview.
> Medicare for
> All, for instance, only came up once in this Jay/Martin interview and only
> because
> Martin brought it up. If either major party candidate had offered Medicare
> for All
> they would have won the election and convinced a majority of registered
> voters to
> vote for them. And it wouldn't surprise me if the majority of the
> registered voters
> again don't vote for POTUS just like they didn't in 2016 (the majority
> that those who
> complain about the electoral college and majority voting typically don't
> talk about).
>
> Getting back to this Jay interview, I'm reminded of why I quit taking The
> Real News
> seriously under Jay's leadership and today: his analysis is not based in
> facts. I'll
> explain more below.
>
> On trying to make Biden look better than he is regarding the 2003 US/UK
> invasion of Iraq:
> > Paul Jay: Honestly, as much as I fully expect Biden to win this election
> and I
> > fully expect to spend the next four years savaging him on so many
> things, I do
> > find myself having to say two or three positive things in terms of
> foreign policy
> > and Biden. Even though, one, he’s fully rooted, as are almost all of the
> leaders
> > of the Democratic Party, rooted in the Cold War mentality. Meaning that
> America is
> > the real civilization, the pillar of democracy. What was Reagan’s line,
> “the
> > beacon on the hill,” or whatever? I think he believes all that. And it’s
> > convenient to believe all that because the military industrial complex
> and
> > finance, it fits their strategy of how to make money out of being the
> global
> > policeman.
> >
> > But I also think he’s realistic and pragmatic in the way Obama was. And
> Obama, we
> > should remember, was against the Iraq war. And he said very clearly he
> wasn’t
> > against war and he wasn’t against regime change.
> >
> > Abby Martin: “Dumb war.”
> >
> > Paul Jay: He just thought the Iraq war was stupid. Yeah, it was dumb.
> And I think
> > Biden agrees with him on that now, that that type of intervention is
> done. It
> > doesn’t help the empire. In one of his vice-presidential debates, he
> said that if
> > you didn’t want Iran to be a regional power, then the United States
> shouldn’t have
> > invaded Iraq. Because that’s what Iraq was: the buffer. And he said,
> It’s over
> > now, you did invade Iraq, and you do have to accept Iran as a regional
> power.
> >
> > That’s a very important point of difference because of the
> foreign-policy-gang
> > types around Trump. And I must include Chuck Schumer and, of course,
> Netanyahu
> > from Israel and the Saudis. They don’t want to accept Iran as a regional
> power.
> > They want to try to destroy the place, mostly through economic warfare,
> but
> > possibly more.
> >
> > And I think when Obama got elected, I said, I only have one hope that
> he’s going
> > to be anything different than a Clinton or any other centrist Democrat:
> on Iran,
> > he might be rational. And it turned out he was. The rest of his foreign
> policy was
> > just normal, corporate-Democratic, defend-the-empire policy.
> >
> > I’m saying I think Biden realized he was wrong about Iraq. He could have
> taken the
> > Obama position. On the other hand, he’s a political opportunist, Biden.
> He goes
> > where the wind blows, where he thinks his political fortunes will be
> best. So, I
> > think it was more about that than anything, why he voted for the
> resolution that
> > wound up enabling the Iraq war.
>
> Biden didn't "realize he was wrong about Iraq". For years after that vote
> he went on
> the lecture circuit telling people he was right to vote in support of
> authorizing
> Pres. G.W. Bush to invade Iraq.
>
> Biden only recently changed his tune to another lie[1], now saying
> something that
> tries to recast his vote to mean something other than authorizing an
> illegal
> invasion. That's not "realizing he [Biden] was wrong about Iraq". Jay
> doesn't even
> put proper emphasis on what Jay has tacitly admitted and downplayed in
> favor of
> constructing another narrative -- Biden was wrong. At the time when it
> counted, when
> there were millions of people on the streets of the world telling him not
> to support
> that invasion, Biden voted to authorize the invasion. Even if Biden
> genuinely had
> changed his mind, as Jay apparently believes, that would mean nothing.
> It's the vote
> at the time that counts for anything.
>
> [1] Notice how Trump's lying isn't so much a point of contention in this
> election?
> It's because Biden has a long documented record of lying going back to
> when he was
> more lucid and he lied about his own educational record and had given
> speeches which
> he copied from others without attribution. He even dropped out of his 1988
> run
> because he got caught in these lies. Trump and Biden's treatment of women
> is also
> tellingly not a hotly contested point in the 2020 election for similar
> reasons --
> both of those candidates are comparably horrible with women.
>
>
>
>
> On casting Glenn Greenwald to have a worse understanding of what just
> happened to him
> than Greenwald said:
> > Paul Jay: But when Glenn goes on Tucker Carlson… He crossed a line
> there. Not by
> > going on Tucker Carlson. I’ll go on Tucker Carlson, but they’d never
> invite me.
> > One, I’m not famous enough. Nobody knows who I am. And, two, they know,
> if they
> > listen to me, I’m not going to do what Glenn did, which is, I’m not
> going to
> > regurgitate Tucker Carlson’s own speaking points back to him and just
> say what he
> > wants to hear. Because when Glenn was on Rising, that Krystal Ball show
> on The
> > Hill, he didn’t say what he said on Tucker Carlson. He spoke completely
> > differently. He spoke to a leftwing audience. And to his left audience,
> all he did
> > was defend his right to have journalistic independence and integrity and
> so on.
> > But when he goes on Tucker Carlson, he says more or less the following
> words, that
> > there’s an alliance between the CIA and the Deep State and the
> Democratic Party
> > and most of the media to undermine the first four years of the Trump
> presidency.
> > Well, that’s a Fox News, rightwing Trump speaking point. More
> importantly, it’s
> > just not true.
>
> If what Greenwald said to Tucker Carlson was so horrible, quote what
> Greenwald said
> and explain precisely what was wrong with it. Even self-described
> "nightclub jagoff
> comedian" Jimmy Dore does this amount of legwork in his pieces. Don't do
> as The
> Intercept's Editor in Chief Betsy Reed recently did in
> https://theintercept.com/2020/10/29/glenn-greenwald-resigns-the-intercept/ --
> her 5
> paragraph response to Greenwald's resignation. There she offered no quotes
> from
> Greenwald. Reed would have us believe that Greenwald's response is
> "designed to make
> him appear as a victim, rather than a grown person throwing a tantrum. It
> would take
> too long to point them all out here, but we intend to correct the record
> in time.".
> Reed has had plenty of time to explain precisely what happened with the
> Reality
> Winner case and it's clear that she won't do it no matter what she says
> later (if
> anything). The truth is that Reed is throwing the tantrum and Greenwald
> gave us the
> substance-filled arguments to back his case. We don't need to take
> Greenwald's word
> for it. We can read the quotes Greenwald provided and see the evidence for
> ourselves
> (all quotes from Greenwald, by the way, are not disputed anywhere by The
> Intercept).
> Jay (above) and Reed in her Intercept response to Greenwald's resignation
> offer
> nothing but their own respective opinions.
>
>
>
>
> On whether the Democrats want to win the presidency in 2020 at all:
> > Paul Jay: Yes, the Democratic Party obviously has been fighting against
> Trump.
>
> I'm not convinced of that. One doesn't run an issue-free campaign headed
> by someone
> with obvious mental problems if they want to win an election. If one wants
> to lower
> the expectations to the point where most don't vote and most understand
> that neither
> major party will help you, and both parties work together, one does
> precisely what
> the Democrats & Republicans are doing now (see David Johnson's list of
> important
> issues where these two parties agree). I think Greenwald has it right:
> party bosses
> might rather have Biden (who has a longer track record of being neocon and
> neolib)
> but they'll be okay with 4 more years of Trump who has been (to borrow a
> phrase)
> brought to heel. Russiagate has helped with bringing Trump into line and
> making up
> for making the establishment nervous with some of the things Trump said
> when he ran
> in 2016 like sharply critiquing the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Russiagate:
> > Paul Jay: I mean, in some ways, the Democrats’ bullshit created this
> situation,
> > because, one, the Russia stuff. I’ve been saying from the very beginning
> — and I
> > didn’t get into the weeds of it as some journalists did because I kept
> saying, I
> > don’t care if it’s all true.
>
> The Obama/Biden presidency is why we have Trump today. Voters did not
> elect Hillary
> Clinton because they didn't want 4 or 8 more years of what Obama/Biden had
> given them
> for the past 8 years.
>
> As for Paul Jay on Russiagate: he had echoed Russiagate bullshit, said
> that he didn't
> care if Russiagate was true (which itself is ridiculous, he should be in
> the job of
> identifying what is true and what is false and debunking the falsehoods),
> and The
> Real News put Russigators like Marc Jacobs on their shows rendering that
> network
> indistinguishable from what I can get anywhere in establishment media.
>
> Russiagate started as a baseless excuse to try and get Hillary Clinton out
> of taking
> responsibility for her poorly-run 2nd attempt at becoming POTUS.
> Russiagate has
> become much more than that since, including a basis for economic sanctions
> against
> Russia and that is a form of war. If even now Jay repeats that tired line
> of not
> caring if Russiagate is true or not, he's not a responsible journalist or
> commentator.
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20201102/a5f66cc9/attachment-0001.htm>