Glenn Greenwald achieves his final form

[Hindsight was 2020]

Good review of the positive impact Greenwald's journalism has had in Brazil and the importance of his work in freeing Lula. The haters will, of course, ignore this to focus on his nasty tweets.

https://twitter.com/jacobinmag/status/1379456363865247747

A contrarian 🌹 Twitter political magazine writing a Glenn fluff piece isn’t the good counterpoint you think it is

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Maggie Wheeler regularly spends the time to take down Greenwald's BS:
https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1378781414607499266

[Horus]

So basically he supports the right in America but the left in Brazil?

[Crumpets]

Pro tip: If you think your petty Twitter battles are distracting people from your important work, get off Twitter.

[Red Velvet]

So basically he supports the right in America but the left in Brazil?

That’s an oversimplification of his positions but in practice, kinda. Because the people who strongly vilified him are alligned with Democrats in the USA and with Sérgio Moro or Bolsonaro in Brazil.

Glenn is often attacked and called a right-winger by Democrat partisans just like Bolsonaro crazy supporters intimidated him in 2019/2020 as a left-winger conspiring to bring communism to Brazil lol. But that was when Sergio Moro was part of Bolsonaro’s government.

Bolsonaro and the Brazilian right even flirted with jail threats or deportation when these car-wash messages were leaked by Glenn. After they discovered the American left hates him and the right doesn’t they became softer on him though.

Lula, ex-president and Brazilian left-wing icon, is a threat again in 2022 because his process was nullified based on the revelations brought by Glenn’s journalism. If that didn’t happen, Bolsonaro would most likely get re-elected next year since there’s no other BIG name that is popular enough.

The thing people have a hard time understanding is, even if the Brazilian and US right can sometimes converge on cultural topics (especially in regards the influence of religion), that’s where comparisons between our politics end lol.

Bolsonaro and Trump aren’t the same thing despite similarities and the difference between the US left and Brazilian left is even bigger.

US conservatives are historically focused on economic austerity policies and that’s something that is just political suicide in Brazil because economic inequality gap is so big. Even right-wing parties would agree stuff like universal healthcare and public education are important because they wouldn’t be elected otherwise for example. There are lots of places that need that government presence otherwise no one will reach to them simply because it’s not lucrative for companies to do so.

Brazilian right is much more about social conservatism, religious values and historically military authoritarianism as well. Sure, they’re more economically right-wing too but not nearly to the “minimum government” mentality that exists in the US.

Meanwhile, US “left” (the ones in power) tends to be somewhat more friendly towards corporations interests, demands of the market, etc. While being a really strong voice for progressive values.

Brazilian left converges culturally on that sense, especially in these days in which social issues gain more protagonism. However, historically there isn’t that much focus on social issues and more on economic ones. Some good amount of people who like and voted for Lula for example, can have more socially conservative values for example. And the left can have more strong reservations about free-market policies.

Also important to remind, because of Cold War history and the military dictatorship in that time, Bolsonaro and the Brazilian right tends to have a more positive image of the US, regardless of party. While for the left, that image is ambivalent at best and negative at worst.

So it’s a mistake to automatically assume these country positions don’t make sense. I can think of lots of people who voted for Bolsonaro here voting for Democrats and hating Trump in the US (PSDB voters), just like I can see a good amount of people in the US who voted for Trump loving Lula if they were inserted in the Brazilian context (populist voters).

Glenn is someone who I can see falling on that populist spectrum, inclined to the left.

From his positions in both countries, I think it’s safe to assume he strongly is against government intervention against individual freedoms, he’s very anti-authoritarian. “Freedom of speech” with no regulations is something he frequently supports for example. While at the same time, defending government presence to address inequality and other economical problems.

[Hindsight was 2020]

So basically he supports the right in America but the left in Brazil?

Snip

Putin, Tucker Carlson, Steve Bannon, and Trump are very authoritarian figures and Glenn has bend over backwards to defend them so to say he’s anti-authoritarian doesn’t mesh with his actions

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The thing about Greenwald that I find so irksome and the notion that he's "left" is he doesn't even really criticize the Democratic Party from the left. If he did that'd be one thing although I usually find such people insufferable too (not because I think the Democratic Party is sacrosanct and should never be criticized but because people who get a following doing so usually tend to be very obnoxious as well as intellectually dishonest in their attacks, see Kyle Kulinski and Jimmy Dore), but rather he basically attacks it from the right and then pretends it's from the left. Like insisting he doesn't support Trump...but then when the Democrats go all out on impeaching Trump saying that's still bad, saying that any investigations into Trump's activities is bad and then when Bill Barr releases some hack job summary of a report against Trump then he starts shilling for Barr's credibility and is all giddy that he was "right", while at the same time pretending this is really some crusade against neoliberalism and a supposedly center-right Democratic Party. He also has immense double standards, like he was constantly bashing Obama over drones, but when Trump took office and used drones just as much...crickets. If he was screaming about how Biden isn't trying to implement Medicare for All by executive order and hating on AOC and Ilhan Omar for not trying to "force the vote" on it then he'd still be annoying and ignorant but at least consistent, his philosophy seems to be more than Trump's Administration is the only Administration in US history that should not be criticized or that if you do so then you're clearly just a neocon because some random former Bush official who joined the Lincoln Project also criticized Trump....it's a whole mess of logical fallacies and absolutely inane conclusion.

The truly amusing thing is that if you replace "Trump" with "Bush" and change a few other things to make it context-specific, a lot of the things he says or things you hear from people like Tulsi Gabbard like her justification for voting "Present" on impeachment and it sounds almost exactly like something you'd hear from Joe Lieberman or various centrist wonks who were criticizing the Democrats for being "too hard" on Bush...the inability to see the irony isn't surprising but quite frustrating.

[Hindsight was 2020]

https://mobile.twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1381384543891034114
https://mobile.twitter.com/VaushV/status/1381409117919604739

[Ferguson97]

Lmao Greenwald is a complete joke

[Ferguson97]

https://twitter.com/Nitzky89/status/1385630634102693889

[darklordoftech]

(In response to the thread title):

Wait... Glenn Greenwald is evolving... Glenn Greenwald evolved into a conservative!

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

https://twitter.com/micahflee/status/1392889268918538243

[DaleCooper]

Greenwald has been disingenuous and unprofessional for a long time now. It was only a few years ago that he was smearing everyone from Bill Maher to Sam Harris as crazy fascist neoconservatives (LOL) for criticizing fundamentalist Islamic violence. He seems to move from one prominent issue to another looking for an excuse to trash every prominent media figure he can without offering any of his own substantive commentary.

[Red Velvet]

Greenwald has been disingenuous and unprofessional for a long time now. It was only a few years ago that he was smearing everyone from Bill Maher to Sam Harris as crazy fascist neoconservatives (LOL) for criticizing fundamentalist Islamic violence. He seems to move from one prominent issue to another looking for an excuse to trash every prominent media figure he can without offering any of his own substantive commentary.

Bashing Islam is such an easy position in US and Europe today though, often (not always) bordering on islamophobia. Especially in Europe, where tensions are higher and everything becomes an excuse to mistreat EVERY people who follow the religion based on isolated actions of some groups.

While for other racial or religious groups this doesn’t happen because of their privilege in western society. Other fundamentalist groups (radical evangelical Christians; zionists; etc) don’t get nearly the same type of backlash and there are always media defenders coming to their rescue saying that Christians are being discriminated, that Zionists are suffering antisemitism; etc. So why not a voice to defend Muslims, considering the hate they get is much much bigger and generalized?

The current development of the Israel-Palestine conflict is also evidence of this. I think it’s good that Glenn is siding with the more underprivileged who are the biggest targets of bigotry because they need someone to defend them in order to make things more balanced. Everyone else has much stronger and more established bases of support and safe spaces, as islamophobia is treated as a non-issue in the west (while Islam is considered a BIG problem by a larger share of society).

[DaleCooper]

Greenwald has been disingenuous and unprofessional for a long time now. It was only a few years ago that he was smearing everyone from Bill Maher to Sam Harris as crazy fascist neoconservatives (LOL) for criticizing fundamentalist Islamic violence. He seems to move from one prominent issue to another looking for an excuse to trash every prominent media figure he can without offering any of his own substantive commentary.

Bashing Islam is such an easy position in US and Europe today though, often (not always) bordering on islamophobia. Especially in Europe, where tensions are higher and everything becomes an excuse to mistreat EVERY people who follow the religion based on isolated actions of some groups.

While for other racial or religious groups this doesn’t happen because of their privilege in western society. Other fundamentalist groups (radical evangelical Christians; zionists; etc) don’t get nearly the same type of backlash and there are always media defenders coming to their rescue saying that Christians are being discriminated, that Zionists are suffering antisemitism; etc. So why not a voice to defend Muslims, considering the hate they get is much much bigger and generalized?

The current development of the Israel-Palestine conflict is also evidence of this. I think it’s good that Glenn is siding with the more underprivileged who are the biggest targets of bigotry because they need someone to defend them in order to make things more balanced. Everyone else has much stronger and more established bases of support and safe spaces, as islamophobia is treated as a non-issue in the west (while Islam is considered a problem).

He wasn't defending Muslims in the US, and he still isn't now especially given how defensive he is of extremist, anti-Muslim Republicans. He was smearing liberal critics of fundamentalist religion and, more importantly, was not offering anything resembling a coherent criticism of their comments. It was typical "Everyone who disagrees with me is a very bad person" talk that you hear from hacks all the time. Greenwald's conflicts with other media personalities almost always resemble internet drama more than they do legitimate disagreements. If Greenwald weren't so disingenuous and questionable regarding his motives, then it would be much easier for me to respect him as a reasonable person that I happen to disagree with, but he's unprofessional and unprofessional people are something that modern journalism desperately needs to separate itself from. Greenwald is an agenda first, truth second journalist and is just another one of many, many people that have contributed to the destruction of journalists' credibility in recent years.

[Red Velvet]

Greenwald has been disingenuous and unprofessional for a long time now. It was only a few years ago that he was smearing everyone from Bill Maher to Sam Harris as crazy fascist neoconservatives (LOL) for criticizing fundamentalist Islamic violence. He seems to move from one prominent issue to another looking for an excuse to trash every prominent media figure he can without offering any of his own substantive commentary.

Bashing Islam is such an easy position in US and Europe today though, often (not always) bordering on islamophobia. Especially in Europe, where tensions are higher and everything becomes an excuse to mistreat EVERY people who follow the religion based on isolated actions of some groups.

While for other racial or religious groups this doesn’t happen because of their privilege in western society. Other fundamentalist groups (radical evangelical Christians; zionists; etc) don’t get nearly the same type of backlash and there are always media defenders coming to their rescue saying that Christians are being discriminated, that Zionists are suffering antisemitism; etc. So why not a voice to defend Muslims, considering the hate they get is much much bigger and generalized?

The current development of the Israel-Palestine conflict is also evidence of this. I think it’s good that Glenn is siding with the more underprivileged who are the biggest targets of bigotry because they need someone to defend them in order to make things more balanced. Everyone else has much stronger and more established bases of support and safe spaces, as islamophobia is treated as a non-issue in the west (while Islam is considered a problem).

He wasn't defending Muslims in the US, and he still isn't now especially given how defensive he is of extremist, anti-Muslim Republicans. He was smearing liberal critics of fundamentalist religion and, more importantly, was not offering anything resembling a coherent criticism of their comments. It was typical "Everyone who disagrees with me is a very bad person" talk that you hear from hacks all the time. Greenwald's conflicts with other media personalities almost always resemble internet drama more than they do legitimate disagreements. If Greenwald weren't so disingenuous and questionable regarding his motives, then it would be much easier for me to respect him as a reasonable person that I happen to disagree with, but he's unprofessional and unprofessional people are something that modern journalism desperately needs to separate itself from. Greenwald is an agenda first, truth second journalist and is just another one of many, many people that have contributed to the destruction of journalists' credibility in recent years.

But what do you think his “agenda” is? What is his political end goal?

I don’t disagree that he has a political agenda, but I think everyone in the media has and forever will. What I like about Glenn is that he’s very vocal and honest about it, doesn’t try to hide it and makes it clear to everyone that he has a side in order to make them know what they’re getting into.

Basically, I guess it all comes down on whether you’re ideologically aligned with the person. If you agree with their agenda you will like them, if you disagree then you won’t. Kinda like how some libertarians love Ayn Rand but it’s like, a niche thing of theirs. Glenn is that type of niche journalist, with a very specific target audience.

When journalists sell themselves as “impartial” it makes them less controversial and gives them broader appeal (they can reach multiple groups) but it also rings fake because they will eventually hint to which side they lean towards too. Which leads to some people looking for alternative types of journalism. I think everyone always has an agenda, no exceptions, because every aspect of life is political. What you eat, your job, your relationship with your family, everything.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Greenwald has been disingenuous and unprofessional for a long time now. It was only a few years ago that he was smearing everyone from Bill Maher to Sam Harris as crazy fascist neoconservatives (LOL) for criticizing fundamentalist Islamic violence. He seems to move from one prominent issue to another looking for an excuse to trash every prominent media figure he can without offering any of his own substantive commentary.

Bashing Islam is such an easy position in US and Europe today though, often (not always) bordering on islamophobia. Especially in Europe, where tensions are higher and everything becomes an excuse to mistreat EVERY people who follow the religion based on isolated actions of some groups.

While for other racial or religious groups this doesn’t happen because of their privilege in western society. Other fundamentalist groups (radical evangelical Christians; zionists; etc) don’t get nearly the same type of backlash and there are always media defenders coming to their rescue saying that Christians are being discriminated, that Zionists are suffering antisemitism; etc. So why not a voice to defend Muslims, considering the hate they get is much much bigger and generalized?

The current development of the Israel-Palestine conflict is also evidence of this. I think it’s good that Glenn is siding with the more underprivileged who are the biggest targets of bigotry because they need someone to defend them in order to make things more balanced. Everyone else has much stronger and more established bases of support and safe spaces, as islamophobia is treated as a non-issue in the west (while Islam is considered a problem).

He wasn't defending Muslims in the US, and he still isn't now especially given how defensive he is of extremist, anti-Muslim Republicans. He was smearing liberal critics of fundamentalist religion and, more importantly, was not offering anything resembling a coherent criticism of their comments. It was typical "Everyone who disagrees with me is a very bad person" talk that you hear from hacks all the time. Greenwald's conflicts with other media personalities almost always resemble internet drama more than they do legitimate disagreements. If Greenwald weren't so disingenuous and questionable regarding his motives, then it would be much easier for me to respect him as a reasonable person that I happen to disagree with, but he's unprofessional and unprofessional people are something that modern journalism desperately needs to separate itself from. Greenwald is an agenda first, truth second journalist and is just another one of many, many people that have contributed to the destruction of journalists' credibility in recent years.

But what do you think his “agenda” is? What is his political end goal?

I don’t disagree that he has a political agenda, but I think everyone in the media has and forever will. What I like about Glenn is that he’s very vocal and honest about it, doesn’t try to hide it and makes it clear to everyone that he has a side in order to make them know what they’re getting into.

Basically, I guess it all comes down on whether you’re ideologically aligned with the person. If you agree with their agenda you will like them, if you disagree then you won’t. Kinda like how some libertarians love Ayn Rand but it’s like, a niche thing of theirs. Glenn is that type of niche journalist, with a very specific target audience.

When journalists sell themselves as “impartial” it makes them less controversial and gives them broader appeal (they can reach multiple groups) but it also rings fake because they will eventually hint to which side they lean towards too. Which leads to some people looking for alternative types of journalism. I think everyone always has an agenda, no exceptions, because every aspect of life is political. What you eat, your job, your relationship with your family, everything.

The destruction of the US as a global power

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Good review of the positive impact Greenwald's journalism has had in Brazil and the importance of his work in freeing Lula. The haters will, of course, ignore this to focus on his nasty tweets.

https://twitter.com/jacobinmag/status/1379456363865247747

A contrarian 🌹 Twitter political magazine writing a Glenn fluff piece isn’t the good counterpoint you think it is

I want to highlight the utter vapidity of this response and what it says about the remarkable provincialism of some Democrat Party hacks on this forum. Glenn Greenwald played an instrumental role in exposing Sergio Moro as a hack and fraud, reducing the political persecution of the left in Brazil. He has built a crack team of investigative journalists in Brazil who have exposed corruption in Bolsonaro's inner circles. He's generally enriched public discourse there by having access to a lot of politicians and doing well-done, in-depth interviews with them.

Considering that Bolsonaro is intent on raping and pillaging the "lungs of the earth", turning over land to strip miners, soybean farmers and ranchers, you'd think that maybe, just maybe, this would be deemed to be more important than smut and lies on Glenn Greenwald's twitter profile?

[Horus]

Good review of the positive impact Greenwald's journalism has had in Brazil and the importance of his work in freeing Lula. The haters will, of course, ignore this to focus on his nasty tweets.

https://twitter.com/jacobinmag/status/1379456363865247747

A contrarian 🌹 Twitter political magazine writing a Glenn fluff piece isn’t the good counterpoint you think it is

I want to highlight the utter vapidity of this response and what it says about the remarkable provincialism of some Democrat Party hacks on this forum. Glenn Greenwald played an instrumental role in exposing Sergio Moro as a hack and fraud, reducing the political persecution of the left in Brazil. He has built a crack team of investigative journalists in Brazil who have exposed corruption in Bolsonaro's inner circles. He's generally enriched public discourse there by having access to a lot of politicians and doing well-done, in-depth interviews with them.

Considering that Bolsonaro is intent on raping and pillaging the "lungs of the earth", turning over land to strip miners, soybean farmers and ranchers, you'd think that maybe, just maybe, this would be deemed to be more important than smut and lies on Glenn Greenwald's twitter profile?

If he cares so much about the environment why does he do everything in his power to boost the GOP and disparage Biden and the Dems? The last GOP president was the worst for the green movement in decades. As has been pointed out he is pro left wing in Brazil but pro right wing in America. He's not consistent and operates on grudges, not principles.

[Virginiá]

The thing about Greenwald that's always disappointed me is that he influenced me pretty heavily when I was younger and just getting into politics wrt to Snowden et al, but afterwards the non-stop steaming hot takes and aggressively contrarian bs has really pushed me away for years now. Insofar as America is concerned, at this point, I'm not really interested in his opinions.

But on the other hand, while Brazilian affairs aren't really a big interest of mine, he has made positive contributions and moved the needle down there (and he did the same here, once upon a time). So I don't think someone's opinion of Greenwald has to be strictly along the lines of "complete and utter sh**t" and "benevolent journalist overlord."

[LtNOWIS]

Okay for those who arguing “oh this is just sexism with critics saying this fragile woman can’t handle criticism”, the problem people have this targeting her isn’t that we think she can’t handle criticism but because Glenn has a notorious troll fan base and why making her the target he is unleashing these rabid dogs on her

Reminds me of this thread I saw today:

https://twitter.com/RosamundUrwin/status/1393207007604318208

[Red Velvet]

The destruction of the US as a global power

I’ve heard this theory before and that’s where the hate on him gets contradictory though.

Because a lot of his critics argue that he’s a right-winger who supports nationalists and hangs out with white supremacists like Tucker Carlson. And then others (but sometimes the same people) say he is this anti-US socialist figure that is trying to undermine it in order to push for a more left-wing global consensus with a lesser share of US power.

Like, those are complete opposite reasonings to hate him. Both can be valid but I wish people picked only one because Glenn apparently is both this far-right AND far-left figure depending of which narrative people pick out of their hat to attack him. Which logically speaking, it makes no sense.

I’ll be honest, I see him as the bitter left-wing option and that’s why I like him, although I totally understand why many people in US would absolutely hate his guts for that “angry rebellious son” behavior.

I like him not because I think he wants to destroy US global position (it’s not my wettest dream, although I would be ok with it since I have no investment), but because it can make the right people uncomfortable and way more pressured to enact positive change in order to maintain that global position that they care about. And that kind of pressure of big powers instead of submission is what I like about journalism because it’s supposed to keep these people in check.

I think the right-wing accusations are more of a strategy to delegitimize him inside the left-wing circles in which he’s popular so that these people won’t hear him even when he denounces authoritarian measures that can damage the US government credibility domestically and internationally on a bigger scale. Democrats historically are perceived as the good cops to the Republicans bad cops, so by damaging the Democrats brand by focusing on the fact that they’re cops, a way more left-wing push is stimulated, which is seen as threatening by both the rich elites and also the US global position.

So I get why some people need to hate him and brand him as a right-winger. What annoys me is that different people mix the different narratives of attack. Sometimes he’s just against the Democrats because he’s this Republican hack, sometimes he’s this anti-authoritarian figure who wants to destroy the US.

Like I said, I think he only wants to do what is under his reach to keep powers that most people don’t dare to criticize so strongly (because they’re supposed to be the “good cops”) and by that, move the center of discussions way to the left and to a more anti-authoritarian global consensus. I don’t necessarily believe he wants to destroy the US more than he wants to change it and by that, stimulate change in the world, as US has high influence.

This leftist energy you see in the US can actually be more good for its reputation than bad. European left is filled with soulless technocrats who are okay with austerity, which is leading to the death of social democratic parties and strengthening a new surge of the far-right.

US managed to defeat Trump in large part because of this newfound left-wing energy that is more open to criticize their leaders and questions more “business as usual”, it provided people with something that can’t be fabricated but is just as essential in maintaining society working, which is the hope for change.

Biden, unlike European leaders, signaled a shift of economic policies in part thanks to that movement that questions their leaders and are more open to “disobedience” in order to put pressure. Glenn is a bit of a symbol of that “disobedience” in my eyes and something every country should have. Some annoying voice who relentlessly questions established authorities. That is lacking in lots of places nowadays, including Europe.

Renovation is always important, even if people from every generation will always see it as a threat because it questions written and unwritten rules that have been long established. It must have been the same whenever big but necessary change happened in the development of humanity.

That’s why I see it more as a natural development than necessarily some plot arranged with Russia to undermine the US lol. Maybe he just has integrity and wants to do what journalists were created for, which is to force change by keeping powers in check?

There’s no such a thing as a perfect place that’s immune to bad practices. When you point and expose these things up, you stimulate change and by enacting of change, your reputation actually improves instead of stagnating.

Reason why people don’t want to be like, Russia, is because there isn’t this perspective of change. Reason why communism lost is that people felt they had less control over their lives to change whenever they wanted. Staying open to change and new demands instead of threatened is always better in the long-term survival, so I think it’s more of a service for the US instead of against it that he’s stimulating.

What I think it should be questioned is whether the change being proposed is actually good, not always that’s the case. But always being resistant to renovation is also bad.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Good review of the positive impact Greenwald's journalism has had in Brazil and the importance of his work in freeing Lula. The haters will, of course, ignore this to focus on his nasty tweets.

https://twitter.com/jacobinmag/status/1379456363865247747

A contrarian 🌹 Twitter political magazine writing a Glenn fluff piece isn’t the good counterpoint you think it is

I want to highlight the utter vapidity of this response and what it says about the remarkable provincialism of some Democrat Party hacks on this forum. Glenn Greenwald played an instrumental role in exposing Sergio Moro as a hack and fraud, reducing the political persecution of the left in Brazil. He has built a crack team of investigative journalists in Brazil who have exposed corruption in Bolsonaro's inner circles. He's generally enriched public discourse there by having access to a lot of politicians and doing well-done, in-depth interviews with them.

Considering that Bolsonaro is intent on raping and pillaging the "lungs of the earth", turning over land to strip miners, soybean farmers and ranchers, you'd think that maybe, just maybe, this would be deemed to be more important than smut and lies on Glenn Greenwald's twitter profile?

If he cares so much about the environment why does he do everything in his power to boost the GOP and disparage Biden and the Dems? The last GOP president was the worst for the green movement in decades. As has been pointed out he is pro left wing in Brazil but pro right wing in America. He's not consistent and operates on grudges, not principles.

Provincial American brain strikes again, as another poster glides over the actual content of a post about Brazil to pivot back to American political issues. As a reminder, not everything is about you and I do not feel obligated in the slightest to pay deference to your desire to ignore the welfare of over 200 million people who live in a country where democracy is imperiled! I care far more about this than I do about tweets that hurt the feelings of bugmen journalists.

An irony here is that I despise Glenn Greenwald as a person. I'm only defending him because I find his critics to be insufferably narrowminded and daft in their reasons for going after him, similar to people who target Taibbi or Angela Nagel or whomever else. He pushes some annoying vendettas, seems thin-skinned but, against Bolsonaro and the corrupt mafiosos who rule Brazil, he has proven to be a powerful adversary who has achieved real results. Am I supposed to pretend that the power of Paul Krugman's Opinion Editorial Page is better than this because it makes me feel warmer and fuzzier inside than real investigative journalism or something?

[Horus]

Good review of the positive impact Greenwald's journalism has had in Brazil and the importance of his work in freeing Lula. The haters will, of course, ignore this to focus on his nasty tweets.

https://twitter.com/jacobinmag/status/1379456363865247747

A contrarian 🌹 Twitter political magazine writing a Glenn fluff piece isn’t the good counterpoint you think it is

I want to highlight the utter vapidity of this response and what it says about the remarkable provincialism of some Democrat Party hacks on this forum. Glenn Greenwald played an instrumental role in exposing Sergio Moro as a hack and fraud, reducing the political persecution of the left in Brazil. He has built a crack team of investigative journalists in Brazil who have exposed corruption in Bolsonaro's inner circles. He's generally enriched public discourse there by having access to a lot of politicians and doing well-done, in-depth interviews with them.

Considering that Bolsonaro is intent on raping and pillaging the "lungs of the earth", turning over land to strip miners, soybean farmers and ranchers, you'd think that maybe, just maybe, this would be deemed to be more important than smut and lies on Glenn Greenwald's twitter profile?

If he cares so much about the environment why does he do everything in his power to boost the GOP and disparage Biden and the Dems? The last GOP president was the worst for the green movement in decades. As has been pointed out he is pro left wing in Brazil but pro right wing in America. He's not consistent and operates on grudges, not principles.

Provincial American brain strikes again, as another poster glides over the actual content of a post about Brazil to pivot back to American political issues. As a reminder, not everything is about you and I do not feel obligated in the slightest to pay deference to your desire to ignore the welfare of over 200 million people who live in a country where democracy is imperiled! I care far more about this than I do about tweets that hurt the feelings of bugmen journalists.

An irony here is that I despise Glenn Greenwald as a person. I'm only defending him because I find his critics to be insufferably narrowminded and daft in their reasons for going after him, similar to people who target Taibbi or Angela Nagel or whomever else. He pushes some annoying vendettas, seems thin-skinned but, against Bolsonaro and the corrupt mafiosos who rule Brazil, he has proven to be a powerful adversary who has achieved real results. Am I supposed to pretend that the power of Paul Krugman's Opinion Editorial Page is better than this because it makes me feel warmer and fuzzier inside than real investigative journalism or something?

I don't care about the journalist who supposedly felt threatened, and I appreciate very much what Greenwald has done in Brazil. But this forum is called US General Discussion. My problem is his extreme ideological inconsistency.  Or maybe Lula and Josh Hawley actually have a lot in common.

[Hindsight was 2020]

The destruction of the US as a global power

Snip

I said “ The destruction of the US as a global power” I said nothing of his political ideology from where that desire comes from. When it comes to his ideology preference his history shows he’s a right winger in leftist clothing from his support to Iraq War to his current simping for Tucker Carlson. He gets confused for a leftist because of his supposed support of Bernie and how his criticism of Obama seem to come from a leftist angle but they were both just fueled by the fact he had a personal grudge with figures and institution in the US at the time that was perceived to not like Bernie at the time just like his work in Brazil is fueled by his personal ax to grind of Bolsonaro and granted this style for once worked out as he beefed with a legitimately bad person but their are also plenty of other journalists in Brazil who have done a great job taking on Bolsonaro without having the baggage of being buddies with crypto fascists like Glenn does