What Glenn’s whiny rant leaves out is that it wasn’t just the Intercept that refused to run the Hunter/Ukraine/China BS: reporters at the NY Post and Wall Street Journal both refused to put their names on the story. The NY Post had to use a producer on Tucker Carlson’s show, while the WSJ ran the story as an op-ed since the reporters again refused to tarnish their reputation (they also ran a story from the actual reporters rebutting the allegations)
Editorial judgment and criticism is part of free speech. It is not just about broadcasting the president’s re-election propaganda as loudly as you can. And the idea that Glenn Greenwald can be trusted rests entirely on his 2007-2015 work, and ignores how disgraceful, craven, and just plain pathetic he became in 2016. Anyone who appears on Tucker Carlson’s show simply should not be trusted.
Edit: to clarify, the editorial you linked seems to be a real editorial that said “these questions need to be investigated” - the op-Ed I linked to presented itself as divulging new information. In 99.9999999% of cases this would be an odd use of an op-ed, but it appears to have been the only option since the reporters refused.
It is also worth noting that WSJ has a unique and well-known dichotomy between “brilliant, hard-hitting reporting” and “unbelievably hackish Joe-Rogan-level opinions.”
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-bidens-and-tony-bobulinski-...