[cf21]

Glenn Greenwald is correct, the initial tweet by Patrick Tucker was false as the ODNI report does not explicitly mention Hunter Biden's laptop. However, Glenn Greenwald also massively mischaracterizes how the "liberal corporate media bubble" handled the situation.

> As this false claim went massively viral, conservative journalists — and only they — began vocally objecting that the report made no mention whatsoever of the Hunter Biden laptop, let alone supplied proof for this claim.

Greenwald basically invalidates his own argument a few sentences later where he describes how there actually were other journalists such as Chris Hayes who objected to the description of the report. And, again stated by Greenwald, Patrick Tucker himself came around, deleted his initial tweet and posted a clarification.

And just as an aside, the "conservative journalists" cited by Greenwald work for the Daily Caller, described by Wikipedia [1] as:

> The Daily Caller has published false stories on multiple occasions. The website publishes articles that dispute the scientific consensus on climate change. Until 2018, the website had also published articles by white supremacists such as Jason Kessler and Peter Brimelow.

I also find it laughable that he characterizes some journalists as minions of the "liberal corporate media" but The Daily caller, founded by Fox News host Tucker Carlson and Neil Patel, is somehow home to harmless independent "conservative journalists". That Glenn Greenwald tries to sell me journalists of a white supremacist outlet as trustworthy and truthful is not really a good sign in my book.

So while I agree that the initial tweet by Patrick Tucker lead to a falsehood being spread on social media I just can't follow Glenn Greenwald's take of seeing this as a coordinated misinformation operation.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Caller

[harry8]

This is the classic way to attack Glenn. Ascribe to him views he did not advance. "The caller is fantastic" then attack those.

Glenn is ok. What he describes is a real problem.

[cf21]

As I said, I agree with his premise.

I still consider it disingenuous to hide Daily Caller journalists behind the label "conservative".

[harry8]

Your opinion about that label changes nothing. And you attacked Glenn by claiming he said things he didn't.

This is really, really common. If you want to laugh look at Glenn's tweets and replies sometime. He gets in there and aggressively defends himself from a never-ending string of false accusations ranging from ridiculous to heinous. I guess a lot of democrats shut their eyes because Trump was horrible and said things that were pretty nuts to "help." Now that the incredibly low bar of "better than Trump" is no longer interesting they're faced with having done it and don't like it when Glenn calls it out. He then gets a lot of hate. I've seen him accused of being a white supremisist, a libertarian shill, a homophobe, a Russian asset, an anti-semite. The convulsions people attempt to try and make something, anything stick is really quite mind boggling until you give up and just start laughing.

The caller are conservative. They have passing reference at best in that story and mostly to note they called it out because they're allowed in their corporate structure for partisan reasons (vonservative) rather from any commitment to truth. All the people mentioned who did back down on the claim and those who didn't he called out on Twitter on real time. It's a short report. It's nuts to have claimed it ever!

The media landscape is a lot worse than most people have noticed. Glenn is a welcome relief from that. Disagreeing with Glenn is good. Shouldn't make you feel bad because he argues from evidence and has integrity. Unless you're too partisan to see it and want him to be a scoreboard reinforcing 'my team is better' and give you warm fuzzies about it because he doesn't do that.

More power to Glenn. I know i don't have the stomach for what he puts up with on a daily basis.

[cf21]

> Your opinion about that label changes nothing.

Well, for me this this mislabeling makes me distrust the entire post so it does indeed change a lot.

> And you attacked Glenn by claiming he said things he didn't.

Which are?

[harry8]

It's right there where i said it still. Glenn argues from evidence. Your claim of mislabeled changes none of that evidence. And i's not mislabeled either, the caller isn't socialist.

Pretty sure this conv has gone past the point of being useful or entertaining to anyone so i wish you the best.

[threatofrain]

> It's right there where i said it still.

How did cf21 misrepresent Greenwald?