General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGreenwald does not have a timeline problem. The NY Times as the story broke:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/us/how-edward-j-snowden-orchestrated-a-blockbuster-story.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&Cryptic Overtures and a Clandestine Meeting Gave Birth to a Blockbuster Story
By CHARLIE SAVAGE and MARK MAZZETTI
Published: June 10, 2013
1) January 2013: Snowden reaches out to documentary filmaker Laura Poitras
2) February 2013: Greenwald receives "an enigmatic e-mail identifying himself as a reader and saying he wanted to communicate about a potential story using encryption."
3) February 2013: Greenwald receives encryption software but doesn't complete the installation process.
4) March 2013: Poitras reaches out to Greenwald to discuss the issue. "At that point, neither knew his name yet."
5) Late April or early May: Greenwald and Snowden begin communicating via encrypted email.
6) Last week of May: Greenwald flies to New York to meet with Guardian editors and then he and Poitras fly to Hong Kong.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/06/25/msnbcs-reid-raises-questions-about-guardians-glenn-greenwald/
We had early conversations about setting up encryption, so we worked early on to set that up, Greenwald says. We didnt work on any documents. I didnt even know Edward Snowdens name or where he worked until after he was in Hong Kong with the documents. Anyone who is claiming that somehow I worked with him to get those documents or helped him is just lying.
senseandsensibility
(17,201 posts)He knows that all of his words will be examined and that the corporate media is just waiting to pounce on any inconsistency. Say what you will about him, but he is not stupid.
tartan2
(314 posts)Glenn Greenwald is a remarkable smart human being and he is very aware of just what a cluster fuck our corporate media is!!!!!
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)It's clear that once a narrative is created by the low-evidence crowd, any facts are useless.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Why, I remember when we used to brag that we were the smartest discussion board on the internet.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)and not enough Port-a-Potties.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)and "high school dropout" arguments.
Thanks for posting!
cheers!
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Jarla
(156 posts)We've known since June 10th or 11th that Snowden first contacted Greenwald before he started working at BAH.
June 10th Tweet from Greenwald:
June 11th Press Release from BAH:
So why is this suddenly a major issue?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)encouraged him to take the job at Booz Allen (false), and encouraged him to commit a crime (false).
Snowden already had the documents before Greenwald knew his name or knew where he worked.
About a week later, he said, Mr. Snowden sent a sample of about 20 documents...
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/us/how-edward-j-snowden-orchestrated-a-blockbuster-story.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&
Jarla
(156 posts)I'm just wondering why people are only asking questions about this now and not two weeks ago?
If this is truly such a big deal, then why did they wait two weeks to raise the issue?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Those who've been most avidly pursuing Snowden aren't the sharpest tacks around here. They still don't grasp the details. The big picture is totally lost on them.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)He gave money to Ron Paul, and I covered a Ron Paul rally
That is all that matters.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)It's legal for a journalist to receive and publish leaked information. It is not legal for a journalist to solicit a leak.
Snowden just admitted to getting the BAH job in order to leak information. He was in contact with Greenwald before he got the job.
If Greenwald encouraged or otherwise advocated for Snowden to get the job so that he can leak, then that could be a crime on Greenwald's part.
But to do more than speculate, we'd need more information than one quote from one newspaper from Snowden.
Jarla
(156 posts)Given the chronology of events, I'd been assuming all along that Snowden took the BAH job in order to leak information.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)2) February 2013: Greenwald receives "an enigmatic e-mail identifying himself as a reader and saying he wanted to communicate about a potential story using encryption."
3) February 2013: Greenwald receives encryption software but doesn't complete the installation process.
4) March 2013: Poitras reaches out to Greenwald to discuss the issue. "At that point, neither knew his name yet."
5) Late April or early May: Greenwald and Snowden begin communicating via encrypted email.
6) Last week of May: Greenwald flies to New York to meet with Guardian editors and then he and Poitras fly to Hong Kong.
...change the fact that Greenwald was in contact with him before he took the job.
No matter how dismissive anyone is of that fact, it's going to be scrutinized, especially in light of Snowden's admission that he took the job with the intent of leaking the information.
So?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)As was Bart Gellman of the Washington Post.
Robb
(39,665 posts)It's illegal for a reporter (or anyone else) to encourage someone to commit an illegal act; does it matter whether the reporter knows exactly who the person is?
I have no idea. There is certainly a line somewhere.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)already happened?
If you notice, so far, the documents revealed are date stamped with the date prior to Greenwald and Snowden communicating in late April or early May.
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)The Link
(757 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)debunking the smears.
Life Long Dem
(8,582 posts)Before he even knew or met Snowden. I didnt even know Edward Snowdens name or where he worked until after he was in Hong Kong with the documents.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)And, he didn't know his name until Snowden outed himself:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/us/how-edward-j-snowden-orchestrated-a-blockbuster-story.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)It's called getting the story.
frylock
(34,825 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Paying the bills.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Catherina
(35,568 posts)cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)whenever some stranger asks him to for no reason.
"Hey I got a story for you, here's an encryption system for your computer".
LOL!
frylock
(34,825 posts)some stranger asked an INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER to install encrypton software in order to exchange email regarding a STORY. what's so sinister about that?
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Woodward and Bernstein met a stranger in a garage. Oooooooh!
frylock
(34,825 posts)that's where people keep cars. you don't exchange information clandestinely in a garage! going to have to rethink the whole Watergate scandal now.
DesMoinesDem
(1,569 posts)baldguy
(36,649 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Well, now he knows and I hope other reporters will assist keeping him up to date technology-wise.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)What do you think investigative journalists do?
frylock
(34,825 posts)don't be silly!
frylock
(34,825 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)I have to question your judgment based on the many references that you make to the "real world" and "reality." based on the "substance" of every one of your posts, I don't believe you have a very firm grasp of either.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)is irrelevant.
Greenwald just randomly install encryption systems on his computer whenever some stranger calls him up and asks him to?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)people who have classified information regularly. It is the nature of their job.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)I wonder why this is so hard to accept. Aren't we all here because we're in the same party? Greenwald is not in it and never has been and never will be. He is not our friend and does not need our hearts and flowers.
frylock
(34,825 posts)am I, or others like me, not welcome? I mean, I can stop voting for democrats if that's what you'd like.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)So many won't go there to read the link and you made it accessible here to remind folks.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)and I hope his attorneys give him better advice than he appears to have given Snowden.
p.s. glad I could clear that up. Carry on.
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)You have nothing but stuff you make up in your head.
Response to ucrdem (Reply #45)
Post removed
Whisp
(24,096 posts)wtf is wrong with you?
57. Predictable
I suspect you'd be happy if a few inconvenient journos had inconvenient, preferably lethal, accidents.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)I can totally see myself "not completing the installation process."
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)like you and I (for all our disagreements) "getting" that bit about the software. This is perhaps horrible, but remember the horrific Danny Pearlman beheading? And they fucked up the recording? They cut that poor man's head off and then someone must have said "hey the little red light wasn't on."
Anyways, hope you are well LM. We have crossed swords many times here but I bet we'd be good friends in real life.
Selah,
'rely
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)I've always appreciated your wit and sense of humor.