|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Yeah, how is this different than any person donating to both parties to secure influence? I'd say there's a difference between donating to one person vs. a group but this is a valid point. Regardless this kind of influence peddling needs to stop altogether regardless of political party. Angry_Ed fucked around with this message at 17:02 on Oct 31, 2019 |
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 16:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 14:45 |
|
|
cochise posted:Been rumors for a while that she's more or less escorting for oil princes in the Middle East. She lives in Dubai now and has been partying it up with all the rich over there. Such a fall from grace. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:01
|
|
|
blavatnik has very substantial investments in US companies so you need to distinguish him buying influence on behalf of his us companies vs buying influence on behalf of russia
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:02
|
|
|
Maggie Haberman is getting slaughered in an AMA on the politics subreddit, hasn't answered any questions yet and mods have already deleted the top question asking about her relationship with Trump in exchange for access.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:04
|
|
|
Nazzadan posted:Maggie Haberman is getting slaughered in an AMA on the politics subreddit, hasn't answered any questions yet and mods have already deleted the top question asking about her relationship with Trump in exchange for access. hahahaha, holy poo poo, who the gently caress thought it was a good idea for her to do this
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:05
|
|
|
Nazzadan posted:Maggie Haberman is getting slaughered in an AMA on the politics subreddit, hasn't answered any questions yet and mods have already deleted the top question asking about her relationship with Trump in exchange for access. i feel a little bad for her that she's bearing the brunt of some unjustifiable NYT decisions and articles that were not hers, most of the really hard-hitting ones are not haberman issues. i don't believe it was her call to signal-boost the clinton email server incessantly, for example.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:06
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:i feel a little bad for her that she's bearing the brunt of some unjustifiable NYT decisions and articles that were not hers, most of the really hard-hitting ones are not haberman issues. i don't believe it was her call to signal-boost the clinton email server incessantly, for example. Counterpoint - she's a bootlicker and deserves every ounce of scorn for helping trump.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:07
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Counterpoint - she's a bootlicker and deserves every ounce of scorn for helping trump. counter-counterpoint: it's not a coincidence that a random woman is bearing the brunt of people on the internet instead of the people (likely men) actually responsible, and scorning her instead of the people actually responsible diverts that scorn from the people who most need it
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:08
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:counter-counterpoint: it's not a coincidence that a random woman is bearing the brunt of people on the internet instead of the people (likely men) actually responsible, and scorning her instead of the people actually responsible diverts that scorn from the people who most need it yea it's misogyny why people think maggie sucks and represents the worst of 'access journalism'.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:12
|
|
|
I want Jake Tapper to do an AMA next
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:13
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:counter-counterpoint: it's not a coincidence that a random woman is bearing the brunt of people on the internet instead of the people (likely men) actually responsible, and scorning her instead of the people actually responsible diverts that scorn from the people who most need it She is not a random woman. Have you followed her at all? She actively carries water for the Trump admin in exchange for access. Do you think she was just some nobody plucked from the NYT to do an AMA?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:13
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:yea it's misogyny why people think maggie sucks and represents the worst of 'access journalism'. It's not the charge, it's the level of animosity I'm actually having trouble of thinking of any man on Twitter who gets hit with a similar level of scorn for...anything
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:14
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:It's not the charge, it's the level of animosity Jake Tapper? Chuck Todd? I'm not saying there's NO misogyny, but it's not all misogyny. Maggie Haberman is terrible and she's an enabler, full stop.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:15
|
|
|
Well that was anticlimactic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:15
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:counter-counterpoint: it's not a coincidence that a random woman is bearing the brunt of people on the internet instead of the people (likely men) actually responsible, and scorning her instead of the people actually responsible diverts that scorn from the people who most need it This is like when the GOP calls any criticism against a woman misogyny regardless of how valid that criticism is. C'mon man.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:15
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:It's not the charge, it's the level of animosity Bret Stephens, for one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:15
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:It's not the charge, it's the level of animosity chris cillizza
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:16
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:It's not the charge, it's the level of animosity Everyone on the NYT Op-Ed section?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:16
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:Jake Tapper? I don't agree with you on either being as harsh
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:16
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:It's not the charge, it's the level of animosity I mean if you want to argue women being held accountable when men aren't then... ok yeah that's obviously true in this hellworld. What does that have to do with Maggie getting poo poo for her enabling fascism? Just because she's a woman and men aren't held accountable then all of a sudden she gets a free pass for the damage she's doing?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:16
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:It's not the charge, it's the level of animosity Brett bedbug Stephens And the pinnochio fact checker man
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:16
|
|
|
saintonan posted:Bret Stephens, for one. He's deserving of every ounce of animosity.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:16
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:chris cillizza Ok, I'll grant this one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:18
|
|
|
BonoMan posted:I mean if you want to argue women being held accountable when men aren't then... ok yeah that's obviously true in this hellworld. Well EW did say he felt a "little" bad not that he thought she shouldn't get drug over her actions, just that the people who are most responsible for rewarding her kind of "access" journalism aren't getting the heat that they should be getting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:18
|
|
|
Completely forgot about Mr. Foot Porn over at CNN. I still remain confused how that Tweet was not a fireable offense. Like a "holy poo poo, you creep, clean out your loving desk and get out or security will throw you out in the next 20 minutes".
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:18
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:counter-counterpoint: it's not a coincidence that a random woman is bearing the brunt of people on the internet instead of the people (likely men) actually responsible, and scorning her instead of the people actually responsible diverts that scorn from the people who most need it The "likely men" who are actually responsible haven't made the incredibly dumb decision to do a Reddit AMA, at least to my knowledge.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:19
|
|
|
BonoMan posted:I mean if you want to argue women being held accountable when men aren't then... ok yeah that's obviously true in this hellworld. because most of the making GBS threads on her is for stuff she didn't do and are issues with the NYT editors and editorial direction. poo poo on her all you want for her articles, but most of the making GBS threads in the AMA is unlinked to haberman. and the other thing is that "access journalism" is way less poisonous than other poo poo the nyt has been doing, haberman's gotten some very damaging admissions out of the white house. there's value there. there is none, absolutely none in laundering republican nonsense into repeated front-page stories about the clinton email scandal, and the general editorial philosophy of the NYT that they print both sides: the truth, and the republican side, and let you decide. nobody itt has any idea what the name of the nyt executive editor is (even me) who is the person who really needs to be poo poo on from a very great height
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:19
|
|
|
I know it’s Halloween, but did Morrison really have to show up at his Deposition dressed like two kids wearing a trench coat? Holy crap he is tall.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:20
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:counter-counterpoint: it's not a coincidence that a random woman is bearing the brunt of people on the internet instead of the people (likely men) actually responsible, and scorning her instead of the people actually responsible diverts that scorn from the people who most need it then she should say that instead of ignoring the question imo she works at the paper, she knows who makes those decisions E: I assume the defense will be "those are probably her bosses, she can't bite the hand that feeds her" in other words we shouldn't expect journalists to do journalism
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:21
|
|
|
Majorian posted:The "likely men" who are actually responsible haven't made the incredibly dumb decision to do a Reddit AMA, at least to my knowledge. They are however most probably the ones who came up with the incredibly dumb decision to have her do one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:21
|
|
|
PainterofCrap posted:insurance adjuster effortpost Thank you for this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:22
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:hahahaha, holy poo poo, who the gently caress thought it was a good idea for her to do this Cue the hand-wringing Twitter reaction for how mean everyone was to this Pulitzer Prize winning journalist blah blah
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:24
|
|
|
Skex posted:They are however most probably the ones who came up with the incredibly dumb decision to have her do one. I mean so far its been up for an hour and they've answered no questions so not much of an AMA  Also its kinda telling the AMA is for both Haberman and Michael Schmidt and everyone is just ignoring him to dunk on her
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:24
|
|
|
Skex posted:They are however most probably the ones who came up with the incredibly dumb decision to have her do one. Maybe, although I think it's at least as likely that she asked Bari Weiss, "Bari, how do I appeal to your fellow millennials?" And Bari Weiss, being the shittiest millennial of all, said, "Try doing an AMA!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:25
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:counter-counterpoint: it's not a coincidence that a random woman is bearing the brunt of people on the internet instead of the people (likely men) actually responsible, and scorning her instead of the people actually responsible diverts that scorn from the people who most need it Are you a young adult posing as an older adult? “Random woman” is the sort of thing a 17 year old might say about her. Has she ever written the words, “the president lied”?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:26
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:
This feels like confirmation that the poster has never been employed in any job whatsoever
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:27
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:then she should say that instead of ignoring the question imo no, there's no excuse for it. Like, the WSJ opinion section is a tire fire, but let's not forget that the business editor allowed them to singlehandedly topple Theranos, which was a both a personal embarrassment and large financial loss to Murdoch. NYT's management might be terrible but Haberman's actions reflect very poorly on her personally as well
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:27
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/davidgura/status/1189940351198515201
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:29
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:chris cillizza He also did an AMA and also got absolutely savaged in it. To the point that other reporters were asking "why did you ever think this was a good idea?"
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 14:45 |
|
|
theflyingorc posted:This feels like confirmation that the poster has never been employed in any job whatsoever That you think anyone who wouldn't cover up unethical behavior by their bosses must be unemployed living in their parents' basement is so, so revealing. This explains so much about your posting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 17:32
|
|