@emptywheel What part of the NYT story is built on the idea that nothing NYT ever releases would help Russia?
-
-
It allows it when they could not otherwise publish story (not true here) preferably w/addl corroborating info (none here).
-
Those policies put into place to avoid anon hit jobs, which this is (again, based off silly premise Putin = loudest TPP critic).
-
I think it’s pretty clear from context that they mean “critic” geopolitically.
-
No. That's batshit. Also not true.
-
Sorry, not trying to be combative, but genuinely don’t follow this last tweet.
-
There's nothing about the context that indicates a geopolitical caveat, nor would the assertion be true if made abt Putin.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I’m guessing Becker and Erlanger and their editors disagree that this is spin.
-
I said "speculation" not spin. NYT specifically said the negotiators "assumed" this, made an "apparent" conclusion. That's speculation
-
Can’t the same thing be said of their claim that Russia hacked the DNC? Do you think that’s false, too?
-
Also, you're inventing things. I'm uninterested in truth of negotiators claim. My arg is entire thing doesn't show what NYT claims.
-
I’m saying that the Russia/DNC claim is also unsourced and, by some definitions, speculative. It isn’t proven in the piece.
-
Sure. but that's not NYT standard. Also for primary claim: Russia hacks DNC, it's common intel lang.
-
I do think there's vast difference bt using intel "high degree of confidence" & "assume." The former is not speculation, NYT standard
-
- 21 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.