The 1st tweet was explicitly hypocrisy in leak standards. The 2nd tweet - posted *immediately under it - said I don't oppose the leaks.
-
You made it most clear even earlier than this morning. Last night: "Still justified." This is all very dumb.https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/868827486234316800 …
Exactly. It's weird to watch Twitter spend the day spreading a lie that you believe exactly the opposite of what you've repeatedly stated.
-
-
because they can't bring themselves to understand that leaks, even when illegal, can be morally justified
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
The cucumber of your mind wants its garden back.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
If the CIA can influence the Washington Post for $600m then what would it do for SM? Control of Twitter/Facebook etc is surely TOP priority
-
Take out the "if" and it's even more accurate
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Who should be the arbiter of what's justified or not? And where's the line in your view?
-
It's not a formal process.
-
Well quite- but without some framework it's down to pure partisanship, and the law that doesn't differentiate good vs bad leaks.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
For a second there, I thought I was reading a
@SamHarris tweet.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.