CNN Reporter Reveals CIA-Benghazi Connection: Is He 'Aiding The Enemy'?
from the it's-called-journalism dept
Between the Ed Snowden and Bradley Manning situations, we keep hearing claims that those two are guilty of violating the espionage act but that also those who helped published what they leaked are guilty too. There’s still an ongoing investigation into Wikileaks, and various government supporters have suggested that reporter Glenn Greenwald should be arrested as well. So, with CNN’s Jake Tapper breaking some news about CIA operatives on the ground during the Benghazi attacks, Matt Yglesias makes an important, if satirical point: is this “great journalism” or is it “aiding the enemy”?.
Obviously, it’s the former, but how can people argue that the reporting on the CIA revelations is great journalism, while the reporting on NSA surveillance or US military excesses are somehow “aiding the enemy”? All are disclosing secret or confidential information about the US government and its actions. All are very much in the public interest. But, for whatever reason, many people seem to want to pretend that Greenwald writing about the NSA is somehow different from Tapper revealing what the CIA was up to.
Filed Under: aiding the enemy, benghazi, bradley manning, cia, ed snowden, jake tapper, journalism, leaks, whistleblowing
Comments on “CNN Reporter Reveals CIA-Benghazi Connection: Is He 'Aiding The Enemy'?”
Simple enough to figure(from the government's perspective):
Is it making the USG look good? Then it’s ‘amazing journalism’.
Is it making the USG look bad? Then it’s ‘aiding the enemy’.
Re: Simple enough to figure(from the government's perspective):
Or rather Pepper in the arse of the others is refreshment as we say here 😉
Re: Simple enough to figure(from the government's perspective):
Yes ! And it doesn’t help that most Americans are Sheep.They all follow the Fear Mongering Speak-Talk.
Re: Re: Simple enough to figure(from the government's perspective):
Them thr terrist is to terrifing i lets them politicins tak car tat.
Re: Re: Re: Simple enough to figure(from the government's perspective):
Dey derkrr derbs!
Re: Re: Simple enough to figure(from the government's perspective):
“most Americans are Sheep”
You state this as though it were fact, I doubt you have any data in support of same.
It all depends on which dictionary you are looking at. Is it English or NSA-babbling?
not as far as i am concerned, but then i’m not a member of any US security agency (or any other) and have a reasonable bit of COMMON SENSE!!
Re: Re:
Says the guy who repeatedly says copyright’s origins lie in common law, despite the fact that is clearly not true.
Re: Re: @ "Rikuo", yapping at shadows again.
That’s not me.
But TWO POINTS FOR EFFORT! GO, RIKUO! YAY!
This is the kind of silly, off-topic, sheerly pointless ad hom yapping that I like to see here.
But does me give me opportunity to use another tagline:
Mike’s fanboy-trolls imitate him by taking no position except the pejorative.
Re: Re: Re: @ "Rikuo", yapping at shadows again.
Okay, given the icons next to your names, you’re more than likely not the same person. AC up above? I apologize for thinking you were OOTB.
OOTB…how can it be an ad-hom when it is in fact TRUE? You have dozens of times yapped on about copyright coming from Common Law, which, again, is not true.
Re: Re: Re:2 @ "Rikuo", yapping at shadows again.
In all fairness… it is an ad-hom, just a less egregious one.
An ad-hom is when you’re trying to disprove someone’s argument by attacking their character rather than the argument. That character attack can be 100% accurate, but it’s still an ad-hom. The logical problem with ad-homs is that they don’t address the actual point being discussed, and so are irrelevant.
Re: Re: Re:3 @ "Rikuo", yapping at shadows again.
Noted. Thanks.
Does Jake Tapper, meet the USG’s definition of a ‘journalist’?
The only ones that want to claim journalism is spying are those being embarrassed and can’t come up with any other reason to stifle the information outflow.
Face it, the majority of government leaders either through their words or actions are complicit in this lawbreaking spying. That starts at the top and goes right on down to the independent contractors making big bucks off the spy/data collection business.
Funny when news releases are in favor of the executive branch no one wants to head hunt for another victim. Take someone that is whistle blowing on wrong doing and suddenly, look there’s an espionage agent. It’s pretty plain what is going on here and the actions are speaking louder than any lying words coming out of Washington to the contrary.
If you consider informing the public, aiding the enemy then yes, he is guilty.
What I'm most amazed about is
that is was a CNN journalist that broke this news. My wife loves CNN and it is on in my house nearly 24/7. Which means I spend a good amout of my time yelling at my TV. I can’t stand the drivel that comes out of the talking heads of the corporate and government sponsored journalists and CNN has become one of the worst.
Re: What I'm most amazed about is
CNN == Conservative News network
Great Reporting?
I’m still stuck on “CNN” and the term “great reporting” in the same sentence. That doesn’t make sense to me.
Is CNN now adapting “Rules of Engagement” to reality?
While it may have been a pleasure to shout infringement, it is more appropriate to shout “what the hell is going on?”. Is NSA trying to change the newscycle to a more political mudthrowing-friendly theme instead of the, for them, extremely awkward “surveillance and what to do about it”?
Government prosecution comes down to politics. As long as one major party can use your journalism as ammunition to promote its preexisting conclusions and/or deride the other party, it’s all peachy. Upset both, and it’s a prison cell or exile. Is it any surprise that so many self-professed ‘real’ journalists tend to stick to talking points and sound bites?
There Is a Difference between Manning & Jake Tapper
Government sources provided information directly to Tapper. Tapper did not crack any passwords or make copies of any classified files for which he did not have a bona fide need to know. What Tapper did qualifies as investigative journalism.
What Manning did qualifies as braking his word, breaking his contract, gaining access to files he had no legitimate reason to access, and distributing classified files to non-
authorized persons.
Re: There Is a Difference between Manning & Jake Tapper
And your opinion of those who took an oath to uphold the Constitution who regularly violate it for political “contributions”?
If your gonna target Manning, lets apply it evenly shall we?
I am guessing that if Manning had gotten paid you’d be screaming so much louder, why are you silent on the rest of the Government who get PAID to violate their oath?
Re: Re: There Is a Difference between Manning & Jake Tapper
I did not “target” Manning, the post did. I merely continued the discussion using the same people the post mentioned. However, the point was not violation of the Constitution, which had nothing to do with what Manning did.
Manning violated a contractual obligation, a working directive, several laws, and a long-established rule of working with classified information. The article contrasted what Manning with the actions of a journalist, not other members of government, so it would be inappropriate for me to change the nature of the post with irrelevant comparisons.
The journalist did not have a contractual obligation with the government.
The journalist did not crack any passwords (based on the reference article).
The journalist did not make any copies of files from any government computers.
The journalist did not distribute information that he was told was classified to anyone, much less to anyone outside the United States.
The journalist, as far I was able to tell from the article, did not violate any laws.
Manning versus Jake Tapper? No comparison at all. One was an oath-breaking, self-aggrandizing, law-breaking criminal who will now pay for his crimes. The other was an investigative journalist using various resources to analyze a situation and to report on the situation, which is what journalists do, and Tapper apparently did not need to break any oaths or laws in the process. Tapper scores!
Re: Re: Re: There Is a Difference between Manning & Jake Tapper
Are you sure no laws were broken?
We have all of those secret ones now.
Re: There Is a Difference between Manning & Jake Tapper
He’s not comparing Tapper to Manning, he’s comparing Tapper to Greenwald.
Obama is a Chicago Democrat
Of course the journalist is attacking the US Government. We now live under communism where most of the media supports the corrupt Administration that even uses government coercion via the IRS to attack political opponents.
Re: Obama is a Chicago Democrat
Fascism does this as well. In fact, a truly dictatorial government would just come down on people directly or through the secret police and not bother with other agencies
Because I’ve never heard of the dreaded Nazi or Soviet tax authorities…