Posted on 10/31/2022 7:19:35 AM PDT by Red Badger
Independent journalist Glenn Greenwald said Sunday that there was a very simple reason that members of his chosen profession seemed unwilling to question the narrative surrounding the alleged attack on Paul Pelosi — namely the possibility that asking questions could put their careers at risk.
Greenwald laid out his theory in a Twitter thread, saying that it didn’t even matter whether or not the prevailing narrative — that the person who was arrested at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) was a far-right conspiracy theorist and election denier — was true. The point, he said, was that it couldn’t be questioned.
“It’s very possible that the instantly formed media narrative — Paul Pelosi’s attacker was a MAGA fanatic who broke in to murder Nancy — will be proven true. But right now there are so many glaring doubts and holes in that story that it just takes common sense to question this,” Greenwald began.
“It’s genuinely alarming how conditioned so much of the U.S. population is to equate skepticism toward the pronouncements of media corporations with mental illness: ‘If you don’t instantly accept what Wolf Blitzer and Andrea Mitchell claim, then you’re a crazy conspiracy theorist.'”
Greenwald went on to explain that even journalists who had questions about the prevailing narrative — on any topic — often felt as though they couldn’t say anything without risking their jobs or even their entire careers.
“It’s so crucial to understand the dynamic dominating journalism. Few journalists have career security,” Greenwald continued. “Imagine you’re a young journalist at a big media corporation. You know if you ask these questions, Twitter will explode and it can ruin your career.”
He then shared a tweet from Steve Krakauer that included just a few of the questions he thought media ought to be asking.
“Why wasn’t there signs of forced entry at Pelosi home?”
“Who was 3rd person who opened door for police?”
“Why was Pelosi holding hammer and attack only happened after police arrived?”
“Where is bodycam/security footage?”
“Why isn’t the press asking these questions?”
“This happened during Russiagate,” Greenwald added, saying that he had gotten a number of messages from journalists who worked for larger media corporations — and they had expressed their thanks that he was willing to question the narrative because they couldn’t do it.
“One Twitter mob against them for questioning Dem narrative (see @DashaBurns or @BoKnowNews) can be career-ending,” he said.
Greenwald said that he believed many journalists saw the “glaring questions and evidentiary holes” in the story that had been pushed so far regarding Pelosi, but especially in the last days before the midterm election, the narrative was even more important than usual. “Why stick their heads up, provoke a liberal Twitter mob, and be branded?” he asked. “That’s the climate.”
“Police investigating the Paul Pelosi attack continue to state they *do not know the motive.* Yet liberal “thought leaders” like @HillaryClinton and @jimmykimmel have decreed that not only is the motive known to them, but only insane or malicious people would question them,” Greenwald continued.
Greenwald went on to say that he wasn’t ready to ascribe any motives because he didn’t feel that he’d seen enough evidence to do so, adding, “The preferred narrative may end up right but most of it is based on massaged-by-CNN anonymous claims.”
He then listed the questions he’d like to see answered before claiming he understood exactly what went down in the Pelosi’s home:
“How someone broke into the home of one of the richest and most powerful families without setting off an alarm?”
“How Paul Pelosi could call 9/11 in the middle of this?”
“Who is the ‘unknown’ person who opened the door for the police?”
“Where is the video?”
The erasures happen faster and faster these days. In fact, they are now almost instantaneous.
so when pelosi is there where to do secret service stay
If I was 3rd in line I would not want to live in that house. seems easy to access.
“It’s very possible that the instantly formed media narrative — Paul Pelosi’s attacker was a MAGA fanatic who broke in to murder Nancy — will be proven true.”
No, given it’s proven false.
Very possible? Very unlikely.
It presents the serious question of whether or not Pelosi and her husband were willing to go so far as to get an assault staged on Mr Pelosi to have an event to meet their narrative of “violent MAGA extremists”.
I wonder who lives in the house. Mr. P is 82. Does he cook and clean for himself ? A housekeeper, perhaps ? They have adult children , I wonder if they check on Pops when moms out of town ? I bet Mr. P get lonely in the big old house when Nan is away. That’s why he boozes it up in Napa and now this. Yeah zip ties, J6 . Nah , Mr. P is on the down low, probably trolls for hook ups offering meth or whatever, possibly.
someone posted that the house is used more for official business and they usually stay in Napa.
Dont know where they keep the 24k dollar fridge with her breakfast $12 ice cream
I would rather stay at the Napa estate as well. I’m guessing male prostitutes are easier to find in SF .
And the number one question NOBODY in the media is asking. “If he went to the bathroom to call the police, why did he return to let the other underwear guy resume assaulting him?
But the quoted question from Krakauer which starts "Why wasn't there signs..." should be "Why weren't there signs..."
Maybe Paul was staying at the San Francisco residence because he had consumed all the booze at the Napa estate.
If the nudist druggie freak really had said “Where’s Nancy?” either security cameras or the cops’ body-worn cameras would have picked it up and it would be playing in endless loops on the “news”, complete with a side by side shot of the Jan. 6 rioters.
“It’s about access not the truth. A “journalist” cannot lose their access or they lose their job. Telling the truth is very dangerous these days.”
“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”-
George Orwell, 1984
If those walls could talk there would be more than careers at risk.
Yes, I suppose you are right.
“That to which I am objecting” is actually the lack of specificity as “to whom” the unspecific “it” is crucial.
To my mind it is “old hat” to anyone with two brain cells to rub together, and some semblance of a memory of mid-term and near-term history.
uh uh uh...doxing...🧐
So we are living in a new version..of the USSR. Or Nazi Germany.
This will all be cleared up after the election.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.