Wrong. The problem with Project Veritas was that it broke the law, targeted some
Private citizens who do not have public accountiniktiy (though planned Parenthood execs seem to be a hybrid) but most objectionable was the fact that it created stories using editing that mischaracterized the content.
My behavior should be the same whether I’m talking to someone who agrees with me or an imposter. I either have principles or I don’t. If I am an elected official, or an appointed one for life with a code of ethics I must take seriously, it’s my duty to authentically represent my views to the public that put me where I am. I signed up for this. And I should be my authentic self when I’m discussing matters I’m allowed to discuss. Roberts comported himself well.
This reporter used her real name and went to an event sponsored by a group in which she holds membership. And she claims to have released the entire recording. I have no problem with it. And while Mrs. Alito is a private citizen, Justice Alito blamed her for the flag in front of his house. He made her relevant.
While Martha Alito was complaining about having to look at the Pride flag this month, the aggressively far-right Colorado Republican Party was urging its members to burn it:*****
.
I wrote abut this in the piece at the link below, and there is more to come soon!
Thoughtful Americans don’t pick on the vulnerable, ignore the radioactive mess known as Rudy Giuliani, or enable the fascist rants and behavior of Trump.
I’ve finally figured out what’s wrong with Aileen Cannon - look at the first two letters in her name. Yep, she’s an AI creation - no wonder she is so useless!
While I too am not a fan of the "disguised journalist"--the Right seems to have whole organizations devoted to this--I have to say that the whole incident shows that there is nothing that requires one to rise to the bait. The responses of Roberts vs that of Alito show this clearly.
The Cannon theory makes sense. Merchan was masterful in the way he avoided (we hope) the pitfalls that can lead to a successful appeal. Her lack of trial experience is showing, as she focuses on getting all the wrong things right.
Oh, god, there's that "What, me worry?" stock photo of Aileen Cannon...surely Getty Images has something more updated than this tiresome head-shot. But, her expression here matches the vapidity of her courtroom decisions, so there's that.
Re: the "secret Alito taping"...sort of "Ends justify the means" argumentation here being played out...rather similar surely to the oily James O'Keefe and his sneaky "Project Veritas" videos, is it not? Sure, Alito is a d-bag, BUT...get the point?
I was appalled when Joy Reid and then Lawrence O'Donnell featured recordings obtained by a woman pretending to be someone she wasn't. When Project Veritas did exactly the same thing, we all protested--rightly so. The Veritas guy went one step further and landed in jail. I loathe Justice Alito as much as Reid or O'Donnell. But l don't think we should stoop to right ring methods to achieve our ends.
These aren’t right wing methods. It’s undercover journalism and it’s been around forever. We can discuss reasonably the ethics of where we draw lines but it has value. It can be used to uncover corruption, corp. pollution, etc. There are hundreds of such examples of undercover journalism or something legal akin to it (criminal investigations snaring people who victimize kids) and we rely on it every day to affect change. It has a place. Let’s discuss its boundaries. That’s fair.
I know what undercover journalism is. It needn't involve pretending to agree with someone to induce them to say something incriminating. I have practiced "undercover journalism" as a filmmaker by assuming a neutral pose. But this woman admitted she tricked the people she interviewed. So did you admire the Veritas guy?
Did you hear the entire actual interview? I did. As a lawyer I know I rather clearly stated above that I do not “admire” anyone who distorts the FACTS when claiming to present them accurately. There are two salient points: facts and accuracy.
I don’t care if people misrepresent their own personal views to appear sympathetic. If we present ourself with authenticity and candor it wouldn’t matter who we are speaking to. Roberts did well. He corrected her when she suggested the government had a role in established religion. Alito agreed with many of her divisive comments. Listen to both interviews.
PV was a failure because it broke the law by stealing data and it also mischaracterized the content with creative editing. The problem isn’t that PV existed. It’s not that they targeted liberals. So what? It’s not even that they misrepresented who THEY were to their subjects. It is how they presented what their subjects said in response and how they broke the law to get materials. Present the entire conversation unedited and that’s what this reporter did. And you won’t hear me crying about it if it happens to a D in exactly the same way.
Ironic fun fact: any right to privacy the Stealitos might feel entitled to* is the same (implied) right to privacy underlying Griswold and a number of subsequent cases. (*Actually, maybe Mrs. Stealito; Sammy I'm sure feels above it all.) Grisworld, one may safely presume would be overturned in a heartbeat if Sammy got his chance.
This a huge cost when hypocrisy is rampant among our leaders: a crushing amount of irony.
What was he thinking? Giuliani’s mug shot could be part of The Shining. 😏
Republican Voters: Reproductive, voting, and gun issues shall be decided by the STATES!
Also Republican Voters: Convictions of Trump decided in the State of NY is Biden-controlled.
Wrong. The problem with Project Veritas was that it broke the law, targeted some
Private citizens who do not have public accountiniktiy (though planned Parenthood execs seem to be a hybrid) but most objectionable was the fact that it created stories using editing that mischaracterized the content.
My behavior should be the same whether I’m talking to someone who agrees with me or an imposter. I either have principles or I don’t. If I am an elected official, or an appointed one for life with a code of ethics I must take seriously, it’s my duty to authentically represent my views to the public that put me where I am. I signed up for this. And I should be my authentic self when I’m discussing matters I’m allowed to discuss. Roberts comported himself well.
This reporter used her real name and went to an event sponsored by a group in which she holds membership. And she claims to have released the entire recording. I have no problem with it. And while Mrs. Alito is a private citizen, Justice Alito blamed her for the flag in front of his house. He made her relevant.
David wrote:
*****Speaking Of The Pride Flag …
While Martha Alito was complaining about having to look at the Pride flag this month, the aggressively far-right Colorado Republican Party was urging its members to burn it:*****
.
I wrote abut this in the piece at the link below, and there is more to come soon!
https://decencyandsense.substack.com/p/will-the-voters-of-colorado-reject
Thoughtful Americans don’t pick on the vulnerable, ignore the radioactive mess known as Rudy Giuliani, or enable the fascist rants and behavior of Trump.
Anyone officially attempting to intervene?
I’ve finally figured out what’s wrong with Aileen Cannon - look at the first two letters in her name. Yep, she’s an AI creation - no wonder she is so useless!
While I too am not a fan of the "disguised journalist"--the Right seems to have whole organizations devoted to this--I have to say that the whole incident shows that there is nothing that requires one to rise to the bait. The responses of Roberts vs that of Alito show this clearly.
The Cannon theory makes sense. Merchan was masterful in the way he avoided (we hope) the pitfalls that can lead to a successful appeal. Her lack of trial experience is showing, as she focuses on getting all the wrong things right.
Oh, god, there's that "What, me worry?" stock photo of Aileen Cannon...surely Getty Images has something more updated than this tiresome head-shot. But, her expression here matches the vapidity of her courtroom decisions, so there's that.
Re: the "secret Alito taping"...sort of "Ends justify the means" argumentation here being played out...rather similar surely to the oily James O'Keefe and his sneaky "Project Veritas" videos, is it not? Sure, Alito is a d-bag, BUT...get the point?
I was appalled when Joy Reid and then Lawrence O'Donnell featured recordings obtained by a woman pretending to be someone she wasn't. When Project Veritas did exactly the same thing, we all protested--rightly so. The Veritas guy went one step further and landed in jail. I loathe Justice Alito as much as Reid or O'Donnell. But l don't think we should stoop to right ring methods to achieve our ends.
These aren’t right wing methods. It’s undercover journalism and it’s been around forever. We can discuss reasonably the ethics of where we draw lines but it has value. It can be used to uncover corruption, corp. pollution, etc. There are hundreds of such examples of undercover journalism or something legal akin to it (criminal investigations snaring people who victimize kids) and we rely on it every day to affect change. It has a place. Let’s discuss its boundaries. That’s fair.
I know what undercover journalism is. It needn't involve pretending to agree with someone to induce them to say something incriminating. I have practiced "undercover journalism" as a filmmaker by assuming a neutral pose. But this woman admitted she tricked the people she interviewed. So did you admire the Veritas guy?
Did you hear the entire actual interview? I did. As a lawyer I know I rather clearly stated above that I do not “admire” anyone who distorts the FACTS when claiming to present them accurately. There are two salient points: facts and accuracy.
I don’t care if people misrepresent their own personal views to appear sympathetic. If we present ourself with authenticity and candor it wouldn’t matter who we are speaking to. Roberts did well. He corrected her when she suggested the government had a role in established religion. Alito agreed with many of her divisive comments. Listen to both interviews.
PV was a failure because it broke the law by stealing data and it also mischaracterized the content with creative editing. The problem isn’t that PV existed. It’s not that they targeted liberals. So what? It’s not even that they misrepresented who THEY were to their subjects. It is how they presented what their subjects said in response and how they broke the law to get materials. Present the entire conversation unedited and that’s what this reporter did. And you won’t hear me crying about it if it happens to a D in exactly the same way.
Ironic fun fact: any right to privacy the Stealitos might feel entitled to* is the same (implied) right to privacy underlying Griswold and a number of subsequent cases. (*Actually, maybe Mrs. Stealito; Sammy I'm sure feels above it all.) Grisworld, one may safely presume would be overturned in a heartbeat if Sammy got his chance.
This a huge cost when hypocrisy is rampant among our leaders: a crushing amount of irony.