I was asked by Mehdi Hasan to discuss whether it is appropriate for journalists to withhold information for tell-all books. Here is my response.
What are your views on this issue? What are your expectations as a media consumer about what winds up as the news of the day vs. in the book “of the moment?" Does it matter at all?
To me, the revelation that was most damning, and deliberately withheld, was Bob Woodward’s holding onto Trump’s acknowledgment that he knew the severity and contagiousness of COVID back in early 2/20.
First and foremost: I think that it s important to differentiate between a book author and a journalist. "Journalists" are affording a lot of legal protections. I don't think that the same applies to book authors. It's very important to differentiate when an individual is acting as a journalist as opposed to an author.
Next: Maggie Habberman deliberately concealed knowledge about criminal conduct with with national security implications. She did so for pecuniary advantage. Regardless of whether or not she disclosed this information to the New York Times (and regardless of whether the NYT made a decision to publish this) she had a responsibility to disclose this information to the Justice Department. If she failed to do so, she should be treated as an accessory after the fact.
If it's your run of the mill, day-to-day information, with juicy, gossipy tid-bits, and the nation wasn't being crippled by the rise of a wanna be king, then who cares about what you knew and when. Write the book.
But most, if not all, of these tell-all books about Trump are self-gratuitous and arrogant. They're now selling a story that should've been told--shouted in every microphone--to US due to the very serious, and very dangerous/corrupt nature of what the information us now revealing.
Access Haberman revealing she's known all this time that Trump stole classified documents, but said nothing. Jake Sherman sitting on real-time text messages from Jan 6. Bob Wooward keeping silent about when Trump knew Covid was deadly serious & lied about it. Just think how many lives could have been saved if he'd reported this information. 🤬 John Bolton, Mark Esper, Geoffrey Berman, et al SHOULD HAVE told the American people the truth...then, and the media should've called his lies lies, instead of normalizing his pathological, narcissistic behavior.
I wouldn't spend one cent on any of this "look what I knew and said nothing to stave off the rise of fascism" books. They're all 7 years TOO LATE, and we're in the ditch hoping the Nov. 8 tow truck will rescue us.
It matters enormously, in fact, I believe if ethics rather than individual economics had been the norm, Trumps’s power would have already been diminished. Speaking out, telling the truth, blowing the whistle, “Pulling a Vindman” should be standard practice. Further if those that are currently remaining silent, came forward and spoke out this county and our democracy would be far stronger.
The fourth estate -freedom of press. - has dissolved. Maggie has been part of Trump PR machine for generations. Woodward a so called hero of Watergate withheld the information about Trump’s downplaying Covid. We have no 4th estate - it’s all entertainment with no sense of duty. Don’t see it changing with Murdoch - Fox- CNN- Habermann- Woodward.
I’m not a middle-of-the-roader on Maggie Haberman: I don’t trust her. But, to me, making the argument about her isn’t the way to address the larger issue. What about the documentary filmmakers who followed Roger Stone during J6? Or the other doc filmmaker who already testified during a J6 hearing? Their evidence is far more damning, they had it literally in the moment and it’s getting no attention to that end. By anyone. Media has become, or always was, a for-profit game to make a buck. Someone in this thread commented that both speakers in this interview were interrupted and the segment ended before a debate could be had. 100% agree. Recently Michael Fanone commented to the effect that when he’s on CNN he has 67 seconds to explain how to fix the problems with law enforcement. Like the other person in the thread said, how can we have a 24/7 news cycle and yet never enough time to delve into an issue? I believe in a free press, but can corporate media be a free press? They don’t demonstrate that they can be.
Considering the amount of jaw-dropping stupidity and aggression coming from Trump at all times, but especially terrifying during his time in the White House, hearing how he wanted to shoot protestors amongst many, many other horrifying actions he wanted to take, it seems almost treasonous to withhold that kind of information from the American People, in order to line your own pockets.
It’s our lives, and the lives of the rest of the world, this jackass was toying with while he tried to play tinpot dictator. We were only lucky there were people there that refused to go along with his worst instincts. That does not give them the right to hide it for personal gain.
It seems the explanation folks (Maggie Haberman) are using is that folks are more comfortable talking after the fact in a more thoughtful slower pace. These are unusual times - I agree with you that journalists are part of the power grid for our democracy and should get out the information in daily print. These books provide an important look and invaluable resource. But history and bad actors move more quickly. Breaking News is wearing us out, but that’s the strategy! Journalists have a responsibility for our democracy, just like our other three branches of government, but we all have the ultimate one - vote. We all have to do whatever we can to keep and treasure our freedoms.
I understand why journalists would want to hold some information back for a book release. When however the withheld information concerns the safety of our country and the lives of our agents both domestically and abroad, that is an entirely different matter. When it concerns Regan's staff looking to raise taxes, OK. When it concerns someone having an affair, OK. When it concerns stolen top secret documents, that's a crime in my opinion and there should be no delay in publishing it and/or informing the Justice Department of the information. Journalists are also citizens. Should even one foreign operative die because the information was withheld, it's criminal.
Journalism has long been defined as the Fourth Estate for a reason. It provided us with information so that we, as the owners and participants of our government, could make choices regarding our representatives and country at large.
when a journalist or news organization withholds information for money, political gain, or manipulation, it is treason as far as I am concerned.
In fact if one were to look at the Sedition Act of 1798 it states in part, "To write, print, utter or publish, or cause it to be done, or assist in it, any false, scandalous, and malicious writing against the government of the United States, or either House of Congress, or the President, with intent to defame, or bring either into contempt or disrepute, or to excite against either the hatred of the people of the United States, or to stir up sedition, or to excite unlawful combinations against the government, or to resist it, or to aid or encourage hostile designs of foreign nations."
I am sure that the current trial against Oath Keepers, et al, is based in part upon this law. However, if we analyze information withheld or manipulated by journalists or news organizations, I believe that we would discover that multiple peoples and organizations could be charged with treason/sedition under this same law.
I listened to Maggie’s interview with Kara Swisher and I learned a lot from that conversation. Sounds like it was her editors at The NY Times who made decisions about what got published.
You should check it out and hear her perspective before continuing to judge and rant.
Steve your point is well taken.Some of this information from these books was known.(at least for political junkies like me)But some wasn't.What really bothers me more was those with power inside the white house(the so called adults in the room) kept silent and therefore became enablers.I am talking about Bolten,Kelly,Mattis,McMaster,Pence,Barr and many others.Their silence has put our democracy in jeopardy. Dave Y
@NYMag profiles @maggieNYT in a piece entitled, “Maggie Haberman on How She Covers Trump Without Losing Her Mind.” Haberman not only withheld facts from @nytimes readers for personal profit, she has now made HERSELF the story via book tour appearances and articles like the one mentioned above. With all the selfless journalists doing their part to preserve our democracy, it’s a travesty that Haberman is the one receiving all the attention. Disgraceful.
Watching and listening above makes me angry as a viewer. Mehdi Hasan should have let you finish your thought, because you were a guest and he should have overridden the $$$ constraint that cuts off so many interviews we are listening to. It was an interview to expand the media's own self-analysis and to be honest about it. The media is not above all. And it is viewers and consumers of it that give it its life and purpose.
Who read the book in question? I did not and will not. Why? Because I depend on the news to make me a better citizen, a more informed one. I do not need it to speak up, but it gives me a very clear picture of who is running the country and why. And I choose who to read and listen to. The book in question, Confidence Man, made its promotion rounds on MSNBC. I saw two interviews. I will speak of one only, Alex Wagner's conversation with the author informed by questions and answers. (The other one, which I keep to myself, has me still reeling with anger because of the tacit and implicit and "liberal" annotation about racism. There is too much racism going on in ordinary talk, the way things are said with intellectual acceptability that, honestly, bears heavily upon guests present who are directly affected by the concealed racism and are disgusted, as I am, for the total lack of emotional import.) Alex Wagner asked tight questions and the answers were, like, yeah, "I started writing the book" after the Second Impeachment, and writing a book takes more time and sources do not want to be on the record in real time, etc. etc. The book would have had a more appropriate title if labeled An Autocrat Speaks. All the back and forth about what he says and does not say says a lot about why documents and compartmented ones are amassed together with other stuff. It is not a question of mess, but it is a matter of Rush to retrieve as much after a failed attempt to overthrow an election and the truncating of a coup to hold on to power. It is a matter of when the documents belonging to the government were "possessed" by him. It speaks of how such documents are Espionage prone. But no, the subject of the book amassed stuff together, classified with items like a raincoat, shoes and an umbrella (...my memory now fails me and will give way to sarcasm. I wonder if the FBI found the monocle and the Inverness cape, along with the cashmere scarf. I mean, it is all so ridiculous.) Maggie Haberman speaks of Donald Trump as if she were describing a porcelain tureen with crackled glaze, leaving out the part about how dangerous it would be to ingest soup laden with lead. Her assessment of him is so detached it made my skin crawl. And I would urge serious commentators to stop referring to him as a privileged and entitled man as she does. He is a con man and a criminal. An obstructionist. An instigator of an Insurrection responsible for the deaths there occurred. He is an Election Denier, a man who does not honor the Peaceful Transfer of Power. By denying that President Joe Biden won the election. By taking Government-Owned Documents to who knows how many properties and seen by who knows how many "interests" against the security of our nation. For money. I worry very much about this, especially given the news about Saudi Arabia's backstabbing America's decisions on energy and who and why it supports countries beyond its borders. I worry about the Kushner connection. Confidence Man? What does it mean?
I worked for a newspaper for 20 years, including eight years as wire editor. I think these writers owe it to the public to publish what they know when they know it.
I find withholding critical information for personal gain reprehensible. We Americans use to look to the press as watchdogs over our politics and government wrongdoings. NO LONGER.
These journalist and writers have become just as much as the problem and no longer part of the solution. I cancelled my subscription to the Times because of Habberman. I cannot stomach that zombie woman in writing or her appearances on news shows hawking her traitorous books.
Generally, it seems wrong to withhold information, but I’d have to know all the facts. For example, who participated in the decision to withhold? Is it possible that the government (DOJ or Intelligence) asked the journalist to stay quiet because of an ongoing, but not yet public, investigation? If it is a decision made solely by the journalist, that is troubling. I still feel I don’t know all the facts regarding Maggie Haberman’s withholding. I’m not attempting to defend her; I’m just saying I don’t have all the facts at hand.
It's a contradiction to say information the reporter withheld for their book wasn't valuable (or info commonly known) then publish their book claiming its now *new* titillating insights thatakes the book a "must have." Doesn't add up.
I believe the general public understands there's a "tightrope" to walk but (in my opinion) too many big-name reporters are more interested in collecting juicy tidbits for their book. Trump reads these guys, has figured out who he can play. I have no doubt Trump says things in their presence just to "test the water." The ones he truly hates are the ones he can't manipulate.
Whether it was held back for a book, or the book is just the cover story, it's completely inappropriate for reporters/editors to sit on important evidence or information about possible Presidential criminal activity. Same goes for news about any important public official. Sitting on information impedes law enforcement and public debate.
Unfortunately, too many news outlets have ruined their brands by performing like boutique corporate PR departments.
I am encouraged by Steve's promoting of my idea to support five Democratic candidates as we head down the stretch..There is a key piece of that effort that I would like to emphasize, $5 to each candidate per week for the last five weeks, makes the $25 to each of the five candidates for the last five weeks of the race..actually $125 in total by each of us. It was my thinking that if we are a 1000 strong and each gave $25 to each Dem, that would represent $25,000 for their campaigns! I have already sent $25 to my five Dem candidates representing the $5 to each per week for the last five weeks..I know we all must do what we are able to afford..so anything that you can is as vital as Steve suggests..He is taking on his part as I had hoped by putting his essays on each of those Republican candidates out for free as publicly as possible to make sure the curtain is pulled back on these dangerous unfit people..Thank you Steve..
Steve, like In told you in the beginning of "The Warning" and before, via Twitter I am with you, and I am grateful you are with us!
It's not just the journalists, it was his staff that knew stuff was going on. Given The Orange Virus's knee jerk reaction to suing, if the journalists had published their books while he was in office then Rump would have sued and WE, the American People would have paid for it. This stuff was being reported real time and everyone knew that Rump downplayed Covid because he had no f-ing clue how to handle it and he couldn't appear weak. Nothing that has been reported thus far has shocked me given the four years of leading by Twitter and the stupid things he said in press conferences. It's all about appearing in charge and smart....He is NONE of those things
I think for anyone who holds the public trust it is incumbent upon them to disclose this kind of information in that very moment. This includes, but is not limited too journalists. How many tell-all books have come from Trumps administration?
It depends on the validity and importance of the information. Certainly, information that could affect the lives of millions of people should reported as a journalist rather than in later years reported as an author.
Well, let’s see. Show me another western democracy that has anything akin to FOX TV .
As far as I know: none. Even back when Berlusconi owned a gazillion TV channels and papers, he made it clear that those were his mouth pieces.
FOX however reins supreme and to the majority of its viewers the hands that pull the marionettes’ strings (tucker, ingraham etc) remain in the dark.
I had to do some digging and reading until I understood, why CNN suddenly had changed onscreen and some high profile hosts left. I know plenty of CNN viewers who to this day do not know what has happened there. I stopped watching them a long time ago.
The most blatant change in journalistic ethics is probably evident in Bob Woodward. Back, when he and Carl Bernstein wrote about watergate and effectively brought down a president, neither one of them could have imagined to withhold information in order to benefit later from book royalties. As far as I know, nevertheless, both profited mightily from their monumental work, both professionally and financially- as they should have. They did amazing work, clean, honest and with only one purpose: bring the truth to light.
Fast forward to Woodward’s last book about trump, in which he reveals that at the beginning of the pandemic trump knew perfectly well, that it was a dangerous and highly lethal disease, while on TV he made light of it, ridiculing everyone who didn’t, and tried everything to impede the public health experts to tell the truth.
Did Woodward have an obligation to tell the public immediately, as soon as he learned about this heinous behavior? Yes. And Woodward himself made clear that trump told him this at the very beginning of 2020.
Would it have made a difference?
Well, for Woodward it may have annihilated his access to trump and the writing of his book.
As for the rest of us; I want to think that it would have caused a huge scandal to hear trump on tape, in real time, say that he knew COVID was bad news, while the rest of us was scrambling in panic, trying to figure out what was happening.
Those of us who are medical professionals, critics thinkers who never believed a word trump or his soldiers told the public, presumed right from the beginning of the pandemic, that the virus was going to be bad news. But the millions who worship at the feet of the Orange did not. How many lives does Woodward have on his conscience?
Somewhere along the way of history, journalistic work goals and ethics took a sharp turn for the very worst: money and profits. Its the Golden Calf they now worship and the price we all pay for it is too steep.
It’s a 24-hour news cycle, but they’re always ‘out of time’ when things get interesting. Building an argument with evidence to come to a point is not what’s required on these ‘shows’. Pithy comments preceded by “That’s a good question, Medhi”to stroke the host and to keep the pace snappy are all that’s wanted. Rudely interrupting a guest whose so obviously building to a conclusion, illustrates that the host is far more focussed on the voice of the Producer in his earbud than the voice of the guest on camera.
There’s often no evidence that the hosts are even listening. They ignore significant, direction-changing comments to jump to the next guest without even acknowledging unexpected ideas which should actually change the direction of the conversation.
Ari Melber is one exception. At times he grunts a little ‘harumph’ that indicates he’s paying attention.
Nicole is the only host I’ve seen who allows you to take the time you need to say what you want without jumping in to keep it moving.
It’s still a ‘vast wasteland’.
As for ‘journalists’…when they get huge salaries and hob-nob with the very people they are supposed to cover without favor, it becomes problematic. It wasn’t always thus. Why does it cost so much to get a journalism degree from Columbia? Why is it even necessary to do that? How will it be paid off? When book deals are so lucrative and the possibility of celebrity is so alluring, what becomes of the judgement and ethics of these former ‘watchdogs’? Why not hold out for the bigger reward?
It’s always worthwhile to take another look at “Broadcast News”, the prophetic 1987 movie written by James L. Brooks, to see where we came from, how we started to compromi$e and how the Albert Brooks character, Aaron Altman, predicts the coming of the Devil, who will arrive in the attractive package of a media personality, who will chip away at our values, bit by bit, until we have nothing left!
If there are legal issues with known law-breaking or issues that indicate a failure of judgement, or actions that would undermine an election process or create an international information breach undermining allies ot aiding the enemy, then there is a requirement for this to be brought forward. Retaining classified documents is an egregious breach, and requires notification. Throwing a plate at the wall is not.
The simple answer is no, under zero circumstances, (w/ the sole exception being for national security purposes). I question the book writing relationship of the journalist with the company - their employer.. is this book writing part of their contract? Does their company earn royalties off of their book too? Or is it a completely separate endeavour and they can do what they want? The journalist then appears on TV.. and they interview each other promoting their books! I saw this a lot on CNN.. and thought it was shocking. The professional red lines are too blurred & there should be more transparency on the issue. This obviously taints the credibility and motivations of the journalist and at a time when there are already significant 'trust issues'.
The list is too long to even contemplate, I get it: literary agents convince them that speaking out early will cost $$$
However, as bad as they are at least they came out even if they were late.
Of the 100’s of sycophantic pieces of dog shit the worst are senators, cabinet members,media bosses and whores like hannity and Carlson led by the likes of Rush, who opened the floodgates of hate anger and derision soon after the death of “fairness doctrine” in media.
Trump was not a US President he was a US anti-president. I can not keep up with all the books that have been published in damnation of him but to what avail? Thus I am not sure the relavance of the timing of these books.
I think it is worthwhile to consider that Haberman and Woodward for that matter gained access by stroking Trump’s ego, resulting in information we otherwise wouldn’t have. I don’t Think journalists should be held to the same level of duty to report that a paid official such as John Bolton. This goes double when the book follows closely to a refusal to testify in a hearing.
With few exceptions, those in the media are complicit in the downfall of America, the demise of democracy, and the rise of devastating political partisanship. Ethical journalism died a slow death and succumbed in the 1980s with the rise of the cable networks and social media.
I agree with you Steve. If the agreement for the interview(s) is that it is for a book to be published later, sources will say or not say what they will, knowing it's not coming out immediately. If there is so such agreement, withholding news relevant to a public health crisis, national security, etc., is immoral. A story about the fact that Donald Trump is racist cannot be equated in terms of urgency with a story about him secretly holding on to highly classified documents or lying to the public about what he knew about Covid-19. It would be laughable if it we not so serious to say that there is no evidence Haberman withheld what should have been breaking news for her book. It is self-evident that she did. The question is, what do we do about it? Money talks louder than morality these days.
It's simple. If a journalist is paid by a news outlet to cover a beat, they have an obligation to the public and their employer to report what they have in real time. They can take a sabatical if they want to go off and write a book. It's one or the other and never both simultaneously. Short term embargoes are one thing, or for signficant national security issues, but holding important information for a book to be published way down the road is unacceptable for a journalist and the media outlet they work for.
Yes it matters. The ethical thing would be that a journalist would report essential need to know news to the American people who are responsible for voting. But we all know that for the most part ethics are in the toilet these days. That’s why what you do here is so vitally important Steve. We need to know who we can trust. So far you have not only not been disappointing but have been a lighthouse on the foggy sea of present day chaos, and a brilliant one at that. Please keep shining and thank you a million times.
Unfortunately, information from all sources must be scrutinized due to 24 hour cycles and everyone trying to get a “ones up” on every matter impacting our lives. Reading books with information journalist had access to BEFORE the situation occurred, speaks volumes of who that individual is and how I trust them moving forward.
I do wonder if any of the authors contacted DOJ, FBI, CDC, etc. If so, we’re they “ keeping quiet” as ordered? It’s obvious to me that many, many in the GOP are equally, if not more, responsible for withholding info & unethical behavior. They withheld info about the many DJT profoundly disturbing actions (or lack of) for political gain& financial gains… THAT is what resulted in untold # of COVID related deaths, illnesses,. attempted coup, & a GOP Court to mention a few things.Knowing DJT is unhinged had to have been known by all who knew him well before books were written. Those greedy politicians & DJTs circle could have intervened long before journalists or authors were writing about it. Certainly, that group profited mightily politically, etc Much bigger definition of withholding info, $$ & political gain. They knew & condoned it. If I were a journalist, I’d be writing that awful story also.
It matters enormously, in fact, I believe if ethics rather than individual economics had been the norm, Trumps’s power would have already been diminished. Speaking out, telling the truth, blowing the whistle, “Pulling a Vindman” should be standard practice. Further if those that are currently remaining silent, came forward and spoke out this county and our democracy would be far stronger.
The MSNBC clip sends a message to me that media does not desire a "deep dive" into the issue at hand. I have lost count of the many discussions that are getting to the heart of hot issues that run out of time, as did this one. That's one point I take away from this.
I also will never forget the comments made by Anthony Hopkins as Bill Parrish in "Meet Joe Black" in which he states that delivering news to people is a sacred calling, to paraphrase it.
I agree with Steve regarding the commercialization of journalistic efforts. I have chosen to use the Media Bias chart as my north star for centrist reporting to glean the most bona fide news reporting in the classical sense.
I worry that there are truly far-out topics that really erudite journalists are just loathe to discuss with a public that you may feel has truly been dumbed down. There is obviously something even more sinister that one metaphorically sees peeping around the corner that I wish you guys could get craftier about leaking, or something. Sometimes, paranoia can be a gift from heaven, if you can temper yourself to use it. I have no other way to say what I just said. 🙄🙄🍀🎸 I finally have paid to subscribe to your substack, Steve, and I hope I get better at expressing myself. You’ve been such an inspiration and help the last 2 years.
I agree with what Steve said. I have lost trust on many sources and I certainly don't read newspapers. Their owners are the ones who sell the dribble. I have learned to watch for trends in most everything. Steve I admire the amount of info you juggle.
Within 48 hrs. of race being called for tRump, MSNBC host R Maddow exclaimed, “How could this happen!!” One brave female panelist spontaneously responded that it happened because everywhere Himself went, we all followed with camera/microphone. Maddow appeared livid, shot back at panelist saying “We followed Himself because every time tRump said something, Himself made news! Shortly after, went to break. Did not see impertinent, truth-telling panelist after commercial. Not certain, but that campaign season may have been the first time MSM began allowing a candidate for president, (tRump of course), to phone in to show and yammer on and on; think Joe Scarborough and Mika fawning all over Himself. While of course, every time Sec. of State and best qualified presidential candidate HRC said one word, Chuck Todd cut her off with The Emails! So Nicole Wallace forthright and rather beautiful. Alex Wagner doing very well, Laurence O’Donnell the best. Usually turn off 11th Hour due to constant posing for camera by current host. Next day, read The Warning, LFAA, First Edition, Lucian Truscott, That’s Another Fine Mess, Joyce Vance and surprised to find important news I hadn’t a clue about. Grateful for Substack writers and readers.
Haberman and others like her are a disgrace: traitors to the U.S. people and to our national security. If they withheld ANY information from the public that could (and did!) adversely affect American lives, they should be investigated and prosecuted.
IF we watch 'interviews' with these 'celebrity'-pseudo-journalists, let alone buy their books, this is our 'vote' that 'this is ok'...because media is about getting viewers/ratings: infotainment. I personally refuse to watch any news channels or programs that interview (promote) journalists who are traitors to our country. (Thanks)
What I think back to Watergate and the news media at that time and compare it to today’s new media, regardless left or right leaning, there is no comparison. During Watergate one had to work to stay informed of the minutia, the details, the players; there was reporting of course, but I really don’t think most people were focused on it until Woodward laid it out for us. Today, the immediacy of the media propels me to check the news several times (who am I kidding, a LOT) during the day. And we have immediate availability of multiple sources to gather information and make decisions about what we accept as true or discard. That said, is there anyone with two brain cells to fire up who believed what trump said about the Coronavirus? He lied about everything, every day, thousands of lies, big and small. Sure it would have been better if he’d been an actual leader and developed a plan for our nation, but his admin never had any plans for anything. So the people I know figured out how to manage living with COVID in spite of the lack of leadership from the White House. If Woodward had shared his conversations about COVID earlier there would still have been no leadership from the White House. The same with Maggie Haverman; the lies were constant, pervasive, and always self serving, so really if she’d reported that he took classified docs, or any docs, he’d have lied and his peeps would believe him, and the rest of us would be horrified, to what end? He’s not in an orange jumpsuit is he? Will he ever be? Who knows. But one thing I am sure about is Hunter Biden will be in one post haste.
Dunno. It has been years since I was a journalist. I worked for Gannett which had an ethical bent. No one could buy me lunch; I would instead buy lunch and the paper would pay me back. There was a ton of stuff that did not get printed and stowed away to use later for deeper context. Haberman has been a conduit for a lot of information. When the paper made me freelance instead of salary, it was grim. I let them buy me lunch a couple times after that. Freedom of the press belongs to those who own one. The Press is THE ONLY business enterprise that is mentioned in the Constitution. The AP/ Style and Libel Manual is something worth checking out. A book about any damn thing is the author's opinion juxtaposed with the facts they may relate. There are always differing opinions on how to interpret facts. The interview as related on Mehdi shows Trump gave a nebulous answer. The context of that answer was not apparent until after Mara Lago or more probably Haberman was not able to grasp the context. There are facts that will come out of this investigation that will make this seem like the proverbial "fart in a whirlwind," I am afraid. Like it is beginning to look like the Secret Service may be implicated in the Coup and some of them are still there. I lurked in at the end of your 'ask me anything" thank you for your candor and your efforts on the "The Warning" it is important. I give a little money (I'm on social security and small pension) to a Democrat candidate Max Stiener running against seditionist Doug LaMalfa here in Northern California of the State of Jefferson as you mention. Max Stiener is a combat veteran and is running as "A Moderate" the DNC tried to strong arm him, and he told them he could not win as a progressive and he was not one. That issue is a problem.
As I understand this topic, from what I know to date there are two instances where the reporting of knowledge to the public or the police would or could have made a difference..The first is the recording of Trump admitting to Bob Woodword that he knew full well how deadly Covid 19 was back at the time he was lying all about it. Now I don’t recall the time line of that disclosure from Trump to Woodward and whether or not his telling it contemporaneously to the public would have made a difference..I think it was rather obvious how little the Trump Administration was doing to inform the public and to provide real time remedies to fight Covid 19..However, Woodward and Costa here chose to remain quiet about the truth of Trump’s real view on the matter, which if made public would have put an important truth the American people should have known about the country’s President..Shaping their view of him going forward..It is this aspect that I believe was something that supersedes the publishing of a book..Yet I don’t see a crime..more a failure of morel and societal obligation..
As for Maggie Habberman, a journalist with the NYT, she is someone who by all accounts should be held to a higher standard of civic responsibility. Her knowledge that Trump had taken classified top secret documents belonging to the government, having national security concerns and held back from reporting it contemporaneously to law enforcement for the express purpose of putting it into her book, well, I see this as exactly as another subscriber has called it. Accessory after the fact. Take a look at this:
18 U.S. Code § 4 - Misprision of felony
Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
Now, did she go to the DOJ, speak with them about what she learned and what next steps should be taken? I think not..
As citizens of the United States I believe we have a basic civic responsibilities. When people come here and become citizens they swear an oath of allegiance to The United States, this is a part of that oath: ... “I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic;”
To me, the revelation that was most damning, and deliberately withheld, was Bob Woodward’s holding onto Trump’s acknowledgment that he knew the severity and contagiousness of COVID back in early 2/20.
First and foremost: I think that it s important to differentiate between a book author and a journalist. "Journalists" are affording a lot of legal protections. I don't think that the same applies to book authors. It's very important to differentiate when an individual is acting as a journalist as opposed to an author.
Next: Maggie Habberman deliberately concealed knowledge about criminal conduct with with national security implications. She did so for pecuniary advantage. Regardless of whether or not she disclosed this information to the New York Times (and regardless of whether the NYT made a decision to publish this) she had a responsibility to disclose this information to the Justice Department. If she failed to do so, she should be treated as an accessory after the fact.
If it's your run of the mill, day-to-day information, with juicy, gossipy tid-bits, and the nation wasn't being crippled by the rise of a wanna be king, then who cares about what you knew and when. Write the book.
But most, if not all, of these tell-all books about Trump are self-gratuitous and arrogant. They're now selling a story that should've been told--shouted in every microphone--to US due to the very serious, and very dangerous/corrupt nature of what the information us now revealing.
Access Haberman revealing she's known all this time that Trump stole classified documents, but said nothing. Jake Sherman sitting on real-time text messages from Jan 6. Bob Wooward keeping silent about when Trump knew Covid was deadly serious & lied about it. Just think how many lives could have been saved if he'd reported this information. 🤬 John Bolton, Mark Esper, Geoffrey Berman, et al SHOULD HAVE told the American people the truth...then, and the media should've called his lies lies, instead of normalizing his pathological, narcissistic behavior.
I wouldn't spend one cent on any of this "look what I knew and said nothing to stave off the rise of fascism" books. They're all 7 years TOO LATE, and we're in the ditch hoping the Nov. 8 tow truck will rescue us.
It matters enormously, in fact, I believe if ethics rather than individual economics had been the norm, Trumps’s power would have already been diminished. Speaking out, telling the truth, blowing the whistle, “Pulling a Vindman” should be standard practice. Further if those that are currently remaining silent, came forward and spoke out this county and our democracy would be far stronger.
The fourth estate -freedom of press. - has dissolved. Maggie has been part of Trump PR machine for generations. Woodward a so called hero of Watergate withheld the information about Trump’s downplaying Covid. We have no 4th estate - it’s all entertainment with no sense of duty. Don’t see it changing with Murdoch - Fox- CNN- Habermann- Woodward.
I’m not a middle-of-the-roader on Maggie Haberman: I don’t trust her. But, to me, making the argument about her isn’t the way to address the larger issue. What about the documentary filmmakers who followed Roger Stone during J6? Or the other doc filmmaker who already testified during a J6 hearing? Their evidence is far more damning, they had it literally in the moment and it’s getting no attention to that end. By anyone. Media has become, or always was, a for-profit game to make a buck. Someone in this thread commented that both speakers in this interview were interrupted and the segment ended before a debate could be had. 100% agree. Recently Michael Fanone commented to the effect that when he’s on CNN he has 67 seconds to explain how to fix the problems with law enforcement. Like the other person in the thread said, how can we have a 24/7 news cycle and yet never enough time to delve into an issue? I believe in a free press, but can corporate media be a free press? They don’t demonstrate that they can be.
Considering the amount of jaw-dropping stupidity and aggression coming from Trump at all times, but especially terrifying during his time in the White House, hearing how he wanted to shoot protestors amongst many, many other horrifying actions he wanted to take, it seems almost treasonous to withhold that kind of information from the American People, in order to line your own pockets.
It’s our lives, and the lives of the rest of the world, this jackass was toying with while he tried to play tinpot dictator. We were only lucky there were people there that refused to go along with his worst instincts. That does not give them the right to hide it for personal gain.
It seems the explanation folks (Maggie Haberman) are using is that folks are more comfortable talking after the fact in a more thoughtful slower pace. These are unusual times - I agree with you that journalists are part of the power grid for our democracy and should get out the information in daily print. These books provide an important look and invaluable resource. But history and bad actors move more quickly. Breaking News is wearing us out, but that’s the strategy! Journalists have a responsibility for our democracy, just like our other three branches of government, but we all have the ultimate one - vote. We all have to do whatever we can to keep and treasure our freedoms.
I understand why journalists would want to hold some information back for a book release. When however the withheld information concerns the safety of our country and the lives of our agents both domestically and abroad, that is an entirely different matter. When it concerns Regan's staff looking to raise taxes, OK. When it concerns someone having an affair, OK. When it concerns stolen top secret documents, that's a crime in my opinion and there should be no delay in publishing it and/or informing the Justice Department of the information. Journalists are also citizens. Should even one foreign operative die because the information was withheld, it's criminal.
Journalism has long been defined as the Fourth Estate for a reason. It provided us with information so that we, as the owners and participants of our government, could make choices regarding our representatives and country at large.
when a journalist or news organization withholds information for money, political gain, or manipulation, it is treason as far as I am concerned.
In fact if one were to look at the Sedition Act of 1798 it states in part, "To write, print, utter or publish, or cause it to be done, or assist in it, any false, scandalous, and malicious writing against the government of the United States, or either House of Congress, or the President, with intent to defame, or bring either into contempt or disrepute, or to excite against either the hatred of the people of the United States, or to stir up sedition, or to excite unlawful combinations against the government, or to resist it, or to aid or encourage hostile designs of foreign nations."
I am sure that the current trial against Oath Keepers, et al, is based in part upon this law. However, if we analyze information withheld or manipulated by journalists or news organizations, I believe that we would discover that multiple peoples and organizations could be charged with treason/sedition under this same law.
I listened to Maggie’s interview with Kara Swisher and I learned a lot from that conversation. Sounds like it was her editors at The NY Times who made decisions about what got published.
You should check it out and hear her perspective before continuing to judge and rant.
Steve your point is well taken.Some of this information from these books was known.(at least for political junkies like me)But some wasn't.What really bothers me more was those with power inside the white house(the so called adults in the room) kept silent and therefore became enablers.I am talking about Bolten,Kelly,Mattis,McMaster,Pence,Barr and many others.Their silence has put our democracy in jeopardy. Dave Y
They, journalists, have a responsibility to report. The people of this country have a right to know, in real time. This can’t be that complicated.
I find there to be an overwhelming amount of "journalists" lacking Intergrity & Honor!
Their "job" is to investigate & REPORT the News to the Public! NOT, Investigate & SAVE the News for a Book @the Detriment of the Public!
In my 65yrs, I do not believe or remember SO Many BOOKS being written, by "journalists" re:Current Events in "realtime"!
Seems EVERYONE is more interested in $$$$ than they are in the Safety & Security of our Sovreign Nation & it's Citizens!
A Disgraceful state of affairs...
@NYMag profiles @maggieNYT in a piece entitled, “Maggie Haberman on How She Covers Trump Without Losing Her Mind.” Haberman not only withheld facts from @nytimes readers for personal profit, she has now made HERSELF the story via book tour appearances and articles like the one mentioned above. With all the selfless journalists doing their part to preserve our democracy, it’s a travesty that Haberman is the one receiving all the attention. Disgraceful.
Watching and listening above makes me angry as a viewer. Mehdi Hasan should have let you finish your thought, because you were a guest and he should have overridden the $$$ constraint that cuts off so many interviews we are listening to. It was an interview to expand the media's own self-analysis and to be honest about it. The media is not above all. And it is viewers and consumers of it that give it its life and purpose.
Who read the book in question? I did not and will not. Why? Because I depend on the news to make me a better citizen, a more informed one. I do not need it to speak up, but it gives me a very clear picture of who is running the country and why. And I choose who to read and listen to. The book in question, Confidence Man, made its promotion rounds on MSNBC. I saw two interviews. I will speak of one only, Alex Wagner's conversation with the author informed by questions and answers. (The other one, which I keep to myself, has me still reeling with anger because of the tacit and implicit and "liberal" annotation about racism. There is too much racism going on in ordinary talk, the way things are said with intellectual acceptability that, honestly, bears heavily upon guests present who are directly affected by the concealed racism and are disgusted, as I am, for the total lack of emotional import.) Alex Wagner asked tight questions and the answers were, like, yeah, "I started writing the book" after the Second Impeachment, and writing a book takes more time and sources do not want to be on the record in real time, etc. etc. The book would have had a more appropriate title if labeled An Autocrat Speaks. All the back and forth about what he says and does not say says a lot about why documents and compartmented ones are amassed together with other stuff. It is not a question of mess, but it is a matter of Rush to retrieve as much after a failed attempt to overthrow an election and the truncating of a coup to hold on to power. It is a matter of when the documents belonging to the government were "possessed" by him. It speaks of how such documents are Espionage prone. But no, the subject of the book amassed stuff together, classified with items like a raincoat, shoes and an umbrella (...my memory now fails me and will give way to sarcasm. I wonder if the FBI found the monocle and the Inverness cape, along with the cashmere scarf. I mean, it is all so ridiculous.) Maggie Haberman speaks of Donald Trump as if she were describing a porcelain tureen with crackled glaze, leaving out the part about how dangerous it would be to ingest soup laden with lead. Her assessment of him is so detached it made my skin crawl. And I would urge serious commentators to stop referring to him as a privileged and entitled man as she does. He is a con man and a criminal. An obstructionist. An instigator of an Insurrection responsible for the deaths there occurred. He is an Election Denier, a man who does not honor the Peaceful Transfer of Power. By denying that President Joe Biden won the election. By taking Government-Owned Documents to who knows how many properties and seen by who knows how many "interests" against the security of our nation. For money. I worry very much about this, especially given the news about Saudi Arabia's backstabbing America's decisions on energy and who and why it supports countries beyond its borders. I worry about the Kushner connection. Confidence Man? What does it mean?
I worked for a newspaper for 20 years, including eight years as wire editor. I think these writers owe it to the public to publish what they know when they know it.
I find withholding critical information for personal gain reprehensible. We Americans use to look to the press as watchdogs over our politics and government wrongdoings. NO LONGER.
These journalist and writers have become just as much as the problem and no longer part of the solution. I cancelled my subscription to the Times because of Habberman. I cannot stomach that zombie woman in writing or her appearances on news shows hawking her traitorous books.
Generally, it seems wrong to withhold information, but I’d have to know all the facts. For example, who participated in the decision to withhold? Is it possible that the government (DOJ or Intelligence) asked the journalist to stay quiet because of an ongoing, but not yet public, investigation? If it is a decision made solely by the journalist, that is troubling. I still feel I don’t know all the facts regarding Maggie Haberman’s withholding. I’m not attempting to defend her; I’m just saying I don’t have all the facts at hand.
It's a contradiction to say information the reporter withheld for their book wasn't valuable (or info commonly known) then publish their book claiming its now *new* titillating insights thatakes the book a "must have." Doesn't add up.
I believe the general public understands there's a "tightrope" to walk but (in my opinion) too many big-name reporters are more interested in collecting juicy tidbits for their book. Trump reads these guys, has figured out who he can play. I have no doubt Trump says things in their presence just to "test the water." The ones he truly hates are the ones he can't manipulate.
Whether it was held back for a book, or the book is just the cover story, it's completely inappropriate for reporters/editors to sit on important evidence or information about possible Presidential criminal activity. Same goes for news about any important public official. Sitting on information impedes law enforcement and public debate.
Unfortunately, too many news outlets have ruined their brands by performing like boutique corporate PR departments.
I am encouraged by Steve's promoting of my idea to support five Democratic candidates as we head down the stretch..There is a key piece of that effort that I would like to emphasize, $5 to each candidate per week for the last five weeks, makes the $25 to each of the five candidates for the last five weeks of the race..actually $125 in total by each of us. It was my thinking that if we are a 1000 strong and each gave $25 to each Dem, that would represent $25,000 for their campaigns! I have already sent $25 to my five Dem candidates representing the $5 to each per week for the last five weeks..I know we all must do what we are able to afford..so anything that you can is as vital as Steve suggests..He is taking on his part as I had hoped by putting his essays on each of those Republican candidates out for free as publicly as possible to make sure the curtain is pulled back on these dangerous unfit people..Thank you Steve..
Steve, like In told you in the beginning of "The Warning" and before, via Twitter I am with you, and I am grateful you are with us!
It's not just the journalists, it was his staff that knew stuff was going on. Given The Orange Virus's knee jerk reaction to suing, if the journalists had published their books while he was in office then Rump would have sued and WE, the American People would have paid for it. This stuff was being reported real time and everyone knew that Rump downplayed Covid because he had no f-ing clue how to handle it and he couldn't appear weak. Nothing that has been reported thus far has shocked me given the four years of leading by Twitter and the stupid things he said in press conferences. It's all about appearing in charge and smart....He is NONE of those things
I think for anyone who holds the public trust it is incumbent upon them to disclose this kind of information in that very moment. This includes, but is not limited too journalists. How many tell-all books have come from Trumps administration?
Journalists holding back news for their private enrichment is a straight up conflict of interest and sholud be banned by every news publication
It depends on the validity and importance of the information. Certainly, information that could affect the lives of millions of people should reported as a journalist rather than in later years reported as an author.
Well, let’s see. Show me another western democracy that has anything akin to FOX TV .
As far as I know: none. Even back when Berlusconi owned a gazillion TV channels and papers, he made it clear that those were his mouth pieces.
FOX however reins supreme and to the majority of its viewers the hands that pull the marionettes’ strings (tucker, ingraham etc) remain in the dark.
I had to do some digging and reading until I understood, why CNN suddenly had changed onscreen and some high profile hosts left. I know plenty of CNN viewers who to this day do not know what has happened there. I stopped watching them a long time ago.
The most blatant change in journalistic ethics is probably evident in Bob Woodward. Back, when he and Carl Bernstein wrote about watergate and effectively brought down a president, neither one of them could have imagined to withhold information in order to benefit later from book royalties. As far as I know, nevertheless, both profited mightily from their monumental work, both professionally and financially- as they should have. They did amazing work, clean, honest and with only one purpose: bring the truth to light.
Fast forward to Woodward’s last book about trump, in which he reveals that at the beginning of the pandemic trump knew perfectly well, that it was a dangerous and highly lethal disease, while on TV he made light of it, ridiculing everyone who didn’t, and tried everything to impede the public health experts to tell the truth.
Did Woodward have an obligation to tell the public immediately, as soon as he learned about this heinous behavior? Yes. And Woodward himself made clear that trump told him this at the very beginning of 2020.
Would it have made a difference?
Well, for Woodward it may have annihilated his access to trump and the writing of his book.
As for the rest of us; I want to think that it would have caused a huge scandal to hear trump on tape, in real time, say that he knew COVID was bad news, while the rest of us was scrambling in panic, trying to figure out what was happening.
Those of us who are medical professionals, critics thinkers who never believed a word trump or his soldiers told the public, presumed right from the beginning of the pandemic, that the virus was going to be bad news. But the millions who worship at the feet of the Orange did not. How many lives does Woodward have on his conscience?
Somewhere along the way of history, journalistic work goals and ethics took a sharp turn for the very worst: money and profits. Its the Golden Calf they now worship and the price we all pay for it is too steep.
Re: the clip:
It’s a 24-hour news cycle, but they’re always ‘out of time’ when things get interesting. Building an argument with evidence to come to a point is not what’s required on these ‘shows’. Pithy comments preceded by “That’s a good question, Medhi”to stroke the host and to keep the pace snappy are all that’s wanted. Rudely interrupting a guest whose so obviously building to a conclusion, illustrates that the host is far more focussed on the voice of the Producer in his earbud than the voice of the guest on camera.
There’s often no evidence that the hosts are even listening. They ignore significant, direction-changing comments to jump to the next guest without even acknowledging unexpected ideas which should actually change the direction of the conversation.
Ari Melber is one exception. At times he grunts a little ‘harumph’ that indicates he’s paying attention.
Nicole is the only host I’ve seen who allows you to take the time you need to say what you want without jumping in to keep it moving.
It’s still a ‘vast wasteland’.
As for ‘journalists’…when they get huge salaries and hob-nob with the very people they are supposed to cover without favor, it becomes problematic. It wasn’t always thus. Why does it cost so much to get a journalism degree from Columbia? Why is it even necessary to do that? How will it be paid off? When book deals are so lucrative and the possibility of celebrity is so alluring, what becomes of the judgement and ethics of these former ‘watchdogs’? Why not hold out for the bigger reward?
It’s always worthwhile to take another look at “Broadcast News”, the prophetic 1987 movie written by James L. Brooks, to see where we came from, how we started to compromi$e and how the Albert Brooks character, Aaron Altman, predicts the coming of the Devil, who will arrive in the attractive package of a media personality, who will chip away at our values, bit by bit, until we have nothing left!
If there are legal issues with known law-breaking or issues that indicate a failure of judgement, or actions that would undermine an election process or create an international information breach undermining allies ot aiding the enemy, then there is a requirement for this to be brought forward. Retaining classified documents is an egregious breach, and requires notification. Throwing a plate at the wall is not.
The simple answer is no, under zero circumstances, (w/ the sole exception being for national security purposes). I question the book writing relationship of the journalist with the company - their employer.. is this book writing part of their contract? Does their company earn royalties off of their book too? Or is it a completely separate endeavour and they can do what they want? The journalist then appears on TV.. and they interview each other promoting their books! I saw this a lot on CNN.. and thought it was shocking. The professional red lines are too blurred & there should be more transparency on the issue. This obviously taints the credibility and motivations of the journalist and at a time when there are already significant 'trust issues'.
The list is too long to even contemplate, I get it: literary agents convince them that speaking out early will cost $$$
However, as bad as they are at least they came out even if they were late.
Of the 100’s of sycophantic pieces of dog shit the worst are senators, cabinet members,media bosses and whores like hannity and Carlson led by the likes of Rush, who opened the floodgates of hate anger and derision soon after the death of “fairness doctrine” in media.
If there is Karma it is running late 😞
Trump was not a US President he was a US anti-president. I can not keep up with all the books that have been published in damnation of him but to what avail? Thus I am not sure the relavance of the timing of these books.
I think it is worthwhile to consider that Haberman and Woodward for that matter gained access by stroking Trump’s ego, resulting in information we otherwise wouldn’t have. I don’t Think journalists should be held to the same level of duty to report that a paid official such as John Bolton. This goes double when the book follows closely to a refusal to testify in a hearing.
With few exceptions, those in the media are complicit in the downfall of America, the demise of democracy, and the rise of devastating political partisanship. Ethical journalism died a slow death and succumbed in the 1980s with the rise of the cable networks and social media.
Journalists like Haberman come at this from a lineage. To understand that lineage, the information in this wiki is helpful:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maggie_Haberman#:~:text=At%20that%20firm%2C%20a%20%22publicity,New%20Yorkers%20including%20Donald%20Trump.
I agree with you Steve. If the agreement for the interview(s) is that it is for a book to be published later, sources will say or not say what they will, knowing it's not coming out immediately. If there is so such agreement, withholding news relevant to a public health crisis, national security, etc., is immoral. A story about the fact that Donald Trump is racist cannot be equated in terms of urgency with a story about him secretly holding on to highly classified documents or lying to the public about what he knew about Covid-19. It would be laughable if it we not so serious to say that there is no evidence Haberman withheld what should have been breaking news for her book. It is self-evident that she did. The question is, what do we do about it? Money talks louder than morality these days.
It's simple. If a journalist is paid by a news outlet to cover a beat, they have an obligation to the public and their employer to report what they have in real time. They can take a sabatical if they want to go off and write a book. It's one or the other and never both simultaneously. Short term embargoes are one thing, or for signficant national security issues, but holding important information for a book to be published way down the road is unacceptable for a journalist and the media outlet they work for.
Yes it matters. The ethical thing would be that a journalist would report essential need to know news to the American people who are responsible for voting. But we all know that for the most part ethics are in the toilet these days. That’s why what you do here is so vitally important Steve. We need to know who we can trust. So far you have not only not been disappointing but have been a lighthouse on the foggy sea of present day chaos, and a brilliant one at that. Please keep shining and thank you a million times.
Unfortunately, information from all sources must be scrutinized due to 24 hour cycles and everyone trying to get a “ones up” on every matter impacting our lives. Reading books with information journalist had access to BEFORE the situation occurred, speaks volumes of who that individual is and how I trust them moving forward.
I do wonder if any of the authors contacted DOJ, FBI, CDC, etc. If so, we’re they “ keeping quiet” as ordered? It’s obvious to me that many, many in the GOP are equally, if not more, responsible for withholding info & unethical behavior. They withheld info about the many DJT profoundly disturbing actions (or lack of) for political gain& financial gains… THAT is what resulted in untold # of COVID related deaths, illnesses,. attempted coup, & a GOP Court to mention a few things.Knowing DJT is unhinged had to have been known by all who knew him well before books were written. Those greedy politicians & DJTs circle could have intervened long before journalists or authors were writing about it. Certainly, that group profited mightily politically, etc Much bigger definition of withholding info, $$ & political gain. They knew & condoned it. If I were a journalist, I’d be writing that awful story also.
I agree with:
Molly Douglas
3 hr ago
It matters enormously, in fact, I believe if ethics rather than individual economics had been the norm, Trumps’s power would have already been diminished. Speaking out, telling the truth, blowing the whistle, “Pulling a Vindman” should be standard practice. Further if those that are currently remaining silent, came forward and spoke out this county and our democracy would be far stronger.
The MSNBC clip sends a message to me that media does not desire a "deep dive" into the issue at hand. I have lost count of the many discussions that are getting to the heart of hot issues that run out of time, as did this one. That's one point I take away from this.
I also will never forget the comments made by Anthony Hopkins as Bill Parrish in "Meet Joe Black" in which he states that delivering news to people is a sacred calling, to paraphrase it.
I agree with Steve regarding the commercialization of journalistic efforts. I have chosen to use the Media Bias chart as my north star for centrist reporting to glean the most bona fide news reporting in the classical sense.
I worry that there are truly far-out topics that really erudite journalists are just loathe to discuss with a public that you may feel has truly been dumbed down. There is obviously something even more sinister that one metaphorically sees peeping around the corner that I wish you guys could get craftier about leaking, or something. Sometimes, paranoia can be a gift from heaven, if you can temper yourself to use it. I have no other way to say what I just said. 🙄🙄🍀🎸 I finally have paid to subscribe to your substack, Steve, and I hope I get better at expressing myself. You’ve been such an inspiration and help the last 2 years.
I agree with what Steve said. I have lost trust on many sources and I certainly don't read newspapers. Their owners are the ones who sell the dribble. I have learned to watch for trends in most everything. Steve I admire the amount of info you juggle.
Within 48 hrs. of race being called for tRump, MSNBC host R Maddow exclaimed, “How could this happen!!” One brave female panelist spontaneously responded that it happened because everywhere Himself went, we all followed with camera/microphone. Maddow appeared livid, shot back at panelist saying “We followed Himself because every time tRump said something, Himself made news! Shortly after, went to break. Did not see impertinent, truth-telling panelist after commercial. Not certain, but that campaign season may have been the first time MSM began allowing a candidate for president, (tRump of course), to phone in to show and yammer on and on; think Joe Scarborough and Mika fawning all over Himself. While of course, every time Sec. of State and best qualified presidential candidate HRC said one word, Chuck Todd cut her off with The Emails! So Nicole Wallace forthright and rather beautiful. Alex Wagner doing very well, Laurence O’Donnell the best. Usually turn off 11th Hour due to constant posing for camera by current host. Next day, read The Warning, LFAA, First Edition, Lucian Truscott, That’s Another Fine Mess, Joyce Vance and surprised to find important news I hadn’t a clue about. Grateful for Substack writers and readers.
Haberman and others like her are a disgrace: traitors to the U.S. people and to our national security. If they withheld ANY information from the public that could (and did!) adversely affect American lives, they should be investigated and prosecuted.
IF we watch 'interviews' with these 'celebrity'-pseudo-journalists, let alone buy their books, this is our 'vote' that 'this is ok'...because media is about getting viewers/ratings: infotainment. I personally refuse to watch any news channels or programs that interview (promote) journalists who are traitors to our country. (Thanks)
What I think back to Watergate and the news media at that time and compare it to today’s new media, regardless left or right leaning, there is no comparison. During Watergate one had to work to stay informed of the minutia, the details, the players; there was reporting of course, but I really don’t think most people were focused on it until Woodward laid it out for us. Today, the immediacy of the media propels me to check the news several times (who am I kidding, a LOT) during the day. And we have immediate availability of multiple sources to gather information and make decisions about what we accept as true or discard. That said, is there anyone with two brain cells to fire up who believed what trump said about the Coronavirus? He lied about everything, every day, thousands of lies, big and small. Sure it would have been better if he’d been an actual leader and developed a plan for our nation, but his admin never had any plans for anything. So the people I know figured out how to manage living with COVID in spite of the lack of leadership from the White House. If Woodward had shared his conversations about COVID earlier there would still have been no leadership from the White House. The same with Maggie Haverman; the lies were constant, pervasive, and always self serving, so really if she’d reported that he took classified docs, or any docs, he’d have lied and his peeps would believe him, and the rest of us would be horrified, to what end? He’s not in an orange jumpsuit is he? Will he ever be? Who knows. But one thing I am sure about is Hunter Biden will be in one post haste.
Dunno. It has been years since I was a journalist. I worked for Gannett which had an ethical bent. No one could buy me lunch; I would instead buy lunch and the paper would pay me back. There was a ton of stuff that did not get printed and stowed away to use later for deeper context. Haberman has been a conduit for a lot of information. When the paper made me freelance instead of salary, it was grim. I let them buy me lunch a couple times after that. Freedom of the press belongs to those who own one. The Press is THE ONLY business enterprise that is mentioned in the Constitution. The AP/ Style and Libel Manual is something worth checking out. A book about any damn thing is the author's opinion juxtaposed with the facts they may relate. There are always differing opinions on how to interpret facts. The interview as related on Mehdi shows Trump gave a nebulous answer. The context of that answer was not apparent until after Mara Lago or more probably Haberman was not able to grasp the context. There are facts that will come out of this investigation that will make this seem like the proverbial "fart in a whirlwind," I am afraid. Like it is beginning to look like the Secret Service may be implicated in the Coup and some of them are still there. I lurked in at the end of your 'ask me anything" thank you for your candor and your efforts on the "The Warning" it is important. I give a little money (I'm on social security and small pension) to a Democrat candidate Max Stiener running against seditionist Doug LaMalfa here in Northern California of the State of Jefferson as you mention. Max Stiener is a combat veteran and is running as "A Moderate" the DNC tried to strong arm him, and he told them he could not win as a progressive and he was not one. That issue is a problem.
It's fine to hold People Magazine-type info.
It is NOT fine to withhold information that affects the health, safety etc. of the people.
Haberman is not a journalist. She's a young Hedda Hopper sans the hats.
As I understand this topic, from what I know to date there are two instances where the reporting of knowledge to the public or the police would or could have made a difference..The first is the recording of Trump admitting to Bob Woodword that he knew full well how deadly Covid 19 was back at the time he was lying all about it. Now I don’t recall the time line of that disclosure from Trump to Woodward and whether or not his telling it contemporaneously to the public would have made a difference..I think it was rather obvious how little the Trump Administration was doing to inform the public and to provide real time remedies to fight Covid 19..However, Woodward and Costa here chose to remain quiet about the truth of Trump’s real view on the matter, which if made public would have put an important truth the American people should have known about the country’s President..Shaping their view of him going forward..It is this aspect that I believe was something that supersedes the publishing of a book..Yet I don’t see a crime..more a failure of morel and societal obligation..
As for Maggie Habberman, a journalist with the NYT, she is someone who by all accounts should be held to a higher standard of civic responsibility. Her knowledge that Trump had taken classified top secret documents belonging to the government, having national security concerns and held back from reporting it contemporaneously to law enforcement for the express purpose of putting it into her book, well, I see this as exactly as another subscriber has called it. Accessory after the fact. Take a look at this:
18 U.S. Code § 4 - Misprision of felony
Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
Now, did she go to the DOJ, speak with them about what she learned and what next steps should be taken? I think not..
As citizens of the United States I believe we have a basic civic responsibilities. When people come here and become citizens they swear an oath of allegiance to The United States, this is a part of that oath: ... “I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic;”
Where was Maggie Habberman?