FACEBOOK REMOVES PAGE OF ECUADOR’S FORMER PRESIDENT ON SAME DAY AS ASSANGE’S ARREST

Facebook Removes Page Of Ecuador's Former President On Same Day As Assange's Arrest

Prior to the removal of the page, Correa lambasted his successor in a series of posts

Zero Hedge – APRIL 12, 2019

Facebook has unpublished the page of Ecuador’s former president, Rafael Correa, the social media giant confirmed on Thursday, claiming that the popular leftist leader violated the company’s security policies.

In a statement republished by Ecuadorean newspaper El Comercio, a company spokesperson said:

“Protecting the privacy and security of people is central to Facebook [and] we have clear policies that do not allow the disclosure of personal information such as phone numbers, addresses, bank account data, cards, or any record or data that could compromise the integrity physical or financial of the people in our community.”

The move comes on the same day that Ecuador’s government allowed British security personnel to enter their embassy in London to arrest journalist and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who has been sought by U.S. officials for years due to his role in releasing scandalous information implicating Washington in a range of crimes, including war crimes.

𝓤𝓼𝓾𝓪𝓻𝓲𝓸𝓼 𝓓𝓲𝓰𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓮𝓼@usuariosdigital

Página en Facebook del exPresidente @MashiRafael no puede ser accesada, se desconocen motivos – link https://www.facebook.com/MashiRafael 

23 people are talking about this

Assange, 47, had been living at the Embassy of Ecuador in London since 2012, when then-President Correa granted political asylum to the Australian amid the British government’s attempts to detain him. At the time, Correa called Eduador’s actions an act of sovereign “duty.”

Ecuador’s current leader, Lenin Moreno, was openly opposed to Assange, whom he referred to on various occasions as a “miserable hacker,” an “irritant,” and a “stone in the shoe” of his government. Moreno’s distancing from the asylee came following a 2017 meeting with Trump campaign confidant and political “fixer” Paul Manafort, where the two discussed Ecuador’s handover of Assange to U.K. and U.S. authorities.

In March, WikiLeaks published a tranche of documents dubbed the INA Papers linking President Lenin Moreno to the INA Investment Corporation, an offshore shell company used by Moreno to procure furniture, property, and various luxury items.

The account number for the offshore account allegedly used by the president to launder money was shared across Ecuadorean social networks by netizens of all political stripes, including by Correa – who had about 1.5 million followers and whose Facebook page enjoyed more interactions and attention than that of President Moreno himself.

The account number was also shared alongside personal photos of President Moreno enjoying lavish breakfasts and dinners of lobster—imagery considered especially damning for the people of Ecuador given Moreno’s previous boasting of an austere poverty diet consisting of eggs and white rice.

It also came amid attempts by the neoliberal Ecuadorean government to curry favor with financiers in Europe and the United States amid the continuing debt crisis. In March, the IMF finally bailed out Moreno’s government to the tune of $4.2 billion.

Prior to the removal of the page, Correa lambasted his successor in a series of posts that still remain on Twitter at the time of this writing.

Rafael Correa

@MashiRafael

Christine:
I do not know what to tell you. I only ask forgiveness from me and my people. A traitor and corrupt like Moreno does not represent us. I promise not to rest until I see him in jail, where he deserves to be.

Mrs. Christine Assange@AssangeMrs

Shame on you @Lenin #Moreno!

May the Ecuadorean people seek vengeance upon you, you dirty, deceitful, rotten traitor!

May the face of my suffering son haunt your sleepless nights..

And may your soul writhe forever in torturous Purgatory as you have tortured my beloved son! https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1116283158943666176 

1,965 people are talking about this

Since 2015, Correa—who lives with his family in Brussels, Belgium—had used the social platform to great effect, using strongly-worded posts, video interviews, and live-streams as a platform amid the Ecuadorean media’s de facto blackout of the former leader, who remains reviled by the center-right former opposition and sections of the country’s left.

Former President Correa minced no words in his assessment of Moreno, denouncing him in an English-language tweet as “the greatest traitor in Ecuadorian and Latin American history … Moreno is a corrupt man, but what he has done is a crime that humanity will never forget.”

Rafael Correa

@MashiRafael

The greatest traitor in Ecuadorian and Latin American history, Lenin Moreno, allowed the British police to enter our embassy in London to arrest Assange.
Moreno is a corrupt man, but what he has done is a crime that humanity will never forget.

Barnaby Nerberka@barnabynerberka

BREAK: Full @Ruptly video of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s arrest by British police this morning

Embedded video

9,806 people are talking about this

In a separate tweet responding to Moreno’s announcement of the handover, Correa further tore into what he called “one of the most atrocious acts [and the] fruit of servility, villainy and revenge.”

“From now on worldwide, the scoundrel and betrayal can be summarized in two words: Lenin Moreno,” the popular former president added.

The removal of Correa’s page for violating Facebook’s “community standards” is an unprecedented move, and the former statesman is the most high-profile public political figure to ever be removed from the social platform–placing the economist and icon of Latin American “socialism of the 21st century” in the same unlikely category as right-wing conspiracy theorist and broadcaster Alex Jones.


Matt Bracken gives his take on the social media unpersoning epidemic sweeping across the internet.

 

GABBARD: ASSANGE ARREST IS MEANT TO ‘SEND A MESSAGE TO ALL AMERICANS’ TO ‘TOE THE LINE’ OR ‘PAY THE PRICE’

Gabbard: Assange Arrest Is Meant to 'Send A Message to All Americans' to 'Toe The Line' or 'Pay The Price'

“The cost in lives and money will be beyond our imagination.”

Chris Menahan | Information Liberation – APRIL 12, 2019

Democrat 2020 presidential candidate Rep Tulsi Gabbard on Thursday forcefully condemned the arrest of Wikileaks publisher Julian Assange saying it was “meant to send a message” to Americans to “be quiet, behave [and] toe the line” or “you will pay the price.”

“The arrest of #JulianAssange is meant to send a message to all Americans and journalists: be quiet, behave, toe the line. Or you will pay the price,” Gabbard said on Twitter.

Screen Shot 2019-04-12 at 2.25.31 PM

“The purpose of arresting #JulianAssange is to send a message to the people, especially journalists, to be quiet and don’t get out of line. If we, the people, allow the government to control us through fear, we are no longer free, we are no longer America,” Gabbard said in a follow-up tweet, sharing video of her appearance on CNN Thursday afternoon.

On Tuesday, Gabbard released a video saying, “Netenyahu and Saudi Arabia want to drag the United States into war against Iran and Trump is submitting to their wishes.”

“The cost in lives and money will be beyond our imagination.”

Tulsi Gabbard successfully qualified for the Democratic debates on Wednesday after getting over 65,000 individual donors for her campaign.

 

YouTube Hides PragerU Video of Candace Owens’ Testimony in ‘Restricted Mode’

Candace Owens

By Alana Mastrangelo

PragerU announced on Wednesday that YouTube has placed another of its videos in “restricted mode,” meaning that not everyone who visits the video-sharing website will be able to watch it. The restricted video is of Candace Owens’ powerful testimony before the House Judiciary Committee hearing on Tuesday.

YouTube has placed yet another PragerU video in “restricted mode,” according to the organization.

This time, the restricted video is of Candace Owens’ testimony before the House Judiciary Committee hearing on Tuesday, which had created several viral moments, one of which has also recently become the most watched C-SPAN video of a House hearing on Twitter.

When YouTube puts a video in “restricted mode,” it means that the video is censored from all users that have enabled the website’s restricted mode feature, which typically include libraries, schools, public institutions, or in any setting where viewers may belong to a younger demographic.

The restricted mode feature is used in order to block videos that have been deemed inappropriate, such as pornography or violence.

“RESTRICTED: @Youtube has placed our video of @RealCandaceO’s testimony before the House Judiciary Committee in restricted mode,” tweeted PragerU on Wednesday, “Why is Youtube trying to prevent people from hearing Candace’s words?”

“@YouTube clearly has a political bias against conservatives,” continued PragerU in a second tweet, “It just placed our video of @RealCandaceO in restricted mode.”

This is not the first of PragerU’s videos to have ended up on YouTube’s restriction list. According to the organization’s founder, Dennis Prager, 80 of their 400 videos are on a restricted list, meaning that the videos are “lumped with pornography and violence, so that kids in libraries and schools can’t see them,” said Prager.

“If you are not on the left, you are to be shut down,” said Prager to Breitbart News in an interview on SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Daily last February, “We have never, ever had anything like this in American history.”

“We are in a dark age because of the left’s control of Silicon Valley, academia, and media,” added Prager, “It’s a dark age that we are living in right now, and it is entirely left-wing induced.”

VIDEO: TRUMP SUPPORTERS AFRAID TO WEAR MAGA HATS

Video: Trump Supporters Afraid to Wear MAGA Hats

These interviews prove many on the left are engaged in domestic terrorism as conservatives are intimidated by political foes

Kaitlin Bennett | Infowars.com – APRIL 10, 2019

Kaitlin Bennett talks with Trump supporters who proudly flaunt their MAGA hats outside of a rally in Grand Rapids, Michigan but admit they’re afraid to wear them in public.

In today’s hostile political environment, the majority of Trump supporters interviewed admitted they feel uneasy when wearing Trump gear due to the high possibility of being attacked or accosted by liberals suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS).

By definition, this behavior is a form of terrorism.

YouTube Streamer Destiny Calls For Violence Against Conservatives, Wants Them ‘Excised’

Destiny Calls for Violence Against Conservatives

The YouTube and Twitch star added that he wants conservatives “excised” from the United States.

By Tom Pappert

The popular Twitch and YouTube streamer Destiny, real name Steven Donnell, recently called for “real violence” against conservatives while streaming with a guest.

Donnell, who has grown a reputation for using crass language to describe his views, told his guest that he “hates” conservatives, and has moved on to the “real violence level” when it comes to how to deal with them.

“You really do hate conservatives, don’t you?” Asked his guest during the Twitch live stream, to which Donnell responded in the affirmative.

“Very much so,” he said. “I’ve moved full on to the political violence level, or the real violence level, when it comes to conservative people.”

This striking call for violence is far less vague than the alleged threat used by Big Tech platforms to ban Alex Jones, who was banned from Twitter after he simply encouraged his viewers to sleep “with their battle rifles ready” to prepare for defense.

Donnell, however, continued by saying he believes conservatives should be physically removed from the United States.

“Yeah, I think they need to be excised from my f*cking country. I think they are demonstrably f*cking evil people by any moral system that most people would use,” said Donnell, adding, “I just hate them because they tend to destroy the outcomes related to this country, which is what I’m concerned about, yeah, absolutely.”

This type of behavior would seem to directly contradict Twitch’s community guidelines, which state that “Hateful conduct is any content or activity that promotes, encourages, or facilitates discrimination, denigration, objectification, harassment, or violence based on race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, disability, medical condition, physical characteristics, or veteran status, and is prohibited.”

Big League Politics and others have attempted to contact Twitch to understand why Destiny is allowed to advocate violence on its platform. We have not received a response.

Donnell grew an audience streaming popular video games including Call of Duty, League of Legends, and Starcraft. He was previously banned from Twitch for using homophobic slurs and derogatory remarks about the disabled, including use of the words “faggot” and “retard.” He was eventually allowed to rejoin the platform.

He was also banned from Twitter after threatening to bomb a Cox Communications Internet node, though he maintained it was a joke.

College President Argues Against Free Speech on Campus

Screen Shot 2019-04-08 at 11.26.26 AM

By Alana Mastrangelo

Union College President David R. Harris recently penned an argument against free speech on college campuses, claiming that institutions of higher learning have a responsibility to manage speech by providing “constructive engagement,” so that students can have an optimal learning experience.

Union College president David R. Harris penned an op-ed, entitled, “A Campus Is Not the Place for Free Speech,” in which he argues that it is the role of colleges and universities to filter the conversations on campuses to provide “constructive engagement.”

“I oppose free speech on college campuses,” states Harris in his op-ed, “I think college campuses should be safe havens from voices on the left and right that violate what I have learned and what I believe.”

The college president had written his op-ed in response to President Donald Trump’s recent executive order requiring colleges and universities to uphold the First Amendment on campus in order to continue receiving federal research funding.

“Many of the president’s supporters have applauded his free speech decision,” states Harris, “because they argue that higher education institutions trumpet liberal perspectives and silence conservative voices.” Harris adds that members of academia believe “the president and his supporters do not understand what actually happens on college campuses.”free-speech-640x480

Harris also claims  in his op-ed that institutions of higher learning would only be managing speech on campus for students’ own good, suggesting that when left unchecked, free speech would not facilitate a productive learning experience, arguing that individuals will end up using speech irresponsibly when utilizing it in its “purest form”

“Free speech, in its purest form, is an exercise in what is achieved when a person yells a view and then leaves, after which someone with an opposing perspective does the same” states the college president, “The speakers do not grow as a result of the experience, and the audience has no opportunity to probe the opposing points of view.”

Harris also insists that he is a supporter of free speech, but just not when it comes to college campuses. On campuses, Harris says, “we must strive for something more than free speech.”

“It is not enough for individuals to speak freely,” continues Harris, adding that college students are already having more constructive and diverse interactions than “most adults,” claiming, “college campuses and social networks tend to be more diverse than ‘real world’ neighborhoods and social clubs.”

Screen Shot 2019-04-08 at 11.28.14 AM

One could argue, however, that younger generations today seem to be less tolerant of everything from intellectually diverse conversations, to even lighthearted comedy skits.

Last week, for example, students at Texas State University demanded censorship of the school’s Turning Point USA student group, a conservative club on campus that some students say need to be banned in the name of “free speech.” The school’s student government plans to vote on a resolution regarding the matter on Monday.

Moreover, students at Columbia University kicked Saturday Night Live comedian Nimesh Patel out of their own event where they had invited him to perform last December, claiming that his jokes were “offensive.”

REDDIT PAGE BANS WHITE PEOPLE FROM POSTING

Reddit Page Bans White People From Posting

Because segregation is progressive!

 | Infowars.com – APRIL 8, 2019

A Reddit page dedicated to black issues has declared that white people are no longer allowed to post there anymore.

The forum, r/BlackPeopleTwitter, posted an “important announcement,” which stated, “Due to the overwhelming number of white people and white opinions present on BTP, we are now restricting access to this sub for black folks only.”

Non-black people then responded to the post by humiliating themselves, embracing their white guilt, and begging to be allowed to post again.

“Super white dude here. I’d like to apply for the token white guy position,” responded one white user. “I won’t post or comment unless you all want to say something like “this sub isn’t racist we have a white guy.”

Screen Shot 2019-04-08 at 11.07.18 AM

Also, sorry for institutional racism and bland chicken,” he added.

“Can an asian ally get in?” asked another user, adding, “At the very least I’m not problematic.”

Remember folks, your white privilege entitles you to be blocked from entire Internet forums because segregation is progressive now!

(NO, IT’S NOT AN APRIL FOOL’S JOKE.) – Facebook plans to curate ‘high quality’ news for its users from ‘trusted outlets’

Screen Shot 2019-04-02 at 10.40.40 AM

Mark Zuckerberg is considering hiring human “editors” to hand-pick “high-quality news” to show Facebook users in an effort to combat fake news — and no, it’s not an April Fool’s joke.

In his ongoing quest to satisfy the political censorship demands of Western governments, Zuckerberg told German publishing house Axel Springer that he is considering the introduction of a dedicated news section for the social media platform, which would potentially use humans to curate the news from “broadly trusted” outlets. Zuckerberg said Facebook might also start paying news publishers to include their articles in this dedicated news section in an effort to reward “high-quality, trustworthy content.”

With social media censorship already at worryingly high levels, who will decide which outlets are “broadly trusted” and which are untrustworthy? What qualifies one outlet as more “trusted” than another? Will Zuckerberg make the criteria public?

Collective punishment? Zuckerberg’s call for internet regulation is aimed at competitors – analyst

Fresh from the anti-climactic Russiagate saga and long-awaited Mueller report, will Facebook penalize all the outlets that incessantly pushed the Trump/Russia “collusion” narrative and hyped fake “bombshells” for more than two years sans evidence, or will the likes of MSNBC and Rachel Maddow automatically earn “trusted status? The answer to that question is blindingly obvious.

Facebook’s efforts to combat fake news are reminiscent of other recent efforts from apps like NewsGuard, the US government-linked app which rates news websites according to their “trustworthiness” and, unsurprisingly, targets alternative media sites which do not strictly adhere to establishment narratives. If recent history is any indicator, Facebook’s own efforts to rate news will also fall directly in line with US government objectives.

The social media giant has been rightly accused of blatant censorship on multiple occasions in recent memory — and there doesn’t seem a way that a group of Facebook-hired editors could be trusted to curate the news for anyone, unless it took some serious steps to address its various biases. In fact, even if it did that, isn’t hiring human editors with their own political biases and preferences to sift through all the available news and select the stories deemed fit for public consumption just an Orwellian idea in the first place?

Facebook should probably already be aware of the pitfalls when it comes to hiring human editors for such purposes. During the 2016 US presidential election, the company’s solution to political bias in its trending news section was to fire the human editors responsible for it. Maybe Zuckerberg thinks this time it will be different? Or maybe, and more likely, this is just another PR effort to placate the pro-censorship crowd on Capitol Hill.

There is no shortage of examples of Facebook censorship at this point. Last year, the platform inexplicably took down the English-language page belonging to left-leaning, Venezuela-based news network Telesur — and deleted the page belonging to Venezuela Analysis, another left-leaning outlet offering commentary critical of Washington’s foreign policy in Latin America. The pages were later restored, but Facebook was not forthcoming with an explanation.

Changes made to Facebook algorithms to combat “fake news” in 2017, saw traffic to multiple socialist and government accountability websites plummeting — including Police the Police (a page exposing US police brutality) and the Free Thought Project (which promotes government transparency). Alternative news websites like Truth-out.org, Democracy Now and Alternet also suffered as a result of those algorithm changes.

More recently, Facebook suspended popular pages run by Maffick Media, which is 51 percent owned by RT’s video agency Ruptly. Coincidentally, the content on those pages is also highly critical of the US government. Funnily enough, Facebook isn’t often caught censoring popular pages whose content is Washington-friendly. The Maffick pages were later restored, but Facebook forced them to include more explicit information about their funding, which in itself is no big deal, but it is a requirement curiously not demanded of US government-funded or linked pages.

ALSO ON RT.COMZuckerberg asks governments for more internet regulation in self-flagellation exercise

Not only has Facebook been accused of censorship, however, it has also been found to be working at the behest of certain governments — but again, only Washington-friendly ones, of course.

The Intercept reported last year that Facebook met with Israeli government officials and complied with orders to delete the accounts belonging to certain Palestinian activists. Facebook quickly bowed to Israel’s demands after threats that it would be forced into complying with the deletion orders by law if it failed to do so voluntarily.

But things don’t look to be getting any better on the Facebook censorship front since then. A journalist for Israeli news outlet +972 Magazine tweeted on Monday that Facebook was now punishing news sites (in the form of lower views) for publishing content that “could be a negative experience” for users — whatever that means. The content in question was an article by the magazine about Gaza’s Great Return march and the casualties inflicted on protesters by the Israeli army.

Screen Shot 2019-04-02 at 10.42.59 AM

With such a terrible track record when it comes to political bias and willingness to censor news and information, don’t be surprised if Facebook’s planned “dedicated news section” of “high-quality” information turns out to be a failure.

Danielle Ryan

Twitter reinstates anti-abortion movie account after sparking outrage with unexplained suspension

CAP

An anti-abortion box office movie has had its Twitter account restored after a temporary and unexplained suspension, which sparked outrage and fresh cries of ‘censorship’ online.

The movie titled ‘Unplanned’ follows the true story of a Planned Parenthood clinic director turned pro-life activist, and was produced by Christian production company Pure Flix. It bills itself as “exposing the truth” about the family-planning organization, which it claims is only interested in money.

CAP

Twitter suspended the movie’s account seemingly without explanation last week, one day after its official premiere, but the backlash on the social media platform was swift, with pro-life and conservative commentators publicizing the suspension and demanding answers on the blackout. After the outcry, Twitter lifted the suspension, having decided that “after further review,” the account did not actually violate any rules.

It appears the suspension could have been the result of pro-choice users repeatedly “maliciously and falsely” reporting Unplanned’s account to Twitter — but the entire thing seems to have backfired, as the movie’s follower count shot up dramatically to over 100,000 soon after its account was restored.

CAP

But the saga continued, as Twitter users then suddenly began reporting that they had mysteriously been unfollowed from the movie’s account — and some claimed that they were not able to follow it at all. However, the account now has more than 200,000 followers.

CAP

The movie has been lauded by conservative media and panned by liberal media as pro-life “propaganda.” Twitter’s action against the movie didn’t seem to bother mainstream media though, with few major outlets reporting on the weekend-long Twitter drama.

READ MORE: Censorship crackdown? Top 10 alt-media pages newly banned by Facebook & Twitter

Major television networks in the US, including the Hallmark Channel and the USA Network, also refused to run the movie’s ads — and it was given an R rating by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) due to some graphic abortion scenes. The movie producers called the decision “deeply flawed” given that films featuring “graphic sex, violence, degradation, murder and mayhem” have been given PG-13 ratings.

Despite the pushback, the movie had a surprisingly strong opening weekend, pulling in $6.1 million and landing in fifth place.

CAP

The movie has enjoyed support from conservative politicians, with former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee encouraging his Twitter followers to see it and calling Planned Parenthood a “money-making baby killing machine,” while former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin called Unplanned a “great movie full of shocking truth” about the “anti-child movement.”

CAP

COLLUSION: NBC Politics Managing Editor Bullies Reporter On Behalf Of DNC, Report Says

By RYAN SAAVEDRA

CAP

Investigative reporter Yashar Ali revealed on Friday that the managing political editor for NBC News and MSNBC bullied him on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) into holding a scoop that he broke yesterday.

“Yesterday, I received a call from @DafnaLinzer who serves as managing editor of NBC/MSNBC politics,” Ali tweeted. “Dafna’s conduct during the call was highly inappropriate and unethical. So what was the purpose of her call? She called me to bully me on behalf of the DNC.”

CAP

“Dafna, who oversees the political coverage for NBC and MSNBC, was calling to bully me into delaying the publication of an innocuous scoop and at no point did she advocate for her network, it was only about the DNC,” Ali continued. “Yesterday morning I received a tip from a trusted source. The source told me the DNC would be announcing the dates of the first 2020 primary debates later that day. The source gave me the dates they would be announcing: June 26 and 27.”

CAP

“At first I thought it was just a fun tidbit that I could tweet out. But after I called several presidential campaign staffers I learn that all the Dem campaigns were desperate to learn what the dates were going to be,” Ali continued. “I decided to post the scoop as an item in my newsletter. This wasn’t a huge scoop but it was a decent one so I quickly called the DNC to fact-check the tip as I was running out of time: the dates would be announced on MSNBC in the 4:00 PM hour. It’s important to note that almost of all of my communication with the DNC was off record.”

CAP

“So I won’t share most of what was said but can tell you it’s pretty run-of-the mill stuff. I asked the DNC if my tip was accurate and they asked if they could call me back in 10 minutes,” Ali continued. “A few minutes later they called back and asked if I could delay posting my scoop. For another hour so they could go through their important notification calls to the state parties. I told them I couldn’t wait as the news would leak and leave me without a story. That’s all I can say about the call. Two minutes later I received a call from Dafna.”

CAP

“I’ve never spoken to Dafna by phone. A couple years ago she reached out to me to see if I wanted to have coffee and talk about working at NBC News but I declined as I was actively investigating NBC matters and thought it would be strange if I discussed a job,” Ali continued. “So when I saw Dafna calling I assumed she would ask me to consider delaying my post so that MSNBC could announce it first. Given that this was an innocuous scoop and not some investigative story I wouldn’t have lost sleep if I had delayed. But that’s not why she was calling.”

CAP

“After exchanging pleasantries, Dafna told me that she received a call from the DNC and was told I had a story,” Ali continued. “Now it’s not strange that the DNC called her, they were coordinating an announcement. What was strange was that she was calling me and taking a menacing tone. She asked if I could hold the story and I said I couldn’t. She was agitated, ‘why not?’ I said I’m not going to lose a scoop. Then she got angrier and said ‘Why not? It’s not a big deal, let them make a few phone calls.’ My jaw dropped.”

CAP

“I realized that @DafnaLinzer, the head of all political coverage for NBC News and MSNBC wasn’t calling to advocate for her network, she was calling to advocate the DNC’s position,” Ali continued. She wanted me to wait so they could call state party leaders. I thought to myself ‘this is how people think it works.’ It’s not. But Dafna was doing it. She kept pressing me. Now I acknowledged, for stuff that isn’t about serious investigative reporting, there is no problem holding something. But I knew once others got the call.”

CAP

“I would lose a scoop. Dafna reminded me she was a nat sec reporter at WAPO for ten years and they would hold stuff all the time (note: so people wouldn’t get killed). ‘Why can’t you just wait, let them make their calls, then you’ll be the first to put it into print,’ she said,” Yashar continued. “I couldn’t believe what she was saying. Again, it was fine for me to print the story an hour later, beat her own network by three hours, she just wanted me to let the DNC inform state party leaders. Why the hell did she care?”

CAP

“I kept telling Dafna no, that I wasn’t waiting. And she kept getting more frustrated. She was exasperated…she didn’t understand why I couldn’t wait for the DNC to make their state notification calls,” Yashar continued. “I was so surprised me that she was talking this way with a total stranger. The head of the political division was trying to bully me at the behest of the DNC over a dumb scoop (even though they may not have asked her to).”

CAP

“2/3 of the way into the conversation Dafna started a sentence with ‘this is off the record.’ She hadn’t said it at the beginning of our conversation and most important at no point did I agree when she said ‘off record’ to keep it off record,” Ali continued. “I’m not one of those gotcha reporters, I think it’s bad for sourcing relationships to make people like they constantly feel like they have to say ‘off record.’ But Dafna isn’t a source and she was calling to intimidate me, so she doesn’t get the benefit.”

CAP

“She said ‘off record’ one more time later in the call and again I just let her keep talking, I did not agree to anything. I then told her I had to go talk to my editor and she got even more frustrated and said ‘No. I want to talk to you about this,'” Ali continued. “I said ‘no, I want to go talk to my editor.’ Then she sent me over the edge and said ‘What’s your editors name, I want to talk to them.’ She was trying to intimidate me..on behalf of the DNC. I ended the call.”

CAP

“After the call with Dafna I published the stupid scoop. Then I did a gut check and over the next two hours I called 10 experienced prominent reporters and told them the story,” Ali continued. “They were all stunned by what Dafna did and encouraged me to share it publicly. I’m not naive to the fact that this incident is going to be twisted by some with an agenda to discredit the media and say they collude with political parties. But I think its more important to expose bad behavior then keep it under wraps. What Dafna did was unethical.”

CAPCAP

CNN’s Brian Stelter reported that NBC PR and Linzer have “no comment” on Ali’s thread.

CAP

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑