And webtv.net is down. And if you do wayback machine, not authorized. Seems legit though...
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/1181
From:[email protected]
To: [email protected]
Date: 2015-05-19 19:38
Subject: Margaret, per our conversation
Margaret, far be it from me what the public editor of the NY Times should focus on, but:
Per our recent conversation and my recent column about "Clinton Cash Con" and the appropriate role of the NY Times, take another look at the Sid Blumenthal story in the Tuesday paper. I make no defense for Blumenthal. But that story involved New York Times doing stenography for the House Benghazi committee, sans legitimate reporting, replete with an email obviously leaked (without disclosure from the Times) by one of the most partisan committees in my memory.
Should the NY Times reporters be stenographers for a partisan committee, taking dictation and writing stories? And if the committee unethically leaks an email shouldn't the NY Times give some general indication of the partisan nature of the source? And shouldn't the NYT reporters do some legitimate reporting rather than repeating from partisan committee handouts?
As we discussed, I respect you and what you are trying to do. And I do not envy your position. We live in an age when political reporting is not what it used to be, and sadly, when political reporting in the New York Times is not what it used to be. The NYT should not be not having exclusive arrangements with Peter Schweizer or writing stenography-handout stories from a partisan committee. In sorrow rather than anger, Margaret, I find it sad this happens because the NYT should be different and better.
Your foreign correspondents are. Your political reporting is not.
Too bad.
Best, Brent
Sent from my iPad
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/7432
From:[email protected]
To: [email protected]
Date: 2016-01-01 20:01
Subject: Re: New Clinton emails
Sid is lost in his own web of conspiracies. I pay zero attention to what he says.
On Friday, January 1, 2016, Brent Budowsky <[email protected]> wrote:
> John, assume I wrote a thousand words about this. It is disquieting that > when HRC was secretary of state she spent a good time of time doing gossip > emails with Sid Blumenthal about various matters, the ubiquitous Lanny > Davis shilling for himself in pathetic ways, and Neera Tanden gossiping > about what Soros thinks of Obama. At least Tanden I regard as a serious > person. Sid and Lanny I do not by standards of a secretary of state or > potential president. >
> I was not in touch with you at the time of the healthcare debate, but what > Sid suggests does not strike me as your style. I was in very regular and > close touch with Daschle at the time, and he would never have said to the > press what Sid suggests, and since I am in the press I know those were not > his views. I guarantee that based on direct personal knowledge of Tom's > views and actions at the time. Blumenthal did not have the slightest idea > of what he was talking about in his girlie gossip with the secretary of > state about this. Why she places such great stock over so much time in > these exchanges with Blumenthal is mystifying to me---and frankly > troublesome. >
> This whole subject, to use vernacular, gives me the creeps. Secretaries > of state, presidential candidates and presidents should not be spending > their time on this kind of minor league stuff. >
> Sent from my iPad
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/1181
From:[email protected]
To: [email protected]
Date: 2015-05-19 19:38
Subject: Margaret, per our conversation
Margaret, far be it from me what the public editor of the NY Times should focus on, but:
Per our recent conversation and my recent column about "Clinton Cash Con" and the appropriate role of the NY Times, take another look at the Sid Blumenthal story in the Tuesday paper. I make no defense for Blumenthal. But that story involved New York Times doing stenography for the House Benghazi committee, sans legitimate reporting, replete with an email obviously leaked (without disclosure from the Times) by one of the most partisan committees in my memory.
Should the NY Times reporters be stenographers for a partisan committee, taking dictation and writing stories? And if the committee unethically leaks an email shouldn't the NY Times give some general indication of the partisan nature of the source? And shouldn't the NYT reporters do some legitimate reporting rather than repeating from partisan committee handouts?
As we discussed, I respect you and what you are trying to do. And I do not envy your position. We live in an age when political reporting is not what it used to be, and sadly, when political reporting in the New York Times is not what it used to be. The NYT should not be not having exclusive arrangements with Peter Schweizer or writing stenography-handout stories from a partisan committee. In sorrow rather than anger, Margaret, I find it sad this happens because the NYT should be different and better.
Your foreign correspondents are. Your political reporting is not.
Too bad.
Best, Brent
Sent from my iPad
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/7432
From:[email protected]
To: [email protected]
Date: 2016-01-01 20:01
Subject: Re: New Clinton emails
Sid is lost in his own web of conspiracies. I pay zero attention to what he says.
On Friday, January 1, 2016, Brent Budowsky <[email protected]> wrote:
> John, assume I wrote a thousand words about this. It is disquieting that > when HRC was secretary of state she spent a good time of time doing gossip > emails with Sid Blumenthal about various matters, the ubiquitous Lanny > Davis shilling for himself in pathetic ways, and Neera Tanden gossiping > about what Soros thinks of Obama. At least Tanden I regard as a serious > person. Sid and Lanny I do not by standards of a secretary of state or > potential president. >
> I was not in touch with you at the time of the healthcare debate, but what > Sid suggests does not strike me as your style. I was in very regular and > close touch with Daschle at the time, and he would never have said to the > press what Sid suggests, and since I am in the press I know those were not > his views. I guarantee that based on direct personal knowledge of Tom's > views and actions at the time. Blumenthal did not have the slightest idea > of what he was talking about in his girlie gossip with the secretary of > state about this. Why she places such great stock over so much time in > these exchanges with Blumenthal is mystifying to me---and frankly > troublesome. >
> This whole subject, to use vernacular, gives me the creeps. Secretaries > of state, presidential candidates and presidents should not be spending > their time on this kind of minor league stuff. >
> Sent from my iPad
Comment