Interesting Article Documenting Glenn Greenwald's Lying and Pressure Tactics

I didn't read about this until I decided to get caught up with The Rude Pundit a half hour ago.  He's the one who gave the link to a piece by Joshua Foust documenting what I talked about in my first post below.  Here's just a sample of what Foust documents. 

For reasons that escape me, very few people like to grapple with the casual way Glenn Greenwald lies, almost constantly. He lied about me again, earlier this year, when he falsely accused me of supporting the wars in Libya and Mali.

Like so many of Greenwald’s lies, this one is not just wrong it is hilariously wrong, considering the tens of thousand of words I wrote in opposition to the intervention in Libya. It was completely pointless. I demanded a retraction from Greenwald, and he refused. He chose to stand by his lies.

Because he is not only a pathological liar but also a bully, very few in the public sphere ever want to stand up for him. In fact, more than one journalist has written me a private note of encouragement in standing up to Greenwald, because for them the professional consequences of fighting off his bulling followers and rebutting all of his lazy lies are simple too overwhelming. So he is allowed to continue lying and bullying people without recourse.

This is the kind of truth and justice that the Snowden-Greenwood cult depends on to maintain its mythology. Let me guess the reaction of his true believers,  Foust used to be a government contractor so everything he says is not only not credible but definitely unbelievable.   Of course, as recently as 2009 Edward Snowden was an intelligence contractor who was saying online that leakers should be shot in the balls.  Only that'll turn out to be different.  Don't ask me how I do it, sometimes I get these flashes of insight, sometimes they turn out to be true.  

Update:  The point isn't that Glenn Greenwald is a jerk, the point is that he's documented to both lie and refuse to correct himself when he lies.  Those kinds of things of don't mesh well with the profession of journalist, or at least they shouldn't.   Or what was the whole idea about why we needed an alternative to the lying, invested, self-interested corporate media?  Much as I like The Rude Pundit, his equating what Joshua Foust exposed in this article with the corporate shill Chet Huntley scolding the press for being too hard on Nixon is entirely off.   This is more like someone exposing someone for lying and conflict of interest and a refusal to correct the record that they have, themselves falsified.   This is a well known tactic of claiming a critic said something they didn't as a means of not having to deal with the criticism.   I'd have thought The Rude Pundit was above that kind of thing.