Liberals are too quick to dismiss critical reporting of Hillary Clinton – and run the risk of "journalist malpractice" for not scrutinizing the Democratic presidential nominee and the Clinton Foundation, investigative reporter Glenn Greenwald charged.
Writing for The Intercept, Greenwald takes particular aim at New York Times columnist Paul Krugman's column that blasts the "presumption that anything Hillary Clinton does must be corrupt...."
"Thankfully, it appears that Krugman — at least thus far — has suffered no governmental recriminations or legal threats, nor any career penalties, for his intrepid, highly risky defense of Hillary Clinton," wrote Greenwald, who as a reporter for The Guardian newspaper won a Pulitzer Prize for writing about the global surveillance programs based on documents disclosed by spy secrets leaker Edward Snowden.
"Aggressive investigative journalism against [Donald] Trump is not enough for Democratic partisans whose voice is dominant in U.S. media discourse," Greenwald wrote.
"They also want a cessation of any news coverage that reflects negatively on Hillary Clinton. Most, of course, won't say this explicitly (though some do), but — as the wildly adored Krugman column from yesterday reflects — they will just reflexively dismiss any such coverage as illegitimate and invalid."
Greenwald labels it "journalistic malpractice of the highest order" if reporters don't "rigorously" scrutinize "the billions of dollars received by the Clintons — both personally and though their various entities."
"That’s exactly what they ought to be doing," he wrote. "The fact that quid pro quos cannot be definitively proven does not remotely negate the urgency of this journalism."
© 2021 Newsmax. All rights reserved.