Nothing let& #39;s you see how easily reporters spread falsehoods like first-hand knowledge: I didn& #39;t "pass" on the RW leak. It was never offered to me. The doc arrived by mail in NYC & TI& #39;s editor-in-chief assigned it to an experienced team. It wasn& #39;t offered to me, & TI reported it: https://twitter.com/dnvolz/status/1305350349113491456">https://twitter.com/dnvolz/st...

7 years after TI& #39;s launch, some reporters refuse to acknowledge - due to ideological resentment (Russiagate), professional jealousy and sexism - that TI has an editor-in-chief and it& #39;s not me. I don& #39;t run TI. Our editorial team in NYC does. My primary focus is on my reporting:

Once I heard about the doc, my opinion - as I& #39;ve said publicly - was (and still is): it was newsworthy, but not conclusive, because it was anonymously authored by NSA & had no underlying evidence. But as NYT says, I had no role in reporting it because it was assigned to others.

Given the US Govt& #39;s war on whistleblowers, TI isn& #39;t the only news outlet to have a source arrested. The NYT & Ben-Smith-led-BuzzFeed forgot to mention it also happened to them. But TI acknowledged its mistakes 3 years ago, instituted reforms & has gone on to break major stories.

For years, the tactic of jealous & bitter journalists was to claim I was responsible for the RW errors. Now that the NYT makes clear what we said all along - I had no role in the story - the criticism shifts. They don& #39;t care about RW or press freedoms, only petty resentments.

Like any news outlet that does complex, high-risk, NatSec reporting, of course TI has made mistakes. I& #39;ve made my own (though not in this story, which wasn& #39;t mine). We have internal debates. But TI has a large team of highly skilled journalists & editors that breaks huge stories.

TI will have its own statement on key points & misleading parts of the NYT story, but it& #39;s amazing to watch some journalists take a story that says I had no role in this & try to focus it on me with falsehoods. It shows what their priorities are (pettiness), and are not (news).

One other point I& #39;ll make. the NYT hints that it wasn& #39;t TI& #39;s errors that led to Reality Winner& #39;s arrest. They caught her because of the clues she left. But NYT buries this because it destroys their drama. The WashPost & others reported this years ago:https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="👇" title="Rückhand Zeigefinger nach unten" aria-label="Emoji: Rückhand Zeigefinger nach unten">

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2017/06/06/did-the-intercept-bungle-nsa-leak/">https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/eri...

That the source would have easily been caught no matter what doesn& #39;t excuse or even mitigate TI& #39;s errors. Those were real and that& #39;s why reforms have been instituted.

But it does show who really cares about RW & press freedom, and who wants to exploit the story for malice.