The Atlantic Accused David Sirota of Secretly Working For Bernie Sanders. But Where's the Evidence?

[CentralMass]

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2019/03/the-atlantic-published-an-unfounded-conspiracy-the.html

"A cloud of scandal hung over Tuesday’s announcement that the Bernie Sanders 2020 campaign had hired investigative journalist David Sirota to fill the role of senior adviser and speechwriter. An article in The Atlantic by Edward-Isaac Dovere, titled “Bernie Sanders Just Hired His Twitter Attack Dog,” made the explosive claim that the veteran journalist had been secretly working for Sanders behind the scenes since December, and using his role as a journalist to attack the Vermont senator’s potential primary opponents.

“Since December, David Sirota has, on Twitter, on his own website, and in columns in The Guardian, been trashing most of Sanders’s Democratic opponents—all without disclosing his work with Sanders—and has been pushing back on critics by saying that he was criticizing the other Democrats as a journalist,” Dovere wrote, moving on to note that thousands of Sirota’s tweets had been deleted.

It was a story that seemed tailor-made to go viral—a political unmasking of a candidate whose brand was integrity while also playing up familiar tropes about his online supporters. In that regard, it did not disappoint—it was quickly picked up and regurgitated by multiple outlets, including The Washington Post and USA Today.

But there was a problem with Dovere’s bombshell: It wasn’t supported by any real evidence. The story hinged on an unverifiable quote which the speaker claims was misrepresented, along with innuendo stemming from the fact that Sirota deleted thousands of tweets following his employment. Paste spoke to multiple campaign insiders familiar with the matter, all of whom disputed Dovere’s timeline and narrative. Their accounts lined up with what we found through our own reporting on unrelated matters over the last few months. Other individuals have also come forward to publicly refute the article’s claims."
More at the link.

[George II]

1. Where's the evidence? How about Sanders' own campaign manager, Faiz Shakir, admitting it?

Is that good enough?

Link to tweet

/photo/1

[Uncle Joe]

3. Apparently you didn't read the article. n/t

[George II]

4. Apparently you didn't see his own campaign manager's admission, and this from CNN:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128735055

[Uncle Joe]

6. Again you didn't read the article of the OP. n/t

[George II]

11. It's not an article, it's an opinion piece from "Paste Magazine"....

.... written by someone who has idolized Sanders for years.

Did you read this? https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/19/politics/bernie-sanders-hires-former-journalist/index.html

I guess the big question is, what does Sirota have to hide? Hours after he was "officially" hired (he was hires a couple of months ago) he deleted virtually ALL of his tweets accumulated over several years. At last glance, he left only about 100 tweets of more than 20,000.

[CentralMass]

21. See repy 17

[George II]

34. See reply #25.

[Cha]

32. I've read the damn opinion piece and it tells me

nothing other than it's from a BS fan.

Link to tweet

[ehrnst]

60. Did you read who wrote this piece?

One of Sirotas fellow bashers of the Democratic party.

Walter Bragman: author of "Bernie Sanders: In His Own Words: 250 Quotes from America's Political Revolutionary" (non-disclosure that they wrote a book who's targeted sales to an audience that supports Sanders indicates a disregard - like Sirota's- for that basic tenet of ethical, credible reporting. If he had said, "In the interest of disclosure, I authored "Bernie Sanders: In His Own Words: 250 Quotes from America's Political Revolutionary" that would indicate that he was confident enough in their claims on their own merit, and he transparent and self-aware of a possible bias or financial stake in Sanders' popularity. But he didn't.)

On the staff of the Intercept, which has a long history of disparaging and trashing the Democratic party, which David Siorta, who he is defending also does. Would you give a lot of credence to a piece refuting reports of Jared Kushner not being approved by State Department for the clearance that he has, from a staff writer for the National Review or who someone wrote a book titled" "Donald Trump: In His Own Words: 250 Quotes from America's Political Hero" and didn't bother to mention that in the piece?

Also contributes to The Hill.

Also completely dismissive of the role of Russia in the 2016 election outcome - which is something that also supports a narrative that the stealing of the Oval Office from the elected Demcoratic candidate entirely a Democratic Party failure because they didn't choose Bernie as a candidate.


https://www.pastemagazine.com/writers?name=walker+bragman

https://www.patreon.com/walkerbragman

https://theintercept.com/staff/walker-bragman/

[KitSileya]

69. Bragman of "A Liberal Case for Trump" infamy?

A liberal case for Donald Trump: The lesser of two evils is not at all clear in 2016
Is there one? A Trump presidency needn't be a nightmare for the left. On many issues, Clinton presidency might be

https://www.salon.com/2016/04/29/a_liberal_case_for_donald_trump_the_lesser_of_two_evils_is_not_at_all_clear_in_2016/

And that's all of that drivel I'll post here on DU - I should need no more to show what kind of person, and more importantly, what kind of "journalist" Walter Bragman is. As in, he's not one - at least not any more credible as a journalist than Stephen Miller, Steve Bannon or Dave Sirota.

[Gothmog]

72. You are using facts against a silly opinion piece

Who are you going to believe-Facts or the opinion of a sanders supporter?

[BannonsLiver]

7. It's an opinion piece from a Bernie fan club newsletter.

Nothing meanigful about it.

[Uncle Joe]

8. The arguments in the article are most logical; perhaps you can point something out in it that isn't?

[George II]

20. Subjectively "logical", not necessarily factual.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

51. Good luck arguing logic... some just don't want to hear it, though it does make perfect sense.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Gothmog]

73. Where are the facts supporting the claims in this opinion piece

I trust sources like the Washington Post

Link to tweet

[Hortensis]

85. Sirota worked to defeat Democrats and elect Trump.

Sanders has hired Sirota.

THOSE alone, which you know to be true, are totally damning. No Democrat would hire this evil creep, and yet Sanders has made him his speechwriter and brought him BACK into his inner circle.

Hell, when Sirota was fired 20 years ago from another campaign for similarly sleazy, lying smears -- racially inflammatory ones of a black candidate that time, that's when Bernie Sanders FIRST hired him.

Quite a job qualification.

Stop searching for some excuse, any excuse to deny the truth.

[Cha]

35. Yeah, what do we expect? Objectivity?

Link to tweet

They're trying to cover for David Sirota for cripe sake.. the guy who had to Delete 20,288 tweets(many on Russia).

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

53. Since when does deleting tweets, emails, and/or texts cause for suspicion? Or does that standard

only apply to Bernie and his campaign?


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[WeekiWater]

57. Not sure. Maybe we could speculate.

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/10026361411#post106

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

58. Better to let the facts come out... why jump to conclusions?

Let's see what was deleted, assuming that's possible - through the "Way Back Machine"?? - and then decide whether there is anything nefarious going on. I admit, the act of deletion, by itself, is not necessarily a good look, but, there could be legitimate reasons for doing so and nothing untoward was being hidden. Let's just wait for the facts to develop and see... then conclude one way or the other.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[WeekiWater]

59. And when it's the Clintons, it's ripe for speculation. NT

[Gothmog]

78. Clinton had a third party law firm review the documents

There was no spoliation in that a third party reviewed and approved the deletion

[WeekiWater]

79. +1

Someone didn't get the memo.

[Cha]

61. Oh the hypocrisy.

[Gothmog]

77. Spoliation Of Evidence

This is a concept that is applicable https://civilprocedure.uslegal.com/discovery/spoliation-of-evidence/

Spoliation of evidence is a term often used during the process of discovery. Spoliation of evidence happens when a document or information that is required for discovery is destroyed or altered significantly. If a person negligently or intentionally withholds or destroys relevant information that will be required in an action is liable for spoliation of evidence.

When a crucial document is lost by spoliation, the courts may try to infer the original information by applying spoliation inference rule. Spoliation inference rule is a negative evidentiary inference. When applying the rule, courts will review the altered document with inference against the spoliator and in favor of the opposing party. The theory behind spoliation inference is that when a party has destroyed evidence, it shows that the party had consciousness of guilt or other reasons to avoid evidence. Hence, the court will conclude that the evidence was not in spoliator’s favor.

[Gothmog]

71. LOL I trust the Washington Post and other real sources

Link to tweet

A reporter’s undisclosed connection to a political candidate would constitute a breach of journalistic ethics. The basic rule is that journalists are supposed to be free of any personal or financial relationship with those they cover or comment on, even an “informal” relationship. Alternatively, reporters are obligated to at least disclose such relationships so that readers or viewers can evaluate the integrity of the reporting for themselves.

Sirota, 43, not only didn’t mention his relationship with Sanders’s campaign but apparently sought to erase his long history of attacks against Sanders’s opponents, according to the Atlantic. Just hours before his hiring by Sanders was announced, Sirota deleted about 20,000 or so of his tweets. He suggested that the timing of the mass deletion was coincidental, telling the Atlantic that his account was scrubbed by an “autodeleter” that periodically and automatically removes his posts.

It remains unclear how long Sirota advised the Sanders camp before his hiring. Neither Sirota nor Sanders’s representatives responded to multiple requests for comment on Wednesday.

Sirota’s vitriolic tweets and blog posts also appear to be at odds with the ethos of the Sanders’s campaign, which has stressed that it will “respectfully engage” other Democratic candidates. His hiring as a speechwriter also appears to be an acknowledgment that Sanders, whose extemporaneous public remarks have been a sign of his authenticity, will at times be scripted like other politicians.

The article in the OP is from a source that no one has heard of.

[Autumn]

9. What's good enough is that Faiz Shakir disputes that version of Dovere's tale.

I wonder why Dovere isn't quoting the different source he went with.

“Faiz Shakir, Sanders’s campaign manager, confirmed in an interview on Tuesday afternoon that Sirota had been in an advisory role prior to his hiring on March 11,” Dovere writes. “‘He was advising beforehand,’ Shakir said, explaining that Sirota’s informal work for Sanders goes back months, and was meant to be a trial period to see how the senator, who famously likes to write every word that he says himself, would work with a speechwriter.”

Shakir told Paste he was surprised at Dovere’s account of their conversation and noted that he’d subsequently reached out to the Atlantic writer to correct the record, but was rebuffed.

“I reached out to [Dovere] and said ‘it wasn’t months; at most, it was a month,’” Shakir explained over the phone. “And so, I sent him the dates and from what I understand, he thinks he’s got a different source that tracks it differently.

Dovere did not respond to our multiple requests for comment, but his article fails to credit any source besides Shakir. Asked what he thought about the fact that no direct quote was used to make such a claim, Shakir replied, “There’s no quote in there because I never said that…Feb. 20 is when you probably start the clock on [Sirota] starting to do some work [for the campaign].”

[George II]

15. But Faiz Shakir doesn't dispute the fact that Sirota and the Sanders campaign has been denying....

...(I'll stop short of saying "lying about) for a couple of months, that Sirota was working for the Sanders campaign WHILE he was working as a "journalist" bashing any Democratic candidate that fell in his sites. See what Sirota and then Shakir said here:

Link to tweet

[Autumn]

64. You are skating around the fact that Dovere was told by Shakir " at most, it was a month".

that's a far cry from your tweet you keeps posting that says otherwise.
His informal work goes back a month at most. Devore refused to correct the record and went with some anonymous unnamed source. How odd and defiantly shady that he continued to use the only named source who denies his story.

I sent him the dates and from what I understand, he thinks he’s got a different source that tracks it differently.
Dovere did not respond to our multiple requests for comment, but his article fails to credit any source besides Shakir. Asked what he thought about the fact that no direct quote was used to make such a claim, Shakir replied, “There’s no quote in there because I never said that…Feb. 20 is when you probably start the clock on [Sirota] starting to do some work [for the campaign].”

I think it's pretty shady that Dovere wouldn't respond to The Atlantic's multiple requests for a comment on the discrepancies in his story. Why would any one who wrote a legitimate bombshell do that? They wouldn't. I think I'll chose to say I agree with the fact as that Walter Bragman said "Dovere’s bombshell wasn’t supported by any real evidence." One could day it was "made up for some reason" if one wanted to stop short of saying he's "lying about" the story or he doesn't really have another source and it's just bullshit.

John Mulholland from The Guardian said the last piece Sirota did for them was the end of December

Link to tweet

[George II]

68. Nope, Shakir said on March 11 that Sirota's informal work "goes back months"....

....even if it was exactly two months (the minimum of "months&quot that would be January 11, possibly longer. Yet later in January Sirota was calling people "filthy liars", even while HE was "lying" about it.

Now Shakir appears to be changing his original story.

What's lost in all of this is the fact that Sirota deleted more than 20,000 tweets going back to 2008. What does he have to hide?

[Autumn]

70. Oh no! Deleted tweets!!!

Sorry, that's just struck me as funny the laughter is not directed at you . I have read nothing about this other than the article in the OP. I don't bother reading the other OPs on this brouhaha in this forum, so I have no idea to whom Shakir spoke to on March 11 but I think when a person who has written and published a story is asked several times about an unverifiable quote which the speaker claims was misrepresented comment in their story and they refuse to respond to those inquiries there's a reason for that. Usually because it's bullshit. YMMV

I really don't care unless he broke the law. I have said all I have to say on this and have things to do so I think I'm done with this conversation. See you later.

[R B Garr]

66. Exactly, it's right there before they tried to backpedal.

Faiz Shakir: “He was advising beforehand. Sirota’s work for Sanders goes back months”

It’s obvious they are just trying to cover up now that they got caught, along with deleting 20,000 tweets.

[CentralMass]

17. The section on the left in black reference a period of time 19 years ago.

The revelation that Sirota was consulting since February 20th? Is apparently the issue.
https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/03/19/politics/bernie-sanders-hires-former-journalist/index.html

"Sirota, who is known for both his reporting and combative Twitter presence, had been informally advising the campaign on a trial basis since the day after Sanders formally launched his 2020 bid for the presidency last month. But shortly before his hiring was announced, Sirota began erasing old tweets, many of which ran contrary to Sanders' call last month for supporters and surrogates to adopt a more friendly tone in their public exchanges with political rivals.
According to campaign manager Faiz Shakir, Sirota began the trial arrangement, in which he would assist Sanders with speechwriting, on Feb. 20, a day after Sanders made his candidacy official. Sirota left his post with the Capital and Main website on Feb. 14, Shakir said. He then signed a formal letter to become the campaign speechwriter on March 11. The trial period was to see how Sanders, who traditionally prefers to handwrite his own speeches on yellow-lined paper, would work with a speechwriter."


On another thread there are links to some 2016 tweets regarding Hillary's Wall St connections. They seem to be sited as evidence of "Sirota's treachery against the party while he was working for Sanders except he wasn't in 2016.

So this was a two or three week period, from February 20th until March 11th when Sirota signed on with the campaign and at which point he deleted tweets not in keeping with the campaign.

So I call bullshit on this bogus Issue.

[George II]

25. The section on the left in black references what Sirota did in 2016, not 19 years ago....

...and the section on the right in white references comments made on March 11, only ten days ago.

Why are you bringing up the 2016 primaries, i.e., "links to some 2016 tweets regarding Hillary's Wall St connections..." ?

Two or three weeks, a month, two months, years......doesn't really matter. The fact is he was working for the Sander campaign, formally or on a trial basis, when he accused people of being "liars" for talking about what he was doing at the time.

PS - "he deleted tweets not in keeping with the campaign"? He deleted more than 20,000, leaving only 100! That many were "not in keeping with the campaign"? In that case, why was he hired by the campaign?

[CentralMass]

26. The paragraph referencing 2016 is truncated in the black section.

Do you have the full text. It is impossible to determine what it is referencing

There is nothing indicating that David Sirota worked for Bernie Sanders in 2016 that i have read.

He worked for him 19 years ago then on a trial basis from February 20th 2019, then was formally hired on March 11th 2019.

[George II]

27. It mentions 2016, so it couldn't be a reference to 19 years, ago, and as I pointed out....

.....the section on the right talks about only 10 days ago.

[CentralMass]

36. No. It mentions that Sirota worked for Sanders 19 years ago the mention him doing "something" in

2016. I won't speculate like you did but I'll bet it was not working for Sanders in 2016.

[George II]

41. That "something" was working for Sanders in 2016, and he also.....

....was working for Sanders since a number of weeks ago (while he was calling people "liars" for saying he was!) before he was formally hired by the campaign.

[CentralMass]

45. No that something references 2016. You are referencing 2019.

According to the CNN article we are talking about a 19 day period.

Sirota's trial period February 20th 2019 until March 11th 2019 at which time he was hired.

[George II]

46. The bottom line is that he was working for the Sanders campaign (as you admit)....

...while he was calling people liars for saying that. And based on what has recently been said, can we really believe it began on February 20?

Then we have the unanswered question, why did he delete virtually ALL of his tweets over the last several years?

[CentralMass]

49. He, according the facts as stated in the CNN article, was working fo the Sanders campaign on a trial

basis for 19 day before he was formally hired. At which time he deleted those tweets. If he lied about that fact then he lied about that fact.
He clearly deleted the tweets because he had then signed a formal agreement to work for the campaign.

This was a 19 day period that this scrutiny of what he was doing in his previous job is relevent.

[George II]

52. You keep saying that, but whatev'. The fact is he was working as a "journalist" criticizing....

....other Democratic candidates during that 19 day period, all the while working for the Sanders campaign and denying that he was, be it 19 days or two months.

And he obviously said things over the last month, two months, and years, that he was ashamed of since he deleted virtually ALL his twitter work over the last several years.

Why?

[betsuni]

54. Funny that yesterday we were assured that CNN was "corporate media conglomerate spin."

Today, a trusted source.

[ehrnst]

62. Yes, Sanders hired Sirota in '98 after Sirota was fired in '97 for

misconduct in another campaign.

[Gothmog]

75. LOL

Link to tweet

[CentralMass]

22. See repy 17

[George II]

33. See reply #25.

[Cha]

38. lol

[Uncle Joe]

2. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread CentralMass.

[Renew Deal]

5. I get the feeling that the Sanders campaign is a giant disinformation operation

Nothing is true. Nothing is false. Doesn’t matter if they admit to something today, they deny tomorrow.

[dalton99a]

10. Similarities to the current White House are eerie

For instance, anything they don't like is fake news

[nini]

18. I have thought the same thing many times

It's not hard to see really..

[sheshe2]

28. Oh.

Ouch.

[R B Garr]

43. The similarities are unmistakeable. nt

[Cha]

56. David Simon on the chronology..

Link to tweet

[we can do it]

12. Lie, deceive and divide.

[R B Garr]

40. It certainly looks that way. Looks familiar, too. nt

[Renew Deal]

55. Yup

[lapucelle]

13. Oh look...the article is by HA Goodman and Dr. Jill's friend Walter Bragman

who told The Guardian:

“Hillary Clinton claimed the nomination, but the process that got us to this point has been so questionable,” Walker Bragman said. “I am undecided who I will vote for – but it will not be Clinton.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/12/bernie-sanders-supporters-vote-clinton-trump

[dalton99a]

14. Makes it so hard to guess

[lapucelle]

16. The article is more garbage by a Jill Stein voter. N/T

[George II]

48. Should he win the nomination (not a snowball's chance in hell, but whatev')...

...will his VP choice be Jill Stein?

[Cha]

23. I go to the link and I

see Walker Bragman's name but no HA Goodman.. only John Paul White.

And, I see no rest of the story at the link. What's up with that?

Thanks, lapucelle

[lapucelle]

81. The Bragman quote is from The Guardian

“Hillary Clinton claimed the nomination, but the process that got us to this point has been so questionable,” Walker Bragman said. “I am undecided who I will vote for – but it will not be Clinton.”

HA Goodman cites Walter Bragman frequently in his screeds. In the irrational tirade that he wrote on November 7, 2016, HAHA urges voters to vote for Wikileaks and Stein, the source for the "data" and "evidence" is a Early November 2016 by Bragman "exlaining" "Jill Stein’s role as savior of our electoral system".

I won't link to third party/trumpian/ratf***ing garbage, but the diatribes are easy to find.

Goodman, Bragman, Sirota, Turner, and Gray were all working hard to depress turnout and sell Stein's line of bs in November 2016. What they did was disgusting. They are fully deserving of contempt for their role in the election of Trump.

[Cha]

84. Thanks! I know Walker Bragman is

Full of Shit.

[CentralMass]

24. Again, see reply 17 based on the CNN article.

[lapucelle]

39. Your link is to a Paste Magazine article by Walter Bragman.

Here's what CNN said:

Despite ending his work as a journalist, Sirota still presented himself as such well past the time he began informally advising Sanders. Screen captures from his Twitter account from Feb. 21 show that he described himself as a "@CapitalandMain and @GuardianUS journo."

snip=========================================

A review of Sirota's tweets -- captured through the nonprofit Internet Archive's Wayback Machine -- from Feb 20 through this morning shows that Sirota never disclosed his ties to Sanders, but regularly promoted the senator and his campaign. In addition to making critical remarks about President Donald Trump -- who would be Sanders' opponent in the general election -- Sirota attacked other 2020 candidates, including former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper and potential third-party hopeful ex-Starbucks CEO Howard Shultz.

[sheshe2]

37. It is from HAHA Goodman?

[R B Garr]

44. LOL, good catch again, lapucelle.

Haha Goodman. What an embarrassment.

[Gothmog]

74. I am still expecting HA Goodman to show up soon

[comradebillyboy]

76. Makes me wonder which good Democrats Salon and Huffpo

will shit on this cycle. They published every ridiculous hit piece from Goodman and Bragman and their ilk in 2016. Once good liberal blogs have descended into green tinged cesspools.

[Talking Tom]

19. Did he update his Twitter bio ?

And when .

[George II]

31. It's hard to tell, because when he was making wholesale deletes....

....(99.5% of his work over several years) he also made wholesale blocks, too. Not many people can now read his tweets.

[SFnomad]

29. I doubt that BS will be able to undo the massive damage he's doing to his own campaign n/t

[kcr]

30. Walker Bragman? Guess he's an expert.

Here is he is, along with fellow piece of work Matt Taibbi claiming deleted anti-Kamala Harris trollbots on Twitter are real:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/01/twitter-has-suspended-suspected-troll-accounts-posting-anti-kamala-harris-content-.html

[CentralMass]

42. Well from the CNN article Sirota started on a trial basis on February 20th 2019 and was formally

hired on March 11th 2019. Or 19 days. At which point he deleted his tweets.

[sheshe2]

47. Why did he delete 20K tweets?

[kcr]

50. He was in talks with Bernie before then. And he deleted his tweets.

Slimy.

[ehrnst]

63. So why the silence from Sanders' campaign? We know he has hired a press secretary.

In the past, Sanders's spox have been more than willing to immediately publicly accuse any analysis of his MFA that doesn't support in full every speculation within of being a "corporate funded attack."

But since scrutinzing the source of any statement is fair game, here's some information on the author of this article:

Walter Bragman: author of "Bernie Sanders: In His Own Words: 250 Quotes from America's Political Revolutionary" (non-disclosure that they wrote a book who's targeted sales to an audience that supports Sanders is a big red flag. If they had said, "In the interest of disclosure, I authored "Bernie Sanders: In His Own Words: 250 Quotes from America's Political Revolutionary" that would indicate that they were confident enough in their claims on their own merit that they they are self-aware of a possible bias and sought to put it aside. But they didn't.)

Also writes for the Intercept, which has a long history of disparaging and trashing the Democratic party, which David Siorta, who he is defending also does.

Also contributes to The Hill.

Also completely dismissive of the role of Russia in the 2016 election outcome - which is something that also supports a narrative that the stealing of the Oval Office from the elected Demcoratic candidate entirely a Democratic Party failure because they didn't choose Bernie as a candidate.

[bhikkhu]

65. What concerns me more is the Sirota currently works for the Sanders campaign

Which Sander's campaign formally announced the other day. I don't care when he started. Recalling the last election, Sirota is the kind of guy that shouldn't be welcome anywhere near a Democratic election.

I have trust issues about Sanders, based on what happened last time around, and based on Trump being in the White House partly because of him. Hiring Sirota really tears open an old wound.

[Cha]

67. This is who David Sirota is..

Link to tweet

[dogman]

80. An observers view.

Link to tweet

[lapucelle]

82. Didn't the "observer" also claim to have worked in a newsroom with Maggie Haberman?

Is this the Mike Elk who worked at In These Times before he was hired/fired by Politico? Remember that time when he said he worked with Maggie Haberman in a newsroom?

Link to tweet

Poor dude is having another twitter meltdown.

Link to tweet

[Gothmog]

83. Some history

Link to tweet

[Celerity]

86. The Editor of the Guardian itself calls bullshit on the first Atlantic piece

Link to tweet

john mulholland
✔
@jnmulholland

'David Sirota in the Guardian has been trashing most of Bernie Sanders's opponents without disclosing his work with Sanders'

@isaacdovere in The Atlantic.


This is totally untrue. Once David was approached by Sanders he wrote nothing else for us.



https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/03/sanders-promised-civility-hired-twitter-attack-dog/585259/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share …

1,845
10:11 PM - Mar 19, 2019


john mulhollandVerified account
@jnmulholland
Editor, Guardian US. Ex-Editor, The Observer (London), Advisor, Body & Soul. Advisor http://artskickersawards.com ; Advisor @libertychoiruk

London
https://www.theguardian.com/profile/johnmulholland
Joined January 2010








I just want Bernie to go away from the POTUS race so we all stop wasting time on him!!!

[lapucelle]

87. So what? That's one newspaper. Sirota continued to do his dirty work on twitter,

sometimes linking to hit pieces he wrote for the Guardian about other Democratic contenders. Sirota may have stopped selling his crap to the Guardian, but he was still hawking it on social media.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/20/beto-orourke-congressional-votes-analysis-capital-and-main