3 ms·

So unless you can prove that something you read in the paper is a lie you must accept it as absolute truth? Seems healthy.. He had a good argument I think. Not

by WhoBeI 10y ago

So unless you can prove that something you read in the paper is a lie you must accept it as absolute truth? Seems healthy.. He had a good argument I think. Not sure if he's right but good argument.

tanderson92 10y ago
Journalists' livelihoods are dependent on not misquoting those who they interview. The claim was that the quote is a fabrication. How can the journalist possibly defend against this charge? It's requiring him to prove a negative.
- AimHere 10y ago
  Actually, the previous poster's claim is worse than that. This journalist does have notes and so if it mattered enough, those could be subjected to forensic examination to see if they're consistent with the time period of the interview. The poster is basically denying something for which there is almost certainly actual physical evidence corroborating Baum's story, as well as apparently defaming a professional journalist.
  - titzer 10y ago
    Sorry, no, questioning a journalist's claims is not defamation. The family thinks this quote is bunk, too. "We never saw or heard anything from our dad, John Ehrlichman, that was derogatory about any person of color," wrote Peter Ehrlichman, Tom Ehrlichman, Jan Ehrlichman, Michael Ehrlichman and Jody E. Pineda in a statement provided to CNN. "The 1994 alleged 'quote' we saw repeated in social media for the first time today does not square with what we know of our father. And collectively, that spans over 185 years of time with him," the Ehrlichman family wrote. "We do not subscribe to the alleged racist point of view that this writer now implies 22 years following the so-called interview of John and 16 years following our father's death, when dad can no longer respond. None of us have raised our kids that way, and that's because we were not raised that way." from: http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/ http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-r...
    - AimHere 10y ago
      > Sorry, no, questioning a journalist's claims is not defamation. If you're falsely claiming a journalist is lying, it damn well is. We're talking about someone who referred to his notes of an interview and flat out quoted Erlichman by name with a lengthy quote. If you're contradicting him, it's hard to see how you're suggesting an innocent misquote - either Baum is lying or you're wrong. > The family thinks this quote is bunk, too. The family clearly doesn't know shit about Ehrlichman's racist views. He was caught on one of Nixon's tapes, released in 2003, ranting that black people were sexual degenerates with no family values, and in another tape that black people should be stuck in boxcars to work as domestics. I'd point you at the recordings (good luck denying those), but the Nixon archives are really hard to search, so it might take some time. The latter is quoted in John Dean's book "The Nixon Defence", but google books isn't giving up the footnote today!

by WhoBeI 10y ago

So unless you can prove that something you read in the paper is a lie you must accept it as absolute truth? Seems healthy.. He had a good argument I think. Not sure if he's right but good argument.

tanderson92 10y ago

Journalists' livelihoods are dependent on not misquoting those who they interview. The claim was that the quote is a fabrication. How can the journalist possibly defend against this charge? It's requiring him to prove a negative.

AimHere 10y ago
Actually, the previous poster's claim is worse than that. This journalist does have notes and so if it mattered enough, those could be subjected to forensic examination to see if they're consistent with the time period of the interview. The poster is basically denying something for which there is almost certainly actual physical evidence corroborating Baum's story, as well as apparently defaming a professional journalist.
- titzer 10y ago
  Sorry, no, questioning a journalist's claims is not defamation. The family thinks this quote is bunk, too. "We never saw or heard anything from our dad, John Ehrlichman, that was derogatory about any person of color," wrote Peter Ehrlichman, Tom Ehrlichman, Jan Ehrlichman, Michael Ehrlichman and Jody E. Pineda in a statement provided to CNN. "The 1994 alleged 'quote' we saw repeated in social media for the first time today does not square with what we know of our father. And collectively, that spans over 185 years of time with him," the Ehrlichman family wrote. "We do not subscribe to the alleged racist point of view that this writer now implies 22 years following the so-called interview of John and 16 years following our father's death, when dad can no longer respond. None of us have raised our kids that way, and that's because we were not raised that way." from: http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/ http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-r...
  - AimHere 10y ago
    > Sorry, no, questioning a journalist's claims is not defamation. If you're falsely claiming a journalist is lying, it damn well is. We're talking about someone who referred to his notes of an interview and flat out quoted Erlichman by name with a lengthy quote. If you're contradicting him, it's hard to see how you're suggesting an innocent misquote - either Baum is lying or you're wrong. > The family thinks this quote is bunk, too. The family clearly doesn't know shit about Ehrlichman's racist views. He was caught on one of Nixon's tapes, released in 2003, ranting that black people were sexual degenerates with no family values, and in another tape that black people should be stuck in boxcars to work as domestics. I'd point you at the recordings (good luck denying those), but the Nixon archives are really hard to search, so it might take some time. The latter is quoted in John Dean's book "The Nixon Defence", but google books isn't giving up the footnote today!