4 ms·
Providing her real name was quite the blunder. Gave WP what they needed to make sense of the unraveling story, and permanently attached her identity to clumsy d
by thesmallestcat 9y ago
Providing her real name was quite the blunder. Gave WP what they needed to make sense of the unraveling story, and permanently attached her identity to clumsy deceit.
- tomc1985 9y agoThey believe she attempted to deceive her in bad faith, in order to affect the campaign of a public official. As they state, (and as US courts will stand behind) she entered into the agreement in bad faith and was caught, and they voided said agreement.
- thesmallestcat 9y agoI'm not sure who you're arguing with, like I said, Phillips blundered by giving them her real name. WP is definitely allowed to publish it.
- tomc1985 9y agoI think I read OP as defending Ms Philips' mistaken expectations of privacy. My bad
- thesmallestcat 9y ago[I] should be less ambiguous [in my comments] :)
- toxican 9y agois "off the record" even legally binding?
- c0nducktr 9y agoNo. It's similar to that "if you're a cop you have to tell me" thing. Basically meaningless.
- veridies 9y agoSure, but the Washington Post may have refused her story if they couldn't verify her identity. The real problem is that for Veritas is that they apparently can't hire someone with a clean identity and no public record of conservative beliefs.
- AceJohnny2 9y ago> The job’s listed goal: “To adopt an alias persona, gain access to an identified person of interest and persuade that person to reveal information.” Yeah, way to fuck that one up. She's burned. But I'm afraid this is just the beginning.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]