 |
Really? We KNOW it happened... its already been admitted... one person has already been thrown under the bus.. (the acting head of the IRS who is likely to be facing a criminal trial)..Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
You alone are saying it didn't happen. THe only thing that hasn't happened yet are the criminal trials for the involved parties... but only you are doubting any of these things happened. Not even Obama is claiming they never happened./
Its only you guys who are calling for him to go to jail, as most of us hope he enjoys his retirement. Personally I think his only fault is the lack of clarity in the procedure. All the 501c3 and 4 groups should be investigated the same way in my opinion, and if there are so many more of them to process, then hire more people.
Holy crap, you didn't just say the same government Axelrod just said is too big to manage needs to get bigger did you?
DUDE! Even your buddies on the left, except for Media Matters and the National Journal, are lynching the admin now. Wake up and get your head out of the sand.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Doesn't matter the noise out there. We will see what we got when the dust settles.
Tal is a true koolaide drinker...
He doesn't even believe his own people when they admit to crimes.
The hubris continues, but sadly for Obama this time the media isn't playing along. In trying to pander to the media today he tried to renew his bid for a shield law to protect journalists. No, really. The day after it gets out that his administration ignored the laws already in place to protect journalists he asks for another law to protect journalists... as if the law was ever a roadblock to Obama. It's not even a speed bump to these guys.
The Society for Professional Journalists isn't buying it.
Quote:
But like lovers spurned too many times before, advocates of a free and open press, as well as First Amendment lawyers, chucked the teddy bear in the garbage and tossed the roses down the drain.
“It is a blatantly political move,” said Sonny Albarado, president of the Society of Professional Journalists. “I don’t know why anyone would think that this would appease those of us who are outraged. I think it is curious that the administration pushed for this the day after—the day after!—it got a black eye for secretly going around obtaining journalists’ work product.”
The media shield law will be introduced by New York Sen. Chuck Schumer at the request of the White House.
"This kind of law would balance national security needs against the public's right to the free flow of information,” said Schumer in a statement. “At minimum, our bill would have ensured a fairer, more deliberate process in this case.”
“When I heard this came out of the White House, I went, ‘Yeah, so?’” said Lucy Dalglish, the dean of the Journalism School at the University of Maryland and someone who has pushed for a federal shield law for years. “They think, ‘Oh well, we threw this bone to them before and it sort of kept them happy.’ Give me a break. This doesn’t pass the smell test.”
The reason DoJ snooped on the AP? Version one from Holder:
And now for the real reason, the AP stole their thunder.Quote:
“I’ve been a prosecutor since 1976, and I have to say that this is among, if not the most serious – it’s in the top two or three – most serious leaks that I’ve ever seen,” Holder added. “It put the American people at risk. And that is not hyperbole.”
So the AP was cooperative and held back until there were no more security concerns. Then the CIA asked for one more day until Obama could tout his national security cred - AND - avoid a story that contradicted his message that all was well.Quote:
For five days, reporters at the Associated Press had been sitting on a big scoop about a foiled al-Qaeda plot at the request of CIA officials. Then, in a hastily scheduled Monday morning meeting, the journalists were asked by agency officials to hold off on publishing the story for just one more day.
The CIA officials, who had initially cited national security concerns in an attempt to delay publication, no longer had those worries, according to individuals familiar with the exchange. Instead, the Obama administration was planning to announce the successful counterterrorism operation that Tuesday.
AP balked and proceeded to publish that Monday afternoon. Its May 2012 report is now at the center of a controversial and broad seizure of phone records of AP reporters’ home, office and cellphone lines. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said the unauthorized disclosure about an intelligence operation to stop al-Qaeda from detonating explosives aboard a U.S. airliner was among the most serious leaks he could remember, and justified secretly obtaining records from a handful of reporters and editors over a span of two months.
Now, some members of Congress and media advocates are questioning why the administration viewed the leak that led to the May 7 AP story as so grave.
...
The CIA officials, who had initially cited national security concerns in an attempt to delay publication, no longer had those worries, according to individuals familiar with the exchange. Instead, the Obama administration was planning to announce the successful counterterrorism operation that Tuesday.
AP balked and proceeded to publish that Monday afternoon.
CIA then offered a compromise, if they would wait another day they would give the AP a one hour scoop with no official confirmation. While the Ap was discussing it amongst themselves, the White House came back and said no dice to that, they would offer a five minute scoop.Quote:
AP’s story about the foiled plot was at odds with the calming message the White House had been conveying on the eve of the first anniversary of the killing of Osama bin Laden. On April 30, the Department of Homeland Security issued a statement saying that there was “no indication of any specific, credible threats or plots against the US tied to the one-year anniversary of Bin Laden’s death.”
The rest is history, and even after trying to be cooperative DoJ went after their phone records. Lesson from the White House? Don't scoop Obama or we'll come after you.
Lesson from AP? Payback's a b*tch.
Dude, we aren't interested in speculation that answers their own question with a question; "Did British disquiet help spur the U.S. investigation into the leak? British government sources would not say whether a complaint was lodged."Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Um, I'll stick with WaPo's version of events for now, not guessing games.
Eric Holder ,in testimony admitted that not only is the Justice Dept having difficulty finding a written record of him recusing himself from the AP case ,but more likely a written record doesn't exist. So all we have is his word when he says he's recused himself from the investigation.
. Holder testimony: Live Updates
Yep, the Sgt. Schultz defense.
It may be that the Emperor can not be taken down by these multiple scandals . But it is a very different matter about his cabinet appointees who are still answerable to Congressional oversight in our system.
I guess you can only push the media so far Mr. President.
Schieffer: "Welcome to dumb and dumber" in Washington
These arguments are becoming circular,
Maybe that's the problem Tom, all these temporary acting bosses have degraded the integrity of all our agencies and institutions which was probably the right wing plan to destroy government and return it to the wishes of the elites in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Nice strategy, filibuster and obstruct EVERYTHING, and call it OVERSIGHT.
Umm twice this year a Circus court has ruled that the Emperor violated the constitution by making recess appointments when the Senate wasn't in session. It's very simple... you talk about the need for the Repubics to cross the aisle and compromise . Well in this case the Executive has to appoint someone who can survive the confirmation process.
When he can ramrod his choices through ,we end up with Eric Holder , Kathleen Sebillius ,Lisa Jackson etc.
Here's a novel idea, how about voting up or down instead of filibustering? Just vote, no compromise needed.
And when Dems are in the minority again?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Good luck :)
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:27 PM. |