ZWICK 4 PREZ;1444260 wrote:http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/05/16/no-choice-gop-congressman-cites-national-security-defends-doj-investigation-of-ap-video/

That damn Obama

Well, that settles it I guess.

If a nutblog quoting another nutblog, quoting some random Pub no one's ever heard of so effectively clears Obie & Holder, I'd expect the rest of the media will be running with it by the end of the day. :rolleyes:

lol.. I've never heard of him.. he doesnt count.

That's always a good defense.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/14/republicans-doj-ap_n_3273153.html?1368550033

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1444276 wrote:lol.. I've never heard of him.. he doesnt count.

That's always a good defense.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/14/republicans-doj-ap_n_3273153.html?1368550033

So asking the the DOJ to investigate leaks by the Executive Branch is in fact, tacit approval (or even a request) to investigate the recipient of the leak, instead of the ones letting out the info.

Got it. :rolleyes:

fish82;1444280 wrote:So asking the the DOJ to investigate leaks by the Executive Branch is in fact, tacit approval (or even a request) to investigate the recipient of the leak, instead of the ones letting out the info.

Got it. :rolleyes:

I'm truly shocked you're missing the point. Truly shocked.

/sarcasm

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1444281 wrote:I'm truly shocked you're missing the point. Truly shocked.

/sarcasm

LOL.

I have no doubt that you are.

fish82;1444288 wrote:LOL.

I have no doubt that you are.

LOL

Where's Monica Lewinsky these days?

I'd call the AP wiretap the worst, easily. Rather disturbing and disgusting to be so keen on completely manipulating the flow of media to go that far into the fourth estate.

I'd say the IRS vs Teabilly thing is more the sort of thing that the Conservatives should be salivating over. The vast majority of people look at the IRS as pure shitholes in the first place, so... Assuming the political climate is in the realm where a certain percent identify as Ds and Rs (both being fairly even, as popular vote nationwide has been pretty close for most reasonably recent presidential elections) and another percent are more in the middle, picking and choosing a party on a more election-by-election basis, that's the sort of thing that can, at least temporarily, drive the undecided middles away from one side for a while. Get the perception out there that if you're known to be against the current order, they'll launch the fucking IRS after you and people will be super gung ho about getting the fuck rid of anyone associated with that idea.

At least in theory. That would necessitate the Rs to show a certain amount of vision to pull off, which would mean the party would have to evolve to some degree. At least to a higher level than they've been with their "let's regurgitate a previous failure and see if he can win something this time!" concept on how to win a presidency.

ccrunner609;1445940 wrote:All are worse then Watergate. All should get people impeached, fired, thrown in jail. If this was done in an era where the press worked for the people and not pushing their political agenda, Washington would be flipped upside down.

I said it years ago, Obama will go down in history as the worst president of all time. After him and his cronies get out of power, they will be villified and the truth will come out.

Good by to Hillary in 16', good bye to Harry Reid in 14'

I'm sure all of these prescient predictions of yours will come true just like the ones you made in July 2010 when you knew...just knew that anybody could beat that Obummer...Oh wait...

Who cares how he does head to head..........he isnt gonna run against all of them. The only thing that matters is that he is down 5 points to "a republican" and you dont even know who it is. Like I said a month ago on here, it doesnt matter who runs againt BHO, anyone can beat him. His term in the WH is the worst of alltime.

^^ Had obama and his administration not suppressed the IRS / AP / Benghazi scandals, he would have lost the election. ccrunner and the rest of us did not perhaps realize, in 2010, the extent of the lawbreaking that the obama administration would go to during the last couple of years, in order to retain power.

About as chilling as it can get in this country.


Change we can believe in ...

^^ which proves they did not have the savvy to be in power anyway.

ccrunner609;1446218 wrote:This+ he was beat after the first debate. He was on the way out and the pubs didnt press on the gas. They blew it.

Hahahaha just give up dude you made a fool of yourself.

Devils Advocate;1446281 wrote:^^ which proves they did not have the savvy to be in power anyway.

Better said, it proves that getting the job and the ability to do the job are separate and unrelated skill sets.

QuakerOats;1446096 wrote:^^ Had obama and his administration not suppressed the IRS / AP / Benghazi scandals, he would have lost the election. ccrunner and the rest of us did not perhaps realize, in 2010, the extent of the lawbreaking that the obama administration would go to during the last couple of years, in order to retain power.

About as chilling as it can get in this country.


Change we can believe in ...

Not My President .......

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/22/doj-invoked-espionage-act-in-calling-fox-news-reporter-criminal-co-conspirator/





Tyranny

QuakerOats;1447261 wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/22/doj-invoked-espionage-act-in-calling-fox-news-reporter-criminal-co-conspirator/

While I think that article is loaded with hyperbole, I'd be more inclined to give the administration the benefit of doubt if they did not so actively attack and attempt to delegitimize basically the lone voice of opposition in the MSM.

What used to be simply a lament of a lack of leadership and governing is taking shape of something much more sinister. Even I wasn't cynical enough to say Obama just wants to crush opposition so he can push his agenda unopposed (and without compromise). But I don't know how anyone can honestly argue otherwise given the track record, and especially given recent events.

gut;1447288 wrote:What used to be simply a lament of a lack of leadership and governing is taking shape of something much more sinister. Even I wasn't cynical enough to say Obama just wants to crush opposition so he can push his agenda unopposed (and without compromise). But I don't know how anyone can honestly argue otherwise given the track record, and especially given recent events.

This really started taking shape in the media after Obama took office back in 2009. He sent his staffers out to try and marginalize Fox News as "not news". The Treasury Department tried to exclude Fox from the press pool in an interview with a Treasury official. They backed down after the rest of the press pool pitched a fit. Now we are seeing how members of the press who are not humping the administrations leg may find themselves under a DOJ probe.

majorspark;1447369 wrote:Now we are seeing how members of the press who are not humping the administrations leg may find themselves under a DOJ probe.

Just like recently they had an semi-exclusive "private" briefing for a select few media members ahead of the IRS scandal (I think it was, might have been AP).

One would think that's a tough decision for a reporter because it threatens your credibility/objectivity. So, so, so very far from "transparent" to invite your friends in the "media" to what must have constituted a spin brainstorming session.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1444276 wrote:lol.. I've never heard of him.. he doesnt count.

That's always a good defense.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/14/republicans-doj-ap_n_3273153.html?1368550033

I believe that the "I never heard of it" defense is used by the current White House occupant?!?
No?

Must be having trouble getting the foot out of your mouth.. uh Zwick?