PDA

View Full Version : Obama DOJ labels Fox News Reporter Co-Conspirator


Claynus
05-20-2013, 06:21 PM
Now the liberal media is sinking their teeth into Obama. Awesome. LMAO

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/20/james-rosen-justice-department-co-conspirator-obama_n_3305857.html?utm_hp_ref=media

DOJ's Calls Fox News Reporter James Rosen 'Co-Conspirator' In Leak Case; Journalists Outraged



A new article about how the Obama administration tracked the movements and correspondence of a Fox News reporter led to a fresh round of condemnation by journalists on Monday.

The Washington Post published an explosive story about the Justice Department's monitoring of James Rosen, a Fox News reporter based in Washington. Rosen allegedly spoke to Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, a State Department contractor, for a story about North Korea's nuclear program. The Justice Department charged Kim with violating the Espionage Act for his contact with Rosen.

Kim's case has already been condemned by critics of the White House's hyper-aggressive approach to leaks, but the details of the DOJ's tracking of Rosen have not been known until now. The Post's Ann E. Marimow laid out the intensity of that monitoring in her article:

The Justice Department used security badge access records to track the reporter’s comings and goings from the State Department, according to a newly obtained court affidavit. They traced the timing of his calls with a State Department security adviser suspected of sharing the classified report. They obtained a search warrant for the reporter’s personal emails.

That goes above and beyond what the Justice Department did when it monitored the Associated Press. There, it looked at phone records, not the actual contents of emails.

Perhaps more chilling, the Post reported that, in order to justify its search warrants for Rosen's private correspondence, the Justice Department labeled Rosen a "co-conspirator" with Kim because he made an arrangement with him about how to get him information:

Reyes wrote that there was evidence Rosen had broken the law, “at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator.” That fact distinguishes his case from the probe of the AP, in which the news organization is not the likely target.


It's not clear how different these arrangements, which the Post wrote involved things like code names, were from the elaborate arrangements that Bob Woodward made with Deep Throat. Journalists reacted with particular alarm to the notion that Rosen was an "abettor" simply because he pushed for a source to give him information:

Ryan Lizza @RyanLizza

Case against Fox's Rosen, in which O admin is criminalizing reporting, makes all of the other "scandals" look like giant nothing burgers.

Eli Lake @EliLake

Serious idea. Instead of calling it Obama's war on whistleblowers, let's just call it what it is: Obama's war on journalism.

Glenn Greenwald ✔ @ggreenwald

To address a widely believed myth: except in very rare circumstances, it is *not* a crime for journalists to report classified information

There has long been evidence that some government prosecutors do not consider journalists to have heightened levels of protection. In January, for instance, lawyers prosecuting military whistleblower Bradley Manning said that, had he passed information to the New York Times instead of WikiLeaks, he would still be "aiding the enemy." The government has also tried to make the case in the past that WikiLeaks chief Julian Assange could be indicted as a co-conspirator with Manning for receiving his information.

UPDATE: Fox News responded to the Rosen investigation in a statement to TVNewser:

“We are outraged to learn today that James Rosen was named a criminal co-conspirator for simply doing his job as a reporter. In fact, it is downright chilling. We will unequivocally defend his right to operate as a member of what up until now has always been a free press.”


@ggreenwald
Glenn Greenwald
Accusing James Rosen of committing crimes - for basic reporting - may be the most dangerous thing the Obama DOJ has done yet

@dangillmor
Dan Gillmor
All journalists, of all political leanings, should be coming loud and hard to the defense of Fox News' Rosen. http://t.co/WAiuByTuTy

@HuffPostMedia
HuffPost Media
Dear many of our commenters: this is one time when you should be siding with Fox News http://t.co/hhPhw4N3XI


Cliffs: You know you done fucked up when even the Huffington Post is supporting Fox News.

stonedstooge
05-20-2013, 06:25 PM
O'BAMA DIDN"T KNOW ABOUT THIS UNTIL HE READ IT ON CHIEFSPLANET

notorious
05-20-2013, 06:30 PM
Wow, the floodgates are about to open.


Then again, this is the media we are talking about. :facepalm:

LiveSteam
05-20-2013, 06:34 PM
Report: Justice Department targeted TWO Fox News Channel reporters and a producer for talking with government sources


Inspector General report found agents read emails, tracked phone records
Reporters James Rosen and William La Jeunesse, producer Mike Levine were the subject of subpoenas but never notified by the government

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2328031/Report-Justice-Department-targeted-TWO-Fox-News-reporters-producer-talking-government-sources.html

stonedstooge
05-20-2013, 06:35 PM
Report: Justice Department targeted TWO Fox News Channel reporters and a producer for talking with government sources


Inspector General report found agents read emails, tracked phone records
Reporters James Rosen and William La Jeunesse, producer Mike Levine were the subject of subpoenas but never notified by the government

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2328031/Report-Justice-Department-targeted-TWO-Fox-News-reporters-producer-talking-government-sources.html

Jesus. Dudes are out of control

RedNeckRaider
05-20-2013, 06:57 PM
I understand how frustrating in must be for our president. He has his staff write the news for the media and then they go snooping around behind his back~

KC native
05-20-2013, 07:08 PM
People should lose their jobs and be disbarred for this shit. This is unacceptable. Holder has to go.

go bowe
05-20-2013, 07:12 PM
clearly the dog, er doj has overreached this time...

there's this pesky first amendment thingy that they seem to have overlooked...

RaiderH8r
05-20-2013, 07:18 PM
clearly the dog, er doj has overreached this time...

there's this pesky first amendment thingy that they seem to have overlooked...

The second amendment never seemed to concern them, why should the first?

CoMoChief
05-20-2013, 07:18 PM
Cosmo to come in soon to tell everyone this isn't happening and that BO is doing a hell of a job.

CoMoChief
05-20-2013, 07:19 PM
The second amendment never seemed to concern them, why should the first?

or the 4th..or 5th...or 10th should we go on

ARE PEOPLE STARTING TO WAKE THE FUCK UP?

Bwana
05-20-2013, 07:26 PM
Barry and his pals are about to go through one hell of a shit storm. If you've lost the backing of a lot of the liberal media, things are going to get fun.

Raiderhader
05-20-2013, 07:27 PM
The second amendment never seemed to concern them, why should the first?

Because the First is important TO THEM. F#ck with everyone else's rights and it's "progress". F#ck with their rights, and all hell breaks loose.

Hypocrites the lot 'em.

listopencil
05-20-2013, 07:28 PM
Meh. It's just the Constitution of the United States of America. What's difference does it make?

KC native
05-20-2013, 07:31 PM
Barry and his pals are about to go through one hell of a shit storm. If you've lost the backing of a lot of the liberal media, things are going to get fun.

Holder will fall on the sword and Obama will walk away from this.

Bwana
05-20-2013, 07:32 PM
Holder will fall on the sword and Obama will walk away from this.

I have no doubt you're right.

go bowe
05-20-2013, 07:53 PM
Barry and his pals are about to go through one hell of a shit storm. If you've lost the backing of a lot of the liberal media, things are going to get fun.

the big o will not be in the dog house long, the liberal media still loves him...

it's just a little lovers' spat...

Raiderhader
05-20-2013, 07:59 PM
the big o will not be in the dog house long, the liberal media still loves him...

it's just a little lovers' spat...


Possible. However, if more of these instances continue to pop up they may completely turn on him.

It will be interesting to see if anyone else in the media has been targeted. Hell I was just reading that this Rosen situation also included another reporter and a producer. I would not be surprised in the least to see more of this abuse of power come to light. If so, things could get a might interesting.....

Bwana
05-20-2013, 08:17 PM
the big o will not be in the dog house long, the liberal media still loves him...

it's just a little lovers' spat...

Perhaps, but this guy keeps finding himself in hot water. One thing the media doesn't seem to warm up to is people going out of their way to **** with one of their own, even if they are ****ing with "the other side."

On a side note, I expect Barry to milk the hell out of the Moore, OK twister to try to deflect as much of the heat off him as he can. It just seems like his style.

Frazod
05-20-2013, 08:22 PM
Meh. It's just the Constitution of the United States of America. What's difference does it make?

http://api.ning.com/files/M6XhXO28glCeEL5ke37D3S1UP9WQktzhIoy6KdNrYhHV*xKilOLSGNKQh48bNACbMnOit1-OZKvXW4Oyr9VcAL897e7bWCnH/ConstitutionToiletPaperDispenser.jpg

Frazod
05-20-2013, 08:23 PM
Meh. It's just the Constitution of the United States of America. What's difference does it make?

http://www.sott.net/image/image/s4/85576/full/constitution_toilet_paper.jpg

LiveSteam
05-20-2013, 08:32 PM
Cant wait for this to hit the main stream media. Heard this on Andy Dean's radio show tonight

The top IRS lawyer just happens to be BFFs with Obama & Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright
Saved Obama & Wright from the IRS back in 2007 & was given this position as an act of gratitude.

InChiefsHell
05-20-2013, 08:34 PM
I'd say this is unbelievable...but I gave that up by year 2 of this asshole's administration.

petegz28
05-20-2013, 08:42 PM
Perhaps, but this guy keeps finding himself in hot water. One thing the media doesn't seem to warm up to is people going out of their way to **** with one of their own, even if they are ****ing with "the other side."

On a side note, I expect Barry to milk the hell out of the Moore, OK twister to try to deflect as much of the heat off him as he can. It just seems like his style.

Just like he did Sandy

cosmo20002
05-20-2013, 08:51 PM
Just like he did Sandy

Geez, he shows up after one of these things and people bitch. He doesn't show up and people bitch.

InChiefsHell
05-20-2013, 09:03 PM
Geez, he shows up after one of these things and people bitch. He doesn't show up and people bitch.

It's not what he does per se...it's WHY...

Prison Bitch
05-20-2013, 09:20 PM
Lesson learned: go after the GOP, but not the media.

Prison Bitch
05-20-2013, 09:21 PM
Just like he did Sandy

Taking bets now on whether Chris Christie accompanies him down to Oklahoma

petegz28
05-20-2013, 09:22 PM
Geez, he shows up after one of these things and people bitch. He doesn't show up and people bitch.

If he weren't always trying to hide from some potential scandal.....

InChiefsHell
05-20-2013, 09:27 PM
Taking bets now on whether Chris Christie accompanies him down to Oklahoma

He'd probably go for the BBQ...

BucEyedPea
05-20-2013, 09:28 PM
Is the admin able to get such emails and phone records due to all the changes since 9/11? Like the Patriot Act?
This is why such an act should not be passed. It will always be abused.

dirk digler
05-20-2013, 09:32 PM
Is the admin able to get such emails and phone records due to all the changes since 9/11? Like the Patriot Act?
This is why such an act should not be passed. It will always be abused.

Yes and we reap what we sow. The right wanted the Patriot Act now they got it. They also complained that Obama was soft on leakers, well I guess not.

BTW a federal judge appointed by Reagan approved the search warrant on Rosen.

I don't necessarily agree with the FBI that Rosen was a co-conspirator but he shouldn't be trying to get classified information on government property.

BucEyedPea
05-20-2013, 09:34 PM
Yes and we reap what we sow. The right wanted the Patriot Act now they got it. They also complained that Obama was soft on leakers, well I guess not.

BTW a federal judge appointed by Reagen approved the search warrant on Rosen.

I don't necessarily agree with the FBI that Rosen was a co-conspirator but he shouldn't be trying to get classified information on government property.

Well, at least there was a warrant from a judge.

BTW, there were enough the right that were opposed to the Patriot Act—like myself.
Congress at the time—another story. Remember, Obama extended the Patriot Act and promised a change in civil liberties.

dirk digler
05-20-2013, 09:38 PM
Well, at least there was a warrant from a judge.

BTW, there were enough the right that were opposed to the Patriot Act—like myself.
Congress at the time—another story. Remember, Obama promised improvements in civil liberties and didn't deliver.

I am sure there was just not enough. Now they can spy on all of us and companies like Google and the telco's have zero problem turning over their customers information.

I definitely agree he promised that and that is probably one of my biggest disappointments in him.

BucEyedPea
05-20-2013, 09:49 PM
I am sure there was just not enough. Now they can spy on all of us and companies like Google and the telco's have zero problem turning over their customers information.

I definitely agree he promised that and that is probably one of my biggest disappointments in him.

Yes I know about Google and the big central spy center out west. I understand it's going to get worse with Google too. Anyone relying on email for security is naive. Snail mail is safer.

go bowe
05-20-2013, 09:55 PM
Perhaps, but this guy keeps finding himself in hot water. One thing the media doesn't seem to warm up to is people going out of their way to **** with one of their own, even if they are ****ing with "the other side."

On a side note, I expect Barry to milk the hell out of the Moore, OK twister to try to deflect as much of the heat off him as he can. It just seems like his style.

correct on both points...

the ig report on fast and furious was just put out if i understood the piece correctly...

more hot water for holder and the big o.,.

i'm disappointed that we're wasting all this time on things that aren't going to change the world when we should be doing something about immigration, energy, jobs and more...

go bowe
05-20-2013, 10:01 PM
I am sure there was just not enough. Now they can spy on all of us and companies like Google and the telco's have zero problem turning over their customers information.

I definitely agree he promised that and that is probably one of my biggest disappointments in him.

"they" can spy on all of us now...

whole federal agencies devote themselves to monitoring digital communication anywhere in the world (practically anyway), including here in 'merica...

law enforcement at every level can get search warrants to seize phone records in criminal investigations and that's to say nothing about fisa warrants and the patriot act in general...

the big o's stance on the war on drugs and infringement of civil liberties have been more than disappointing, they have been downright infuriating...

notorious
05-20-2013, 10:02 PM
Doors can be opened by either party and exploited.

That's why I am pissed. One party will create a loophole or a way around procedures to get what they want, then the other party will use that opened door to push their bullshit through.


The system was sound at one time, but it's been bent and abused to the point it is no longer even close to the same. A lot of what was written in was done so to avoid the abuse that is happening today.

cosmo20002
05-20-2013, 10:27 PM
It's not what he does per se...it's WHY...

So what is the WHY? Is it any different than anyone else? Presidents usually go to these things and never was it necessary nor did they spend the day helping clean up debris. They go in part for a morale boost to the people there and in part for a photo op. And no matter what, morons will bitch about it.

patteeu
05-20-2013, 10:40 PM
Yes and we reap what we sow. The right wanted the Patriot Act now they got it. They also complained that Obama was soft on leakers, well I guess not.

BTW a federal judge appointed by Reagan approved the search warrant on Rosen.

I don't necessarily agree with the FBI that Rosen was a co-conspirator but he shouldn't be trying to get classified information on government property.

No, "they" complained that Obama was an opportunistic leaker who placed more value on making Obama look good than on national security. And "they" were right.

donkhater
05-21-2013, 05:37 AM
I'm not concerned. This is just a one time thing. Won't happen again.

I've been told there's no such thing as a slippery slope when it comes to federal laws.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=265183&page=5

WhiteWhale
05-21-2013, 05:53 AM
or the 4th..or 5th...or 10th should we go on

ARE PEOPLE STARTING TO WAKE THE **** UP?

No. They'll toss and turn and go back to sleep.

Donger
05-21-2013, 06:09 AM
I'm really shocked that anyone is surprised by this...

2010

Last week, in an interview with Univision radio, Obama urged Hispanic votes for Democrats, and said: "If Latinos sit out the election instead of, 'we're going to punish our enemies and we're going to reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us' -- if they don't see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it's going to be harder."

Bwana
05-21-2013, 06:22 AM
i'm disappointed that we're wasting all this time on things that aren't going to change the world when we should be doing something about immigration, energy, jobs and more...

I agree John, but it's what I have come to expect with these useless window lickers.

The hill has turned into nothing more than a giant pissing contest. They run their mouth, but don't seem to get much done in the way of helping out the folks that put them in office...........useless.

Bootlegged
05-21-2013, 07:32 AM
It's a shame nobody knew about this guy before the first election.... Oh wait

Comrade Crapski
05-21-2013, 07:37 AM
I warned everybody about that raccoon looking rodent back in 2008, but did anybody listen? Nope. Just character assassinated me.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=214070&highlight=Eric+Holder

You fucking moonbat scumbags ie banyon, orange, amnorix

blaise
05-21-2013, 07:38 AM
"Big deal. You RWNJ complain about everything."

- cosmo

Comrade Crapski
05-21-2013, 07:40 AM
it's all right here

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/search.php?searchid=908276

listopencil
05-21-2013, 07:41 AM
http://www.sott.net/image/image/s4/85576/full/constitution_toilet_paper.jpg

Yup. Exactly.

blaise
05-21-2013, 07:42 AM
"We need a Beyonce concert and a "candid" photo of me playing hoops with some kid, now!"

- Obama

KILLER_CLOWN
05-21-2013, 08:23 AM
The government would never abuse it's powers, we should give them more. A fat, apathetic population that thinks it can't happen here is the usual recipe. Congrats, it's on all of us for not understanding history.

jettio
05-21-2013, 08:50 AM
I think it is one thing to establish probable cause for a search warrant and another to get a federal grand jury indictment and trying to prosecute the reporter.

It is kind of silly to say that the DOJ is treating reporters as "criminal co-conspirators" if that is a fact stated in a search warrant application affidavit but the reporters are not being indicted or prosecuted.

I doubt any reporters would ever be indicted for somebody giving up secrets to them if they used it in a story, but what if a reporter got hold of classified material and never reported it in a story and passed the information on to other people for other reasons?

It is interesting to me, that the "liberal media" keeps reporting that there have been 6 leak prosecutions under the Obama administration and that is more than all other administrations combined, but they never discuss the merits of those individual cases.

It might be the case that nearly all Americans would agree that those 6 cases warranted prosecution. And I think that 2 or 3 of those cases were inherited from the prior administration.

My personal belief is I would be much more concerned about an administration punishing leakers of information that never should be classified in the first place and is only embarrassing to the job performance of the executive branch. If somebody is leaking classified information that compromises national security and endangers our assets in dangerous places and/or says nothing at all about executive branch wrongdoing, then that leaker should be punished.

mikey23545
05-21-2013, 09:01 AM
I think it is one thing to establish probable cause for a search warrant and another to get a federal grand jury indictment and trying to prosecute the reporter.

It is kind of silly to say that the DOJ is treating reporters as "criminal co-conspirators" if that is a fact stated in a search warrant application affidavit but the reporters are not being indicted or prosecuted.

I doubt any reporters would ever be indicted for somebody giving up secrets to them if they used it in a story, but what if a reporter got hold of classified material and never reported it in a story and passed the information on to other people for other reasons?

It is interesting to me, that the "liberal media" keeps reporting that there have been 6 leak prosecutions under the Obama administration and that is more than all other administrations combined, but they never discuss the merits of those individual cases.

It might be the case that nearly all Americans would agree that those 6 cases warranted prosecution. And I think that 2 or 3 of those cases were inherited from the prior administration.

My personal belief is I would be much more concerned about an administration punishing leakers of information that never should be classified in the first place and is only embarrassing to the job performance of the executive branch. If somebody is leaking classified information that compromises national security and endangers our assets in dangerous places and/or says nothing at all about executive branch wrongdoing, then that leaker should be punished.


I know you're talking but all I can hear is blah blah blah Obama love blah blah blah...

blaise
05-21-2013, 09:08 AM
I know you're talking but all I can hear is blah blah blah Obama love blah blah blah...

"It might look like an important story at first glance, but upon closer inspection: Obama #1."

KILLER_CLOWN
05-21-2013, 09:14 AM
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3odt3mgIcHw?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

jettio
05-21-2013, 09:16 AM
"We need a Beyonce concert and a "candid" photo of me playing hoops with some kid, now!"

- Obama

And what is your point with this post?

HonestChieffan
05-21-2013, 09:24 AM
And what is your point with this post?


To me Blaise was trying today that Barak needs to reach out and reconnect with his base through the things that brought them together from the beginning. His love of sport and his ability to dominate on the BB court or the golf course resonates deeply. And his ability to relate to and energize the entertainment community would recapture that special feeling of the past and possibly get them to come to his aid in a time of deep division.

mikey23545
05-21-2013, 09:25 AM
We need to get this party, this administration, out of power as soon as possible - while we still can.

blaise
05-21-2013, 09:26 AM
And what is your point with this post?

I don't think it's all that complicated. Keep trying to figure it out, and if you're still having trouble this afternoon let me know.

jettio
05-21-2013, 09:44 AM
I don't think it's all that complicated. Keep trying to figure it out, and if you're still having trouble this afternoon let me know.

You should read the Washington Post article by Anne Marimow that is referred to in the opening post as the initial story about the leak and the investigation.

Pretty funny to see how this James Rosen interacted with this leaker.

If you start with the given that a reporter should not be compelled to reveal his source, these dupes did not do much to make sure they could not be found out.

jettio
05-21-2013, 12:10 PM
Here's an article written by a reporter who read the Anne Marimow article and came to a similar conclusion about James Rosen and this leaker, Steven Kim.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/21/us-shafer-rosen-idUSBRE94K0IQ20130521?feedType=RSS&virtualBrandChannel=11563

You have to wonder what was the motivation of this Kim fellow. I would not be surprised if Rosen was paying him, because they pretty much raced out the door of the State Department as soon as Kim and about 90 others sworn to secrecy received the top secret report that Kim leaked.

If Rosen was not paying Kim, Rosen really screwed him because he was motivated by the ambition of being first with the story and for some damn reason he decided he had to say that it was based on information gathered inside North Korea.

Now if that was a human intelligence asset, North Korea executes people on the spot. And if it was an electronic intercept, thanks a lot for compromising that.

You gotta love how stories get spun. Rosen is motivated by ambition and he totally screws our intelligence assets in North Korea and his leaker. I don't think it is a big deal that a reporter was called some name in a search warrant application affidavit. Especially when he is not indicted or prosecuted and he deserves to be called something much worse than a co-conspirator for what he did to everybody else involved.

I would really like to know if Rosen was paying Kim for info. If he wasn't then he seduced Kim into being a dupe and completely set him up for an easy investigation and prosecution, all because Rosen wanted to be first with a story and include information that he did not need to include.

jettio
05-21-2013, 12:15 PM
"It might look like an important story at first glance, but upon closer inspection: Obama #1."

Looks like you refuse to pay more than a first glance to a story that you call important.

Go ahead and do your closer inspection, and tell us what you think about it.

blaise
05-21-2013, 12:19 PM
Looks like you refuse to pay more than a first glance to a story that you call important.

Go ahead and do your closer inspection, and tell us what you think about it.

No thanks. You go ahead and do what you like.

jettio
05-21-2013, 12:21 PM
I don't think it's all that complicated. Keep trying to figure it out, and if you're still having trouble this afternoon let me know.

I don't think we need any more discussion on your silly post.

But you criticized me for my initial take on this story before I even read the Anne Marimow article and the Jack Shafer article and I am inviting you to explain why you disagree with what I wrote then, or, after I read those articles.

jettio
05-21-2013, 12:31 PM
No thanks. You go ahead and do what you like.

Wow.

KILLER_CLOWN
05-21-2013, 12:33 PM
Wow.

I would have at least double wow'd it, or you could have used something to show emotion.

jettio
05-21-2013, 01:14 PM
I would have at least double wow'd it, or you could have used something to show emotion.

How about?

I posted with a little skepticism regards the brouhaha. :BS:

Blaise was little smarty-pants.:jester:

I read up and asked Blaise what he thought. :titus:

Blaise got scared and took off like he had turpentine up his azz. :fear::bolt::bolt::bolt:

Journalists and planeteers everywhere were disappointed by Blaise. :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

Comrade Crapski
05-21-2013, 01:30 PM
How about?

I posted with a little skepticism regards the brouhaha. :BS:

Blaise was little smarty-pants.:jester:

I read up and asked Blaise what he thought. :titus:

Blaise got scared and took off like he had turpentine up his azz. :fear::bolt::bolt::bolt:

Journalists and planeteers everywhere were disappointed by Blaise. :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

Stick with what you are good at.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd143/dsgraphics_photos/My%20Political/Kneepads.jpg#Obama%20knee%20pads

The_Grand_Illusion
05-21-2013, 01:41 PM
How about?

I posted with a little skepticism regards the brouhaha. :BS:

Blaise was little smarty-pants.:jester:

I read up and asked Blaise what he thought. :titus:

Blaise got scared and took off like he had turpentine up his azz. :fear::bolt::bolt::bolt:

Journalists and planeteers everywhere were disappointed by Blaise. :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

Isn't your touchdown dance just a little premature? Turns out the person you put so much faith in the original article has disgraced herself before.


http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/01/07/ann-marimow-shills-for-disgraced-fast-and-furious-lawyer-at-washpost/

Ann Marimow Shills for Disgraced Fast and Furious Lawyer at WashPost

"Behold the Washington Post’s Ann Marimow shilling for disgraced Justice Department lawyer Jason Weinstien – one of the few to suffer any consequences for the murderous Fast and Furious scandal (italics are all mine; editorializing is all Marimow’s):

Although Weinstein had no role in devising the tactics and had no supervisory authority over Fast and Furious, he had signed documents that helped the agents proceed with their operation.

On Capitol Hill, the investigation had taken on predictable and in*trac*table political dynamics. Democrats concluded that no high-level officials at the Justice Department, including Weinstein, were to blame for the “gun-walking” scheme; Republicans accused Weinstein of knowingly abetting the flawed operation.

Weinstien was the Deputy Assistant Attorney General who resigned because of his role in preparing false statements to Congress and overseeing aspects of the bloody gun running mess concocted by the Holder Justice Department. But that doesn’t matter, you see, to the Washington Post, because Weinstein is smart.

Weinstein came to Washington as a teenager in 1982 to compete in the National Spelling Bee, having won the regional championship in San Antonio. The son of a hospital administrator and a nurse, he was a high achiever from the get-go. He also was captain of the math and debate teams in high school. Then he was off to Princeton, where he became student body president and led campaigns to build a new student center. . . . Weinstein — a brilliant student, gifted lawyer and methodical prosecutor — had spent a career steeped in nuance.

But smarts aren’t the only reason the Washington Post and Marimow heap so much praise on Weinstein, there are more predictable reasons. He did what the Post also did through much of the 1970′s - wage a campaign against the CIA. Weinstein campaigned “to stop the Central Intelligence Agency from recruiting on campus until it changed its policy that prevented gays and lesbians from being hired.”

There is no better and faster way to earn credibility among Marimow’s crowd than bashing the CIA, except maybe bashing George W. Bush.

Ann Marimow

Marimow never places a bit of blame on Weinstein. Instead we are served up excuses, and potato skins.

At the Elephant and Castle pub across Pennsylvania Avenue from the Justice Department, about 75 former co-workers gathered one brisk evening days after Thanksgiving to toast Weinstein. Breuer served as master of ceremonies, several in attendance said.

As guests munched on potato skins and wings at a cash bar, there were lengthy, upbeat tributes to Weinstein’s work.

Many of Weinstein’s former colleagues — federal law enforcement agents, prosecutors and other lawyers — say they are distraught about his public-service career being cut short. The portrayal of Weinstein on the Hill and in the inspector general report is at odds with the person they know.

“This bears no resemblance to the Jason that I know and what he would have done and what I’ve seen him do over and over again,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrea Smith, who prosecuted a notorious hitman with Weinstein in Baltimore. “He’s one of those people who instinctively always knows right from wrong.”

After he resigned, it took Weinstein two weeks to return e-mails and phone messages from former colleagues. He took the time to clean out the garage and get a haircut. He’s looking for a job.

“In a thousand years, you don’t expect this phase of your career to end this way,” Weinstein said. “But there’s a badge of honor for surviving these things, and I’m determined to earn it.”

I’ll leave someone like Fast and Furious guru Katie Pavlich to detail the extent of the lies in Marimow’s story. (Hey Ann, did you call Katie or ANY other expert source to get an opposing view?) But today’s Post gives you a fresh example how the left protects their own inside the beltway. And any of you spending a red cent on the Washington Post are helping them do it."


Oh and your second source is an opinion peice based on the shill above. You also failed to mention what he said from your article. There is nothing wrong with asking questions, that's what reporters do but to pass off both these opinion peices, one being a shill for someone who got caught in the Fast & Furious scandal, as your reason for justification, really deserves a major :facepalm:


"Just open your Twitter feed and listen to the Washington press corps howl about the Obama administration's latest intrusion into their business.

From the mainstream we hear the grousing of Washington Post National Political Editor Steven Ginsberg, Washington reporter John Solomon and the Associated Press's Matt Apuzzo. From the partisan corners come the protests of the Daily Caller's Tucker Carlson, the New Yorker's Ryan Lizza, Fox News Channel's Brit Hume, the Guardian's Glenn Greenwald and the chronically underemployed Keith Olbermann.

All deplore, in vociferous terms, the excesses of a Department of Justice leak investigation that has criminalized the reporting of Fox News Channel's James Rosen.

While I join this chorus of rage, I also wonder how much of Rosen's trouble is of his own making. Did Rosen get caught and get his source in trouble because he practiced poor journalistic tradecraft?.....................(Jack Shafer is a Reuters columnist but his opinions are his own.)"

jettio
05-21-2013, 02:18 PM
Isn't your touchdown dance just a little premature? Turns out the person you put so much faith in the original article has disgraced herself before.


http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/01/07/ann-marimow-shills-for-disgraced-fast-and-furious-lawyer-at-washpost/

Ann Marimow Shills for Disgraced Fast and Furious Lawyer at WashPost

"Behold the Washington Post’s Ann Marimow shilling for disgraced Justice Department lawyer Jason Weinstien – one of the few to suffer any consequences for the murderous Fast and Furious scandal (italics are all mine; editorializing is all Marimow’s):

Although Weinstein had no role in devising the tactics and had no supervisory authority over Fast and Furious, he had signed documents that helped the agents proceed with their operation.

On Capitol Hill, the investigation had taken on predictable and in*trac*table political dynamics. Democrats concluded that no high-level officials at the Justice Department, including Weinstein, were to blame for the “gun-walking” scheme; Republicans accused Weinstein of knowingly abetting the flawed operation.

Weinstien was the Deputy Assistant Attorney General who resigned because of his role in preparing false statements to Congress and overseeing aspects of the bloody gun running mess concocted by the Holder Justice Department. But that doesn’t matter, you see, to the Washington Post, because Weinstein is smart.

Weinstein came to Washington as a teenager in 1982 to compete in the National Spelling Bee, having won the regional championship in San Antonio. The son of a hospital administrator and a nurse, he was a high achiever from the get-go. He also was captain of the math and debate teams in high school. Then he was off to Princeton, where he became student body president and led campaigns to build a new student center. . . . Weinstein — a brilliant student, gifted lawyer and methodical prosecutor — had spent a career steeped in nuance.

But smarts aren’t the only reason the Washington Post and Marimow heap so much praise on Weinstein, there are more predictable reasons. He did what the Post also did through much of the 1970′s - wage a campaign against the CIA. Weinstein campaigned “to stop the Central Intelligence Agency from recruiting on campus until it changed its policy that prevented gays and lesbians from being hired.”

There is no better and faster way to earn credibility among Marimow’s crowd than bashing the CIA, except maybe bashing George W. Bush.

Ann Marimow

Marimow never places a bit of blame on Weinstein. Instead we are served up excuses, and potato skins.

At the Elephant and Castle pub across Pennsylvania Avenue from the Justice Department, about 75 former co-workers gathered one brisk evening days after Thanksgiving to toast Weinstein. Breuer served as master of ceremonies, several in attendance said.

As guests munched on potato skins and wings at a cash bar, there were lengthy, upbeat tributes to Weinstein’s work.

Many of Weinstein’s former colleagues — federal law enforcement agents, prosecutors and other lawyers — say they are distraught about his public-service career being cut short. The portrayal of Weinstein on the Hill and in the inspector general report is at odds with the person they know.

“This bears no resemblance to the Jason that I know and what he would have done and what I’ve seen him do over and over again,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrea Smith, who prosecuted a notorious hitman with Weinstein in Baltimore. “He’s one of those people who instinctively always knows right from wrong.”

After he resigned, it took Weinstein two weeks to return e-mails and phone messages from former colleagues. He took the time to clean out the garage and get a haircut. He’s looking for a job.

“In a thousand years, you don’t expect this phase of your career to end this way,” Weinstein said. “But there’s a badge of honor for surviving these things, and I’m determined to earn it.”

I’ll leave someone like Fast and Furious guru Katie Pavlich to detail the extent of the lies in Marimow’s story. (Hey Ann, did you call Katie or ANY other expert source to get an opposing view?) But today’s Post gives you a fresh example how the left protects their own inside the beltway. And any of you spending a red cent on the Washington Post are helping them do it."


Oh and your second source is an opinion peice based on the shill above. You also failed to mention what he said from your article. There is nothing wrong with asking questions, that's what reporters do but to pass off both these opinion peices, one being a shill for someone who got caught in the Fast & Furious scandal, as your reason for justification, really deserves a major :facepalm:


"Just open your Twitter feed and listen to the Washington press corps howl about the Obama administration's latest intrusion into their business.

From the mainstream we hear the grousing of Washington Post National Political Editor Steven Ginsberg, Washington reporter John Solomon and the Associated Press's Matt Apuzzo. From the partisan corners come the protests of the Daily Caller's Tucker Carlson, the New Yorker's Ryan Lizza, Fox News Channel's Brit Hume, the Guardian's Glenn Greenwald and the chronically underemployed Keith Olbermann.

All deplore, in vociferous terms, the excesses of a Department of Justice leak investigation that has criminalized the reporting of Fox News Channel's James Rosen.

While I join this chorus of rage, I also wonder how much of Rosen's trouble is of his own making. Did Rosen get caught and get his source in trouble because he practiced poor journalistic tradecraft?.....................(Jack Shafer is a Reuters columnist but his opinions are his own.)"

Maybe you do not realize that the article that broke this story regards Rosen was by this journalist, Anne Marimow.

It was like she wrote this story, and everybody picked up on it and used it as a source piece from which to express outrage.

Her story "facts" are attributions to the court documents. So in some sense they are sworn to by the investigators but not cross-examined or determined in court, but it is not as if she is writing as a witness and not a reporter.

You seem to be saying that because some opinionated guy criticized her for wriiting an article about this guy that lost his job over Fast & Furious that she does not follow journalistic standards.

Why don't you link that article that your hero is criticizing?

Anyway. I am not sure why you want to attack her journalist credentials because some partisan writer is mad at her for writing her article instead of the editorial he wanted to write. Especially when she is the one who broke this story that you are trying to make hay out of.

The_Grand_Illusion
05-21-2013, 02:25 PM
Maybe you do not realize that the article that broke this story regards Rosen was by this journalist, Anne Marimow.

It was like she wrote this story, and everybody picked up on it and used it as a source piece from which to express outrage.

Her story "facts" are attributions to the court documents. So in some sense they are sworn to by the investigators but not cross-examined or determined in court, but it is not as if she is writing as a witness and not a reporter.

You seem to be saying that because some opinionated guy criticized her for wriiting an article about this guy that lost his job over Fast & Furious that she does not follow journalistic standards.

Why don't you link that article that your hero is criticizing?

Anyway. I am not sure why you want to attack her journalist credentials because some partisan writer is mad at her for writing her article instead of the editorial he wanted to write. Especially when she is the one who broke this story that you are trying to make hay out of.

She is a known shill, that's all we need to know about her credibility.

TGI

jettio
05-21-2013, 02:34 PM
She is a known shill, that's all we need to know about her credibility.

TGI

Here is a link to the article that your brainbender was referring to:

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-01-06/lifestyle/36208485_1_fast-and-furious-weinstein-guns

It is in the Lifestyle section and is something of a human interest puff piece. It is sympathetic to the guy, but seems to me that she attributes sources on most of the factual claims.

When did she become a known shill to you and who was she shilling for when she broke this story about this Kim leak case?

How would you classify this pjmedia.com website that you quote?

The_Grand_Illusion
05-21-2013, 02:40 PM
Here is a link to the article that your brainbender was referring to:

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-01-06/lifestyle/36208485_1_fast-and-furious-weinstein-guns

It is in the Lifestyle section and is something of a human interest puff piece. It is sympathetic to the guy, but seems to me that she attributes sources on most of the factual claims.

When did she become a known shill to you and who was she shilling for when she broke this story about this Kim leak case?

How would you classify this pjmedia.com website that you quote?

:facepalm:

jettio
05-21-2013, 02:47 PM
:facepalm:

:fear::bolt::bolt::bolt:

Maybe you ought to ask the mods to take down the thread because you think it is based on a false partisan story intended to make the Obama administration look good.

I am not sure why most of the posters in the thread drew a first impression that it reflected badly on the DOJ and the administration. Maybe their mind is not wired as good as pjmedia.com wired yours.

gblowfish
05-21-2013, 02:50 PM
Well, you can't really call a guy who works for Fox "a reporter."


Kidding....I'm kidding!

jjjayb
05-21-2013, 03:10 PM
Well, you can't really call a guy who works for Fox "a reporter."


Kidding....I'm kidding!

I'd say you can't really call the "reporters" who work at CBS/NBC/ABC/MSNBC/CNN reporters. Afterall, some of these news stories we've spent so much time talking about lately were reported on last year by Fox while these other idiots were doing their best to bury them.

DaveNull
05-21-2013, 03:13 PM
You mean when Fox was demanding an investigation into the leak?

JohnnyV13
05-21-2013, 04:24 PM
Is the admin able to get such emails and phone records due to all the changes since 9/11? Like the Patriot Act?
This is why such an act should not be passed. It will always be abused.

You and I have gone "round an' round" on many issues, but I completely agree with this.

The Patriot act needs to go, as well as Guantanamo, for precisely this reason: if such laws stay in place long enough, they will get abused.

Now we see Obama abusing the holes he knocked in the 4th amendment.

RedNeckRaider
05-21-2013, 04:26 PM
You and I have gone "round an' round" on many issues, but I completely agree with this.

The Patriot act needs to go, as well as Guantanamo, for precisely this reason: if such laws stay in place long enough, they will get abused.

Now we see Obama abusing the holes he knocked in the 4th amendment.

Hope and change baby! Barry promised to get rid of both...oops~

go bowe
05-21-2013, 09:39 PM
Hope and change baby! Barry promised to get rid of both...oops~

to be fair, barry could have promised lower milk prices, but if congress blocks him like it did on guantanamo there's nothing he can do no matter what he promised...

i don't think he lied about closing gitmo, he just assumed too much because he wasn't steeped in the ways of washington dc...

aka politically naive...

HonestChieffan
05-21-2013, 09:48 PM
to be fair, barry could have promised lower milk prices, but if congress blocks him like it did on guantanamo there's nothing he can do no matter what he promised...

i don't think he lied about closing gitmo, he just assumed too much because he wasn't steeped in the ways of washington dc...

aka politically naive...


All congress' fault. yup. To be fair and all.

go bowe
05-21-2013, 09:59 PM
All congress' fault. yup. To be fair and all.

it is congress' fault that gitmo hasn't been closed...

isn't it?

LiveSteam
05-21-2013, 10:00 PM
Obama could have just bypassed congress with an EO to close gitmo?

go bowe
05-21-2013, 10:09 PM
Obama could have just bypassed congress with an EO to close gitmo?

no, iirc congress placed restrictions on the use of funds for trying prisoners or housing them in the us, effectively keeping gitmo open despite the president's intention to close it...

for a good explanation of why gitmo hasn't been closed see this link
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/04/30/obama-just-gave-a-powerful-speech-about-the-need-to-close-gitmo-so-why-hasnt-he/

nstygma
05-21-2013, 10:17 PM
to be fair, barry could have promised lower milk prices, but if congress blocks him like it did on guantanamo there's nothing he can do no matter what he promised...

i don't think he lied about closing gitmo, he just assumed too much because he wasn't steeped in the ways of washington dc...

aka politically naive...so really he can promise anything, generate leg thrills up so many, and when it doesn't happen, its always someone else's fault. yep, sounds about right. politicians play so many of us like schmucks

HonestChieffan
05-21-2013, 10:42 PM
it is congress' fault that gitmo hasn't been closed...

isn't it?

Congress or Bush. Didnt Congress block it when Pelosi was in charge? And when Bush was President? Damn Congress.

GoChargers
05-21-2013, 11:05 PM
Meh. It's just the Constitution of the United States of America. What's difference does it make?

Cue the leftist partisan sheep whining about how "outdated" it is, even though it's supposed to be the people's line of defense against abuses of power like the shit the Obama administration has been pulling.

AustinChief
05-22-2013, 03:59 AM
no, iirc congress placed restrictions on the use of funds for trying prisoners or housing them in the us, effectively keeping gitmo open despite the president's intention to close it...

for a good explanation of why gitmo hasn't been closed see this link
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/04/30/obama-just-gave-a-powerful-speech-about-the-need-to-close-gitmo-so-why-hasnt-he/

Sorry, but this is 100% wrong. No, I'm sorry again, this is 10000% wrong. Gitmo's closing has little to nothing to do with Congress. try again.

I actually don't blame Obama for not closing Gitmo.. I do blame him for being so piss ignorant to think it was ok to claim he could close it in the first place. Sad that so many bought into this bunch of pandering leftist bullshit. It worries me how naive the voting public is , that this rhetoric is swallowed whole and then defended after the fact

HonestChieffan
05-22-2013, 05:57 AM
Sorry, but this is 100% wrong. No, I'm sorry again, this is 10000% wrong. Gitmo's closing has little to nothing to do with Congress. try again.

I actually don't blame Obama for not closing Gitmo.. I do blame him for being so piss ignorant to think it was ok to claim he could close it in the first place. Sad that so many bought into this bunch of pandering leftist bullshit. It worries me how naive the voting public is , that this rhetoric is swallowed whole and then defended after the fact

Home Run.

BucEyedPea
05-22-2013, 06:52 AM
Obama could have just bypassed congress with an EO to close gitmo?

ROFL:clap:

blaise
05-22-2013, 07:34 AM
to be fair, barry could have promised lower milk prices, but if congress blocks him like it did on guantanamo there's nothing he can do no matter what he promised...

i don't think he lied about closing gitmo, he just assumed too much because he wasn't steeped in the ways of washington dc...

aka politically naive...

Making a promise you can't keep is basically a lie. You can excuse it how you want, but it's still a broken promise. And it was a pretty big selling point by him during his first campaign.

Comrade Crapski
05-22-2013, 09:44 AM
Making a promise you can't keep is basically a lie. You can excuse it how you want, but it's still a broken promise. And it was a pretty big selling point by him during his first campaign.

Barry's just a crazy mixed up girl. His heart is in the right place, though. :rolleyes:

:drool:

BucEyedPea
05-22-2013, 09:59 AM
Making a promise you can't keep is basically a lie. You can excuse it how you want, but it's still a broken promise. And it was a pretty big selling point by him during his first campaign.

Especially, when he taught the Constitution. LOL!

listopencil
05-22-2013, 01:48 PM
Sorry, but this is 100% wrong. No, I'm sorry again, this is 10000% wrong. Gitmo's closing has little to nothing to do with Congress. try again.

I actually don't blame Obama for not closing Gitmo.. I do blame him for being so piss ignorant to think it was ok to claim he could close it in the first place. Sad that so many bought into this bunch of pandering leftist bullshit. It worries me how naive the voting public is , that this rhetoric is swallowed whole and then defended after the fact

Wasn't there a huge voter turnout among young people? OMG, he's just so hopey changetastic, he's my guy! Seriously though, can you blame them? The D's and the R's spent a shitload of money convincing them that they had to vote for one or the other. Romney's a douche. The Republican party is a joke. At least Obama was spoon feeding them easily digestible bullshit and the Democrats were pretending to give a rat's ass about them.