Posted on 05/17/2013 12:04:47 PM PDT by Brad from Tennessee
As is their pattern, defenders of the president offer a straw man in regard to the subpoena of Associated Press phone records: Shouldn’t we investigate leaks?
Duh, yes. The entire question, however, revolves around the extent of the probe and its necessity. Only the Richard Nixon fan club would argue, for example, that it is okay to willy-nilly conduct surveillance of the press on a leak that wasn’t actually a threat to national security.
The AP issue revolves around several issues.
Did the AP endanger national security?
The Post reported:
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. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Um. Coincidences in politics? Why now? Why the Friday dumps? Why all at once?
The left had pre-prepared talking points for all of this, and IMO, it was designed to overwhelm the congressional minority that could handle the volume, and create a screen play for amnesty. Keeps the lapdawg media busy with covering the nasty GOPs attacks on St Zero, as well as their gored ox AP phone taps. Well played actually.
I think they miscalculated the backlash from the public, and the press however. Hope it’s enough.
A little here, a little there all week long. We’ve been commenting here at FR about what a bad week it’s been for Obama, and today’s revelations about match the rest of the week. Seems like more today, but I think it’s because of the Congressional hearing that was today. Gives the illusion of more activity than it was.
I hope your observation about the backlash Press/public is correct also. I think it is. We shall see.
I agree. But I think the leaker worked in the White House. This foiled Yemeni bomb plot was the latest in a series of leaks aimed at inflating Obama. It and the Sustex computer virus story were particularly egregious because intel projects of foreign allies were exposed. Tom Donilon was the chief suspect. With news media accusing the White House and members of Congress talking about a special prosecutor Obama told Holder to investigate. Or go through the motions, since they knew all along who leaked.
Yes, indeed, we shall see.
T’was a tip of the hat, and a nod.
Our Lord has not forsaken us. What lessons are we to learn?
What lessons indeed!
Thanks.
Did DOJ grab 60 Minutes/CBS' Steve Kroft's emails?
BACKSTORY After Hillary huffily told Congress "What difference does it make," she and O were shortly thereafter sitting with 60/Min's Steve Kroft. O looked lovingly at Hillary (stupidly thinking she had saved his *** on Benghazi). O told Kroft she was "the best" secy of state we ever had.
Did O maneuver himself and Hillary on 60 Min? Does Kroft have emails from O? Did O's admin produce the segment? Did CBS and Kroft acquiesce in the setup---- to allow O to manipulate public opinion on Benghazi? .....Obama knew the horrific inside details at the time of the 60/Min interview---as the facts clearly show now----so then the entire Kroft interview was a lie. What does Kroft say now, knowing he was lied to?
The breathtaking aspect of the O scandals is that they uncover rot in all the old familiar places we already suspected rot existed.
BOTTOM LINE We need to know whether Holder/DOJ grabbed Kroft's emails---and all other communications from O to CBS, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.