The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: Ballygrl on May 13, 2013, 07:01:26 PM
-
http://election.democraticunderground.com/10022838575
cali (79,942 posts)
Shit. Associated Press says U.S. government seized journalists' phone records
Does this mean that the AP and the media are going to finally do their job?
CJCRANE (13,247 posts)
7. Yes, the story itself seems like a politically motivated leak!
A leak about an investigation into a leak.
still_one (31,043 posts)
10. I find it interesting all this is coming out now, Libya, IRS, wow
coincidence, maybe, but I want real evidence not a kangaroo court
devilgrrl (21,011 posts)
11. You're not the only one.
This all smells like a steaming pile of BULLSHIT!
boston bean (16,725 posts)
9. Holder is going to have to resign. When? Soon, I suppose. nt
-
No surprise DU sided with the govt on this one.
Freedom of the press? Rule of law? Not in the liberal playbook. Obama is going to go Hugo on us.
-
Hey DU! Why don't consider the obvious answer, Obama and his administration are criminals in the best of Chicago tradition!
-
Some payback for the AP. They've been fellating the incompetent liar since day one.
They have learned that when you sleep with the devil, you shouldn't be surprised when he rolls over and ****s you in the morning.
-
I'd hazard a guess that by Wednesday this administration will some how blame Bush for this.
-
Response to cali (Reply #3)Mon May 13, 2013, 06:33 PM
ProSense (97,722 posts)
5. That doesn't
"Federal prosecutors secretly obtained records of telephone calls "
...tell you anything except that these are phone records. Was there a subpoena or a warrant?
Warrant? Warrant? We don't need no stinking warrant.
-
I think it was Greg Gutfeld today that said;
"The fish rots from the head down"
-
Geez, DUmmies, aside from taking away your handouts, is there anything 0bama could do that you'd find unconstitutional? Seriously, ALL of this is a conspiracy? You know what? Perhaps it is...the press did his bidding to help him win the election. You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to see that, you just have to look at the stories they chose to report and the ones they chose to ignore. How about, why didn't your boy king come out as soon as AMERICANS HIS ADIMINSTRATION SENT THERE were killed? Romney had to do what the boy king should have done. Even IF he was going to try to sell the story about the video, which he's STILL trying to pedal as of his press conference today, he should have come out immediately and condemned the actions. But, of course, since he and Hillary made apology commercials in the ME for a video no one had ever seen, pointing it out to them so they would be angry, I guess comforting a nation right after trying to comfort the Islamists would be unseemly...to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
So, let's play pretend for a minute shall we? What if this was Bush or Romney or Reagan (although they respect the constitution too much to do this kind of thing.
1) The president of the United States targeted liberal nonprofit groups that had "occupy", "pink" or "no war" in their names for extra scrutiny by the IRS. And then claimed that no one in his administration knew about this. It was all done by underlings.
2) The president of the United States refused to send help to citizens under attack even though there were troops and planes that could have easily got there in time. Their fellow citizens, after begging to be given permission to help, had to listen to them die in real time. Whistleblowers were demoted, people in the military lost their commands. And if that weren't bad enough, the administration continues to lie about it, while parents are still desperate for answers. Now tell me honestly you wouldn't be screaming for impeachment! Remember how angry you guys were about the Watergate cover up? No one died in that cover up.
3) The president allowed Mexican drug lords to acquire weapons to use against their own people and kill a border control agent. There were NO tracking devices (as there were in Operation Gun Runner...which ended years before this operation). They didn't even bother to tell the Mexican government as was done in Operation Gun Runner and when hearings (remember, we're pretending this is a Republican administration) and hearings were held, the president suddenly declared executive privelege. This, of course, was after saying the guys at the top didn't know, despite emails to and from Holder that indicated this was done on purpose.
4) The government siezes telephone records from the press, which is a 1st Amendment violation. They gave NO justification or explanation for their actions.
Now, tell me how you would sit there at DU and defend and justify these actions if it were a Republican? Because if you honestly believe you would think this is perfectly fine, then the next time there's a Republican president (and considering all the scandals coming out and how simply vile and criminal they are) then you guys better sit over there and shut the **** up.
Cindie
-
...
Now, tell me how you would sit there at DU and defend and justify these actions if it were a Republican? Because if you honestly believe you would think this is perfectly fine, then the next time there's a Republican president (and considering all the scandals coming out and how simply vile and criminal they are) then you guys better sit over there and shut the **** up.
Cindie
No need to wonder.
Jdingleberryhill is beating the Proglodytes around the head and neck with one of their own talking points but at the same instance he is answering your question:
jberryhill (29,761 posts)
2. As to the seizure of AP Corp.'s records
View profile
This is a great victory against the idea that corporations have Constitutional rights.
JaneyVee (3,719 posts)
4. Good point. Looks like corporations AREN'T people, my friend.
jberryhill (29,761 posts)
8. Then there is no problem
View profile
These corporations, like Amnesty International for instance, think they have "rights".
Well, we'll show them.
JaneyVee (3,719 posts)
14. But Amnesty International isn't a political org, it is a social welfare org.
jberryhill (29,761 posts)
16. Is it a corporate entity?
JaneyVee (3,719 posts)
17. It's non-political, unlike the Tea Party.
Ah!
So only political entities do not have political rights.
Makes perfect sense.
jberryhill (29,761 posts)
18. Is Exxon a "non political" corporation?
heh
-
Ouch.
KC
-
No surprise DU sided with the govt on this one.
Freedom of the press? Rule of law? Not in the liberal playbook. Obama is going to go Hugo on us.
I'm always amazed at what good little facists the libs are when it comes to "someone elses" freedoms.
On second thought, no I'm not, I just remembered that "if you scratch a liberal you'll find a facist".
-
Some payback for the AP. They've been fellating the incompetent liar since day one.
They have learned that when you sleep with the devil, you shouldn't be surprised when he rolls over and ****s you in the morning.
LOL, my sentiments exactly! :cheersmate:
I about OD'd on all the crimes and misdemeanours of the felonious Zero administration being reported upon today. And all smelly, shit stained roads are leading back to the Chief Pile of Excrescence stinking up our White House as I type.
If one combined Watergate with Lewinskygate, it would amount to a small hill of beans next to the reeking mountain of dung called Benghazi/IRS/AP gate. I hope the AP is happy with its role in enabling the worst lawbreaker in our nation's history to occupy the Oval Office.
-
jberryhill (29,761 posts)
2. As to the seizure of AP Corp.'s records
View profile
This is a great victory against the idea that corporations have Constitutional rights.
Someone is still bitter about Citizens United.
-
Someone is still bitter about Citizens United.
Hell, they're still bitter about the 2000 and 2004 elections, Watergate, Iran-Countra, Haliburton, Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43, the 1994 mid-term election, BP, PATCON, the fall of the Berlin Wall, East Germany, and the USSR, no "free" healthcare, "free" healthcare (coming soon), Republicans, Conservatives, Fox News, the Tea Party, etc., etc., etc.
The list of what they are NOT (or WILL NOT) be bitter about would be much shorter.
Spoiled, immature brats, who have been told all their lives that they're "special".
They are like a bunch of 5 years-olds at Christmas, after their toys are broken or need batteries.
-
Hell, they're still bitter about the 2000 and 2004 elections, Watergate, Iran-Countra, Haliburton, Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43, the 1994 mid-term election, BP, PATCON, the fall of the Berlin Wall, East Germany, and the USSR, no "free" healthcare, "free" healthcare (coming soon), Republicans, Conservatives, Fox News, the Tea Party, etc., etc., etc.
The list of what they are NOT (or WILL NOT) be bitter about would be much shorter.
Spoiled, immature brats, who have been told all their lives that they're "special".
They are like a bunch of 5 years-olds at Christmas, after their toys are broken or need batteries.
Well said.