U.S. Justice Dept Obtains Wide AP Phone Records in Probe

[JJ Husker]

I also happen to get a kick out of politically tainted head-in-the sand acceptance.

 

The irony of this statement following on the heels of this post astounds me:

 

Look, I know some of you are not as concerned about the Benghazi as some of us are, and certainly not as over concerned as maybe Fox News or Sen. Graham seems to be but, there is no way you can say the administration has been open and forthcoming about the goings on there. Sure, a lot of it has to do with the whole issue being a partisan football but there are some real issues that need to be settled. IMO the order of importance is; 1- Americans were killed 2- We need to examine exactly what happened that allowed this to occur so that we can possibly prevent a reoccurrence. 3- Whether or not it is politically palatable, Americans need to be made aware that possibly this administrations view of world affairs (how to best deal with radical Islam) is potentially naïve. Americans were killed and I believe it could have been prevented, even as late as after the attack started if stand down orders had not been issued. It is now widely known that how to disseminate this information to the public was heavily discussed and manipulated, I can only assume that was done in the interest of the campaign and for political benefit. When those types of things are placed ahead of truth and security, I think we are right to keep hammering on the issue. It really does not matter in the least if Fox News or Graham didn't show the same level of concern about 11 other attacks that occurred on Bush's watch. That only displays those entities inconsistencies and bias and has no bearing on doing the right thing now.

 

I do not necessarily "tie" the IRS thing to Obama and yes, at this point, it is because he was/is President while it occurred. I'm just spit ballin here but I see no way this exact same thing (extra scrutiny of Tea Party and Patriot organizations) happens if a Republican is in the White House. And sure it could of happened with an organization like MoveOn under a repub administration. But the fact that it was Obama in the WH with a dem administration in charge does make it more suspect. If you don't think it does, you are too biased to be honest about it.

 

I guess I don't know how tame or wild the Justice departments actions are but I sure know that is not how the Justice Dept of the United States of America is expected to operate. Surely you do not want them acting with impunity when it comes to things like this. It may turn out to be fairly innocent and mild (tame) but the only thing keeping it from getting out of hand is the added scrutiny it is now receiving.

 

I usually tend to go with the thought that the easiest, most logical explanation is the best way. Unfortunately, this administration, and happenings under it, have been less than transparent and it is way too easy to perceive them as typical Chicago Machine tactics. People can write this all off as left-right dirty politics but, where there is smoke there is usually fire. Right now I would characterize this administration as fully engulfed in flames. We don't need to ease up on them, they need to do something that shows there is, in fact, no fire.

 

I'm glad I was able to astound you but if you have a point to make concerning one statement following the other, you are going to have to spell it out because I don't have any idea what you're driving at.

[knapplc]

I don't have any idea what you're driving at.

 

That's quite apparent, and it's the reason we're in the trouble we're in today.

[BigRedBuster]

Yeah....it was a pretty stupid campaign promise wasn't it? Let me ask you this. Did he flat out feed us a line of horse hooeey when he promised that or was he completely naive and clueless?

 

I think without question Barack Hussein Obama is naive and clueless. Right?

 

 

I go back and forth on my thoughts on that. I'm interested in Someone's opinion though.

[StPaulHusker]

Yeah....it was a pretty stupid campaign promise wasn't it? Let me ask you this. Did he flat out feed us a line of horse hooeey when he promised that or was he completely naive and clueless?

 

I think without question Barack Hussein Obama is naive and clueless. Right?

 

 

I go back and forth on my thoughts on that. I'm interested in Someone's opinion though.

You might be the first

[BigRedBuster]

Yeah....it was a pretty stupid campaign promise wasn't it? Let me ask you this. Did he flat out feed us a line of horse hooeey when he promised that or was he completely naive and clueless?

 

I think without question Barack Hussein Obama is naive and clueless. Right?

 

 

I go back and forth on my thoughts on that. I'm interested in Someone's opinion though.

You might be the first

 

 

This is the only time it's true.

[JJ Husker]

I don't have any idea what you're driving at.

 

That's quite apparent, and it's the reason we're in the trouble we're in today.

 

Thanks for the help. I guess in the future I'll just ignore it from the git go.

[carlfense]

Surely you are aware that added security had been requested and denied and that there was a response team ready to go, once it started, but they were ordered to not go. If not aware of these things, you can try this thing called google.

Those claims have . . . evolved. To which are you referring? The hearsay provided by Hicks and denied by the Pentagon? Or one of the other so called "stand down" allegations?

 

Noted Obama defender (and definitely not a Republican Bush appointee) Robert Gates:

We don’t have a ready force standing by in the Middle East. Despite all the turmoil that’s going on, with planes on strip alert, troops ready to deploy at a moment’s notice. And so getting somebody there in a timely way – would have been very difficult, if not impossible. And frankly, I’ve heard, “Well, why didn’t you just fly a fighter jet over and try and scare ‘em with the noise or something?” Well, given the number of surface to air missiles that have disappeared from Gaddafi’s arsenals, I would not have approved sending an aircraft, a single aircraft – over Benghazi under those circumstances.

 

With respect to sending in special forces or a small group of people to try and provide help, based on everything I have read, people really didn’t know what was going on in Benghazi contemporaneously. And to send some small number of special forces or other troops in without knowing what the environment is, without knowing what the threat is, without having any intelligence in terms of what is actually going on on the ground, I think, would have been very dangerous. And personally, I would not have approved that because we just don’t it’s sort of a cartoonish impression of military capabilities and military forces. The one thing that our forces are noted for is planning and preparation before we send people in harm’s way. And there just wasn’t time to do that.”

http://www.washingto...ust-wasnt-time/

 

I wouldn't characterize it is some grand conspiracy but rather a poor decision made for the wrong reasons. And it really wouldn't be a "pivot" to Hillary considering she has been right in the middle of it all the way. Seems highly plausible to me but, since you brought it up, what are the several more plausible reasons you see?

23 out of 30 people evacuated were CIA. Do you think that might explain why the State Dept. pushed back against falling on the sword? I can elaborate if necessary but I'm sure that you can work from there if you'd like to move beyond your initial assumption.

 

Yikes? Yikes, that American citizens should expect their government to be transparent? Yikes, that citizens should expect their government to not retaliate on political adversaries through the IRS? Yikes, that we expect an explanation from the Justice Dept about why wide ranging phone call logs of AP reporters were gathered? I guess my reactions is "yikes" for anyone who doesn't expect these things.

I think that you might have read too much into that.

[Someone]

Look, I know some of you are not as concerned about the Benghazi as some of us are, and certainly not as over concerned as maybe Fox News or Sen. Graham seems to be but, there is no way you can say the administration has been open and forthcoming about the goings on there. Sure, a lot of it has to do with the whole issue being a partisan football but there are some real issues that need to be settled. IMO the order of importance is; 1- Americans were killed 2- We need to examine exactly what happened that allowed this to occur so that we can possibly prevent a reoccurrence. 3- Whether or not it is politically palatable, Americans need to be made aware that possibly this administrations view of world affairs (how to best deal with radical Islam) is potentially naïve. Americans were killed and I believe it could have been prevented, even as late as after the attack started if stand down orders had not been issued. It is now widely known that how to disseminate this information to the public was heavily discussed and manipulated, I can only assume that was done in the interest of the campaign and for political benefit. When those types of things are placed ahead of truth and security, I think we are right to keep hammering on the issue. It really does not matter in the least if Fox News or Graham didn't show the same level of concern about 11 other attacks that occurred on Bush's watch. That only displays those entities inconsistencies and bias and has no bearing on doing the right thing now.(1)

 

I do not necessarily "tie" the IRS thing to Obama and yes, at this point, it is because he was/is President while it occurred. I'm just spit ballin here but I see no way this exact same thing (extra scrutiny of Tea Party and Patriot organizations) happens if a Republican is in the White House. And sure it could of happened with an organization like MoveOn under a repub administration. But the fact that it was Obama in the WH with a dem administration in charge does make it more suspect. (2) If you don't think it does, you are too biased to be honest about it.

 

I guess I don't know how tame or wild the Justice departments actions are but I sure know that is not how the Justice Dept of the United States of America is expected to operate. (3) Surely you do not want them acting with impunity when it comes to things like this. It may turn out to be fairly innocent and mild (tame) but the only thing keeping it from getting out of hand is the added scrutiny it is now receiving.

 

I usually tend to go with the thought that the easiest, most logical explanation is the best way. Unfortunately, this administration, and happenings under it, have been less than transparent and it is way too easy to perceive them as typical Chicago Machine tactics. People can write this all off as left-right dirty politics but, where there is smoke there is usually fire. Right now I would characterize this administration as fully engulfed in flames. We don't need to ease up on them, they need to do something that shows there is, in fact, no fire.

 

1. Graham's 'inconsistancies and bias' is very relivant to what he is doing now. It's called credibility.

2. The IRS thing happened under the watch of a Republican appointee from the Bush administration who kept it secret from the Obama administration. I love facts.

3. This time, the Justice Dept got a warrant. Under Bush, such legal steps didn't always happen. As a federal judge has noted, Congress enacted warrant law "specifically to rein in and create a judicial check for executive-branch abuses of surveillance authority.”

[carlfense]

3. This time, the Justice Dept got a warrant. Under Bush, such legal steps didn't always happen. As a federal judge has noted, Congress enacted warrant law "specifically to rein in and create a judicial check for executive-branch abuses of surveillance authority.”

Nah. This is the worst ever. Worse than Watergate.

[knapplc]

Nah. This is the worst ever. Worse than Watergate.

 

Worse than Benghazi, though?

[carlfense]

[Someone]

Worse than when Defense Secratary David Brice killed Susan Atwell and Lt Cmdr Tom Farrell helped him cover it up?

[carlfense]

Nah. This is the worst ever. Worse than Watergate.

 

Worse than Benghazi, though?

OK. Second worst. It goes 1. Benghazi, 2. This, 3. Solyndra, 4. Fast & Furious. I don't think that anything else should even be on the list.

[Someone]

That is pretty funny.

 

 

Here are more FACTS about the leaked CIA operation that is believed to be the reason for the search warrants:

 

" members of Congress called on C.I.A. officials and other federal officials to investigate the source of the leak. At the time, Representative Peter T. King, a New York Republican who is the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said that the leak was particularly troubling because the plot was “one of the most tightly held operations I’ve seen in my years in the House.”

 

“Regardless of political consequences, I hope that you get to the bottom of it,” said Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa"

 

"The investigation continues an unprecedented focus by the Obama administration on targeting the sources of unauthorized disclosures of classified information to the news media. The administration has prosecuted six such cases, compared with a total of three under all previous presidents.

 

The prosecutions have had strong bipartisan support from Congress "

 

"American intelligence officials were angry about the disclosure of the Qaeda plot, first reported Monday by The Associated Press, which had held the story for several days at the request of the C.I.A. They feared the leak would discourage foreign intelligence services from cooperating with the United States on risky missions in the future, said Representative Peter T. King, a New York Republican and chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee."

[knapplc]

Nah. This is the worst ever. Worse than Watergate.

 

Worse than Benghazi, though?

OK. Second worst. It goes 1. Benghazi, 2. This, 3. Solyndra, 4. Fast & Furious. I don't think that anything else should even be on the list.

 

The fact that Obama is not even American has to be up there. Trump's investigators are close to the truth, I'm just sure of it.