Which Scandal is the worse for the President & Country

[StPaulHusker]

3. Justice Dept wire tapping of AP reporters' phones - 1st amendment issues at stake here

I would say the wire tapping of AP phone records. That just seems the shadiest in my book.

 

It turns out that this is officially "Condemn Others for Something That Didn't Occur" Week.

 

Ironically, some people defended wiretapping as a means of fighting terrorism when it was done by the people they voted for, but now they want to condemn the people they didn't vote for over wiretapping as a means of finding a leak that interupted an ongoing CIA mission to stop terrorism. Nevermind the fact the condemnation of said wiretapping of AP phone records overlooks the fact the DOJ didn't wire tap AP reports' phones.

Fine. Seizure of phone records. Happy?

[Someone]

3. Justice Dept wire tapping of AP reporters' phones - 1st amendment issues at stake here

I would say the wire tapping of AP phone records. That just seems the shadiest in my book.

 

It turns out that this is officially "Condemn Others for Something That Didn't Occur" Week.

 

Ironically, some people defended wiretapping as a means of fighting terrorism when it was done by the people they voted for, but now they want to condemn the people they didn't vote for over wiretapping as a means of finding a leak that interupted an ongoing CIA mission to stop terrorism. Nevermind the fact the condemnation of said wiretapping of AP phone records overlooks the fact the DOJ didn't wire tap AP reports' phones.

Fine. Seizure of phone records. Happy?

What is bad about that?

[JJ Husker]

some other posters, in other threads, have set me straight. Apparently all of these things are normal operating procedure and should not be questioned. Well, that's not exactly right, they could be questioned IF Fox News and republicans weren't questioning them

Do you have a link to said claim by 'other posters, in other threads'?

 

Yes but go fish. If you're looking for my claim as an exact quotation though, you will be wasting your time. If you don't agree that was the general gist of some of those posts, well you comprehend different than I do or have an inability to read between the lines.

[StPaulHusker]

3. Justice Dept wire tapping of AP reporters' phones - 1st amendment issues at stake here

I would say the wire tapping of AP phone records. That just seems the shadiest in my book.

 

It turns out that this is officially "Condemn Others for Something That Didn't Occur" Week.

 

Ironically, some people defended wiretapping as a means of fighting terrorism when it was done by the people they voted for, but now they want to condemn the people they didn't vote for over wiretapping as a means of finding a leak that interupted an ongoing CIA mission to stop terrorism. Nevermind the fact the condemnation of said wiretapping of AP phone records overlooks the fact the DOJ didn't wire tap AP reports' phones.

Fine. Seizure of phone records. Happy?

What is bad about that?

 

It can be seen as a threat to 1st Amendment rights.

[Someone]

some other posters, in other threads, have set me straight. Apparently all of these things are normal operating procedure and should not be questioned. Well, that's not exactly right, they could be questioned IF Fox News and republicans weren't questioning them

Do you have a link to said claim by 'other posters, in other threads'?

you comprehend different than I do

1. It is ok to ask question, IMHO, but if a ranking Republican says investigate the leak and get to the bottom of it regardless of the political fallout, how upset should we really be when the DOJ does what the Senate committee demanded?
   
2. Is there something different that Obama should have done to see the IRS problem before he did?
   
3. Do you believe, as the released documents confirm, that Beng with a CIA mission and the security of that mission was the CIA's job?
   
4. Regardless of how you feel about Obamacare, do you believe it is a scandal?
   
5. Do you believe that the Government (Federal + States) can create and operate a workable health care solution that combines Federal and State regulations with private insurance companies and healthcare providers?
   
6. What do you think of medicare?
   

[Someone]

What is bad about that?

 

It can be seen as a threat to 1st Amendment rights.

True. Nearly all collection of evidence can be seen as an infringment of rights. Going to a judge and getting a warrant is the required procedure to protect those rights. Does that make it a scandal?

[StPaulHusker]

What is bad about that?

 

It can be seen as a threat to 1st Amendment rights.

True. Nearly all collection of evidence can be seen as an infringment of rights. Going to a judge and getting a warrant is the required procedure to protect those rights. Does that make it a scandal?

 

It can. And in this case I think it does. 100 reporters and editors were affected. The AG admits to not knowing ANY facts as to why the subpoena was made. But since he has known the people who did for many years, it's good with him.

[Someone]

What is bad about that?

 

It can be seen as a threat to 1st Amendment rights.

True. Nearly all collection of evidence can be seen as an infringment of rights. Going to a judge and getting a warrant is the required procedure to protect those rights. Does that make it a scandal?

 

It can. And in this case I think it does. 100 reporters and editors were affected. The AG admits to not knowing ANY facts as to why the subpoena was made. But since he has known the people who did for many years, it's good with him.

That is not exactly the case.

 

He knows there was a very major leak of an ongoing CIA operation that had to be stopped before it was finished. He knows the FBI is investigating the leak because he was interview by the FBI about the leak. He knows that he should not head up an investigation that considers him a potential target. He knows who is heading up that operation. He knows that the ranking republican on Senate Intell committee has demanded an investigation, regardless of the political fallout.

[Junior]

Scandal? Scandals? Where? Don't worry, I was confused at first too but some other posters, in other threads, have set me straight. Apparently all of these things are normal operating procedure and should not be questioned. Well, that's not exactly right, they could be questioned IF Fox News and republicans weren't questioning them but, they are so we can't. Also, another applicable rule I learned is that if a person didn't question similar goings on during the Bush administration, then you better not say squat now. There might be more lessons I didn't pick up on but I got those two. Oh crap, almost forgot number 3; Obama is not responsible for any goings on in his administration, that is of course unless it is something generally regarded as good. Then the buck stops there. Just trying to help out and share some of the valuable advice I have learned here on Huskerboard.

 

Look, I'm not saying you aren't allowed to be upset by the AP phone records thing... but seriously, were you outraged by the Bush wiretapping orders that he admitted he signed? Because that is just leaps and bounds worse.

[StPaulHusker]

From the horses mouth:

 

Quote: "“The people who are involved in this investigation who I’ve known for a great many years and who I’ve worked with for a great many years followed all the appropriate Justice Department regulations and did things according to DOJ rules,” Holder said. “ Based on the people that I know -- I don’t know about the facts -- but based on the people that I know, I think that subpoena was done in accordance with DOJ regs.”

 

 

http://www.huffingto...edia&ref=topbar

[carlfense]

From the horses mouth:

 

Quote: "“The people who are involved in this investigation who I’ve known for a great many years and who I’ve worked with for a great many years followed all the appropriate Justice Department regulations and did things according to DOJ rules,” Holder said. “ Based on the people that I know -- I don’t know about the facts -- but based on the people that I know, I think that subpoena was done in accordance with DOJ regs.”

 

 

http://www.huffingto...edia&ref=topbar

He had recused himself.

[Junior]

From the horses mouth:

 

Quote: "“The people who are involved in this investigation who I’ve known for a great many years and who I’ve worked with for a great many years followed all the appropriate Justice Department regulations and did things according to DOJ rules,” Holder said. “ Based on the people that I know -- I don’t know about the facts -- but based on the people that I know, I think that subpoena was done in accordance with DOJ regs.”

 

 

http://www.huffingto...edia&ref=topbar

 

Yea, so he doesn't have intimate knowledge of an investigation in which he may be considered a potential target. Isn't that a good thing?

[Someone]

Scandal? Scandals? Where? Don't worry, I was confused at first too but some other posters, in other threads, have set me straight. Apparently all of these things are normal operating procedure and should not be questioned. Well, that's not exactly right, they could be questioned IF Fox News and republicans weren't questioning them but, they are so we can't. Also, another applicable rule I learned is that if a person didn't question similar goings on during the Bush administration, then you better not say squat now. There might be more lessons I didn't pick up on but I got those two. Oh crap, almost forgot number 3; Obama is not responsible for any goings on in his administration, that is of course unless it is something generally regarded as good. Then the buck stops there. Just trying to help out and share some of the valuable advice I have learned here on Huskerboard.

 

Look, I'm not saying you aren't allowed to be upset by the AP phone records thing... but seriously, were you outraged by the Bush wiretapping orders that he admitted he signed? Because that is just leaps and bounds worse.

Stop that. You are wrong. Listening to the calls without getting a warrant is far better than going to the judge and getting a warrant to just see the time and date and what number was called or was calling.

 

The size of the scandal and the amount of outrage is not in any way tied to whichever political party you feel closest to.

[Someone]

From the horses mouth:

 

Quote: "“The people who are involved in this investigation who I’ve known for a great many years and who I’ve worked with for a great many years followed all the appropriate Justice Department regulations and did things according to DOJ rules,” Holder said. “ Based on the people that I know -- I don’t know about the facts -- but based on the people that I know, I think that subpoena was done in accordance with DOJ regs.”

 

 

http://www.huffingto...edia&ref=topbar

Got it.

 

He doesn't have any FACT as of if "that subpoena was done in accordance with DOJ regs". Of course not--see Carl's reply.

 

Now, that is different than what you claimed: "The AG admits to not knowing ANY facts as to why the subpoena was made."

 

Has he indicated that he has no clue as to WHY the DOJ is looking into the records? (Be honest.)

[JJ Husker]

[*]It is ok to ask question, IMHO, but if a ranking Republican says investigate the leak and get to the bottom of it regardless of the political fallout, how upset should we really be when the DOJ does what the Senate committee demanded? This was exactly the point of my post. What the hell does it matter what a ranking Republican has done? Why should that affect how we react to anything? There is nobody in Washington acting or speaking on my behalf in either party.

[*]Is there something different that Obama should have done to see the IRS problem before he did? I don't know. The thing I do think I know is that Patriot/Tea Party groups would not have been targeted with a repub admin in the WH. It may not be fair at all but there is a bit of guilt by association view to be garnered here. It would be exactly the same if it had been liberal groups targeted while Bush was in the WH. I also believe that it is not below Obama to keep employing the Chicago machine thug tactics that he is rightfully known for. He is smart enough that there will always be some scapegoats between him and anything like this. He may not have been directly involved but the knowledge that he was in charge I am sure contributed to this occurrence.

[*]Do you believe, as the released documents confirm, that Beng with a CIA mission and the security of that mission was the CIA's job? What does this have to do with anything I have said?

[*]Regardless of how you feel about Obamacare, do you believe it is a scandal? No, it's not a scandal.

[*]Do you believe that the Government (Federal + States) can create and operate a workable health care solution that combines Federal and State regulations with private insurance companies and healthcare providers? I think the only thing the government could create is a compost pile but they would never be able to operate or manage it.

[*]What do you think of medicare? Like all government programs it is bloated, inefficient, and does little to promote cheaper or better health care.

 

That's a lot of questions for someone who already has the answers they want.