Free Press

Obama's War Against the Free Press Gets Creepier

|

President Obama
White House

Perhaps the most chilling aspect of the U.S. Department of Justice "investigation" of Fox News chief correspondent James Rosen isn't the intrusive tracking of his movements and contacts — although that's disturbing enough — but the basis for the criminal charges he may ultimately face. At its heart, the allegation that Rosen broke the law "at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator" is based on nothing more than meeting with and asking questions of government adviser Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, who told him the non-shocking information that North Korea could very well respond to United Nations sanctions with more nuclear tests. That's right. Meeting an official and asking questions, which is what journalists do, is interpreted as criminal conspiracy. Taken with the already brewing scandal over the snooping of Associated Press phone records, we're looking at a full-fledged assault on the free press.

The path that led to allegations of illegal journalism is bad enough. In search of leaks, reports the Washington Post, Justice Department officials went full spy movie:

They 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 e-mails.

So, now we have a control-freak government that's determined to plug every source of unauthorized information and that has already prosecuted more leakers than all of its predecessors combined. So much for transparency. But to go after journalists who receive that information and to actually accuse them of crimes for asking questions is a fresh new step. As the Post adds:

[I]t remains an open question whether it's ever illegal, given the First Amendment's protection of press freedom, for a reporter to solicit information. No reporter, including Rosen, has been prosecuted for doing so.

Glenn Greenwald points out in the Guardian that the idea that asking questions can be criminal is at the root of the U.S. government's efforts against Julian Assange.

That same "solicitation" theory, as the New York Times reported back in 2011, is the one the Obama DOJ has been using to justify its ongoing criminal investigation of WikiLeaks and Julian Assange: that because Assange solicited or encouraged Manning to leak classified information, the US government can "charge [Assange] as a conspirator in the leak, not just as a passive recipient of the documents who then published them."

Having been tried out against a relative outlier like Assange, the theory that soliciting information can be criminal is apparently now ready for application against the mainstream press. We already know that the president explicitly considers freedom of the press to be only one consideration among several that have to be balanced, apparently according to the priorities of officials in his administration. He told us so just days ago, when asked about the government's treatment of the AP:

Now, with respect to the Department of Justice, I'm not going to comment on a specific and pending case.  But I can talk broadly about the balance that we have to strike.  Leaks related to national security can put people at risk.  They can put men and women in uniform that I've sent into the battlefield at risk. They can put some of our intelligence officers, who are in various, dangerous situations that are easily compromised, at risk. 

U.S. national security is dependent on those folks being able to operate with confidence that folks back home have their backs, so they're not just left out there high and dry, and potentially put in even more danger than they may already be.  And so I make no apologies, and I don't think the American people would expect me as Commander-in-Chief not to be concerned about information that might compromise their missions or might get them killed.

So, in the name of "balancing" government officials' priorities with core individual freedoms protected in the Bill of Rights, we're at a point now where journalists can be spied upon to find out their sources of information. And then they may actually be prosecuted for asking the "wrong" questions.

NEXT: Embattled New York Assemblyman Resigns

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. James Rosen is under investigation? I’m not a big fan of FoxNews, but when I see Rosen, I know I’m about to get some good information.

    1. We should start taking bets on what the next big scandal will be from these idiots.

      Do you think there is some infidelity possible? I mean, Obama thinks he can get away with everything else, why not that?

      What’s funny is that I bet the infidelity would get the public more interested than stalking a news reporter.

      1. The thing is, Obama is like the most asexual person ever. Power seems to get him excited, not women. Clinton, you could smell the scandal coming. But Obama? The Wookie would tear his arms off.

        1. So the question is, who’s Sasha and Malia’s daddy?

          1. Warty?

            1. No way. That woman’s too ugly for even The Warty to fuck. Even on a whiskey night.

              1. Gavin. I agree that Steven`s artlclee is inconceivable… on friday I got a great new Peugeot 205 GTi from earning $8100 thiss month and-more than, 10-k lass-month. with-out a doubt this is the most-financially rewarding Ive had. I began this 7-months ago and immediately started bringin home more than $82, per-hr. I use this website….. Click here
                (Go to site and open “Home” for details)

            2. No, no, that’s an understandable mistake. Warty insists that Sasha and Malia call him “Daddy,” but it’s not because he IS their daddy.

              1. “Who is you daddy and wat does he do?”

                1. It might be a tumor.

              2. Doesn’t he make them call him “The Boss”?

          2. STEVE SMITH?

        2. At this point I think either of his daughters could rip his arms off.

          He makes my high school yearbook picture look hypermasculine.

          1. I’ve seen your yearbook picture, and I know why your sugardaddy first named you “Fluffy”.

          2. I Googled “fluffy’s yearbook picture” and the first picture listed could be one of Obama’s daughters. Or sons. It’s difficult to be certain.

            If that’s you, then you’re absolutely correct.

        3. When its discovered that a request was sent to the White House by the Park Service asking that the President please stop sodomizing the original Bill of Rights, along with which 10 souvenier copies were sent.

        4. Obama is like the most asexual person ever

          So Andrew Sullivan was right? Well except for James Buchanan that is.

        5. Well, she is the man in the family.

        6. There have been various rumors floating around that Obama is on the down low.

        7. What in the world causes you to believe his infidelity would necessarily be with women?

      2. I’m betting cronie corruption or insider information kind of thing. It’s the Chicago way.

        1. Having lived in Illinois, I can tell you the Chicago way is to make sure you can never be directly tied to the corruption. Like the Corleones, the Daley machine has alot of “buffers”.

          1. Ya gotta type it like Willie Cicci said it” Yeeeah. Da family hadda lotta buffas”

            1. Cicc’ a porta!

      3. Everything I’ve read indicates that there’s no chance of Obama being overtly corrupt (Dick Nixon style) or being a philanderer (Clinton style). But everyone seems to agree that he is hyper-political, so I wouldn’t be surprised if we continue to get evidence of him hiding information and targeting people for political reasons. You may get evidence that he suppressed information coming out of various departments.

        Or, you know, maybe the next big scandal will be everyone realizing in an Emperor-has-no-clothes moment that he really is an incompetent leader in every area other than inspiration.

        1. Him being a petty, passive-aggressive piece of shit makes about as much sense as anything else.

        2. there’s no chance of Obama being overtly corrupt

          Define ‘corrupt.’

        3. Everything I’ve read indicates that there’s no chance of Obama being overtly corrupt

          Bull fucking shit.

          He’ll be celebrated for being a billionaire before his successor is out of office.

        4. Until big media gets on board with that message, he’ll continue to play the ‘the lamb and the wolf’ game. That is, he accuses everyone of being political but in the end he’s the most political of them all.

          He’s a cynic.

      4. I bet they put the hit on Breitbart

        1. I have often wondered…

        2. Is your name pronounced “Throat Warbler Mangrove” ?

      5. Next scandal? Well, some would call it old news but in light of recent stories who’s going to believe it to have been an isolated incident by mid level employees:

        Breaking – Report: DOJ Leaked Docs to Smear Fast & Furious Whistleblower, Says IG

        http://www.breitbart.com/Big-G…..stleblower

        1. Low-level. Rogue attorney. Holder doesn’t know shit. Old news. Fox news. Obama heard about it on the grape vine. Bush did it. He deserved it. Move along.

  2. Remember, fawning media fools: HOPE and CHANGE.

    If this doesn’t cause the press to viciously turn on Obama, I don’t know what will.

    1. This guys works for Fox. Wake the media when Obama prosecutes someone from NPR for asking questions.

      1. I can’t wait until the NYT screams bloody murder in the Rubio administration and is met with a big, fat ‘meh’ by everyone.

        1. Yeah, but the rest of us also get screwed in that process. Team Blue screws Team Red (and the rest of us) so Team Red screws Team Blue (and the rest of us).

        2. One of my facebook friends actually wrote “Why don’t they hold Republicans to the same standards as Democrats?”

          1. Remember the lesson we learned from Facebook: Stay out of Facebook.

      2. The AP is in the same part of the spectrum as NPR and they got targeted (not for prosecution, though).

      3. This guys works for Fox. Wake the media when Obama prosecutes someone from NPR for asking questions.

        This, unfortunately. Many people in the “main stream” media don’t consider Fox News to be “mainstream” and will most likely consider this to be A-OK in their book so long as those FEAUX NOOZ people get theirs. They won’t care.

        1. “will most likely consider this to be A-OK in their book so long as those FEAUX NOOZ people get theirs. They won’t care.”

          I dunno ’bout this. They seemed to have Foxes back when they got froze out of the press pool.

    2. the press doesn’t care if it’s a Fox reporter in the crosshairs. They care when it’s AP because that’s part of their Obama dogwashing club.

    3. It won’t; and I don’t either.

  3. I fucking love when wingnut conspiracy theorists are proven right. Delicious. Go on, bootlickers, yell about BLACK HELICOPTERS some more.

    1. Wait, there was a conspiracy theory here?

      1. I thinks it’s the general “The FedGov is out to get us, and is taking steps toward that end.”

        The “realists” know that the FedGov is a benevolent organization that only exists to make sure that the state governments don’t reimplement slavery.

        1. “The FedGov is out to get us, and is taking steps toward that end.”

          This isn’t a conspiracy, this is fact.

      2. The conspiracy theory is the general “Obama is doing this because he wants to be evil.” I freely admit that he’s doing these stupid and evil things with the best of intentions.

        1. “Oh, no,” Trevor-Roper told me with great asperity. “Hitler was convinced of his own rectitude.”

        2. That’s true of any conspiracy theory. Wingnutz see evil things in the world and assume they must have been designed by evil people. They can’t wrap their heads around the idea that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

          1. Assuming that the problem is that the Guy in Charge is Evil feeds into the problem of assuming that it’s All Good if only the Right Guy (My Guy) is in charge.

            1. Excellent point.

          2. They can’t wrap their heads around the idea that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

            True. But they need to be held accountable for the actual outcomes, regardless of their intentions.

          3. Yes to this (and the replies). If I had to boil down my attitude toward politics into a half-dozen sentences, the truism about the paving on the road to hell would be one of them.

        3. Yes, the ill-conceived plans of the well intended idiot shall be celebrated for they have our best interests at heart!

      3. The only conspiracy, if one can call it that, is that Misha has 2 testicles and Barry would like them back. When Barry can prove to Misha that he deserves to have them….

  4. I just walked by a television tuned to FoxNews. Unfortunately, even they have already switched from round-the-clock coverage of scandal-gate and are back to covering the soft news stories, such as the murder of Jualianna Redding.

    It’s like the news has a bad case of ADD.

    1. Who the fuck is Jualianna Redding and why should I give a flying fuck?

      TV news is retarded.

      1. She must be a pretty blonde. Otherwise why would they cover it?

        1. Oh, so more bullshit “celebrity” crime news.

        2. So I had to click on this (don’t know why). And, a very minor point that puts me in the soft news camp: how do you call an accused “hit woman” of being a “female James Bond.” Because, yeah, that was the Bond character.

        3. The deceased ressembles Bianca Kajlich to a great degree, who lets us hope with the end of her steady easy work will be doing some skinemax. Great rac, btw, google it.

          1. Ah, nuts. They’ve already got her lined up for a new show this fall.

  5. From Greenwald’s column:

    So do Obama defenders believe that George Bush and Richard Nixon – who never prosecuted leakers like this or formally accused journalists of being criminals for reporting classified information – were excessively protective of press freedoms and insufficiently devoted to safeguarding secrecy? To ask that question is to mock it.
    […]
    JAMES GOODALE: “Well, more precisely, I say that if in fact he goes ahead and prosecutes Julian Assange, he will pass Nixon. He’s close to Nixon now. The AP example is a good example of something that Obama has done but Nixon never did. So I have him presently in second place, behind Nixon and ahead of Bush II. And he’s moving up fast. . . .

    Suck it, Steve Chapman.

    1. Dog bless Greenwald. One of the few lefties who actually stand on principles of civil liberties as opposed to TEAM BLUE 4EVA cheerleading.

  6. U.S. national security is dependent on those folks being able to operate with confidence that folks back home have their backs, so they’re not just left out there high and dry, and potentially put in even more danger than they may already be.

    Right. But look at the example in this case.

    What secret was put at risk?

    The secret that our intelligence agencies had warned the President that pursuing additional sanctions against North Korea would lead to additional nuke tests.

    The effort against Rosen was designed to punish him from publishing information that might subsequently embarrass the President, and make him look like he had chosen the wrong policy.

    That’s all that was being protected.

    1. Yes, but I’m sure that he’s convenience that he is the state, and that embarrassing him would weaken the country’s negotiating intention.

    2. U.S. national security is dependent on those folks being able to operate with confidence that folks back home have their backs, so they’re not just left out there high and dry, and potentially put in even more danger than they may already be.

      Christ, the sand on this fucker. It’s like he can see the irony of the Benghazi situation in light of that statement, and deliberately says something that shows what a mendacious, power-hungry liar he is.

      1. How about… why the fuck are they even over there. Get your fucking nose out of other countries’ business and you won’t need to worry about unintentional exposure, you stupid dickwagon.
        (*insert big government flunky* is the dickwagon)

    3. Totally irrelevant, but I have to say, I hate it when people say “folks” all the time.

      1) “Folk” is already plural.
      2) Just say fucking “people”!

      That’s all.

      1. P-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-Porky P-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-Pig said “folks.”
        That’s all.

        1. Well, he’s not people.

          1. Porky may not be people but he’s good folk in my book!

      2. What about the Folks Wagon?!?!

        1. I don’t know enough German to make a clever comment on that.

      3. For a libertarian you have a totalitarian like attitude about word usage.

        folks is a colloquialism. Get over it.

    4. And how many State Department employees died the last time the President got embarrassed? Or SEALS the time before that?

      Barack’s ego is a matter of national security. End of story.

  7. If asking you is wrong,
    I don’t wanna be right.
    If being right means no questions,
    I’d rather live a wrong-doing life!
    The AP and Fox say it’s a shame
    It’s the Watergate.
    Long as I got the First Amendment by my side
    I don’t care about your national securi-tay.

    1. We aren’t far from the Alien and Sedition Act wherein questioning the government will get you put on the list.

  8. ” A well regulated press being necessary to the maintenance of the Obama Administration, the rights of the people shall be infringed.”

    FIFY

    1. +1 (not Amendment, however)

    2. Along those lines I believe a lot of people will say “when the press starts to care about my second as much as they care about the 1st the I’ll get worked up about the fed’s spying on the press.

  9. Here’s a little pick-me-up: Michael Kinsley of The New Republic just got accused of being a Voelker worshipper. I would’ve thought that when Sully went over the side, The Atlantic would move back towards its liberal but decently written past. Apparently, they’ve doubled down on being lefter-than-thou.

    1. I checked, and re-checked, and triple-checked, and I can confirm that it’s not 1979 anymore.

      the government can borrow money and put people back to work. It’s really that simple.

      Shakedown 1979

      1. That was the worst, most disappointing album ever. It’s not surprising that you like it.

        1. It was the Smashing Pumpkins. How could you be disappointed by poppy cotton candy?

          1. Because at least the Pumpkins could rock out at times, and so on a double album, one expected a certain percentage of cranked out songs, and instead got like one and a half. Weak.

            1. Gish was OK, but I still could never stand the singing. Or really anything about Billy Corgan.

            2. the Pumpkins could rock out at times

              Citation?

        2. I liked it when I was 13. I revisited it when I was an adult and couldn’t believe what shit it was. What you need to explain, you disgusting lump of diseased scrotum flesh, is why you liked that crappy band as an alleged grownup.

          1. I don’t have to explain shit to you! Why don’t you go back to listening to Queensryche and putting on mascara?

          2. Smashing Punkins sucked

            1. I don’t think they sucked so much as they refused to play to their strengths. Corrigan was invested in making a particularly bland form of darkwave dream pop, and every time they “resisted” him some OK music came out of it. Smashing Pumpkins is what happens when bands that are delicate balancing acts–The Replacements or The Smiths–get too much weight on the wrong end of the teeter-totter.

              1. Corrigan

                who?

                1. William Patrick “Billy” Corgan, Jr. (born March 17, 1967) is an American musician, producer, lyricist, writer, professional wrestling promoter, and poet

                2. You know, Donny Corrigan. The singer for the Smashing Squashes.

                  1. the Smashing Squashes.

                    It’s a Dropkick Murphy’s cover band?

                3. Derp. Me spel wrongs

                4. Corrigan

                  who?

                  SF was just proving how much of a non-fan he is.

              2. Yeah, and Corgan won, bigtime, on Mellon Collie. Jesus, even the name was retarded. I mean, Siamese Dream had some seriously rocking songs on it, yet Mellon Collie is all whining all the time. Shut up, Billy Corgan.

                1. I wonder if anyone else caught that “Mellon Collie” was a pun on “melancholy.”

                  1. It went right over my head. Billy’s too subtle for me.

                2. all whining all the time

                  Of course it was, it’s right there in the title.

                  1. Of course it was, it’s right there in the title.

                    At the very least, Billy couldn’t be accused of false advertising.

            2. Most of their music had this airy static disonance noise that I found repelling.

      2. the government can borrow money and put people back to work. It’s really that simple.

        Claim A does not necessarily support conclusion B.

        1. “That’s the sound of the men working on the chain…gang”

      3. I checked, and re-checked, and triple-checked, and I can confirm that it’s not 1979 anymore

        Yeah, we’re spending far more as a percentage of GDP than we ever did back then.

  10. Stagflation wasn’t supposed to happen, but it did.

    The only bit of good news is this is an easy problem to solve: with interest rates as low as they’ll ever be, the government can borrow money and put people back to work. It’s really that simple.

    Moron. Interest rates vs unemployment, interest rates vs unemployment, interest rates vs unemployment… repeat ad infinitum. There couldn’t possibly other factors in play, like capital, or total debt load, or risk aversion, or anything at all. It’s just interest rates and unemployment

    1. Not to mention the shitstorm on the budget that would ensue once the blended rates went up to about 3.5%.

      These idiots are so invested in their “JERBS! STIMULUZ! MUH .GOV INVESTMENTS!” that they don’t even realize that we HAVE been borrowing to keep the economy afloat for at least 13 years now, and that the 80s, 90s, and 2000s booms were built on unsustainable credit inflation.

  11. Pretty sure a reporter’s job description has to include asking questions, so they’re going to prosecute him for asking questions of the wrong guy?

  12. This is getting worse than Nixon. Time to start impeachment proceedings.

    1. Can you impeach someone for simple incompetence? After all, the people voted Obama into power knowing he was incompetent from past performance. The people want an incompetent president. Who is Congress to deny them that?

      1. You can impeach someone for anything you can convince the House to vote to impeach over.

      2. some guy, I don’t think people knew he was incompetent. What I wonder is if smart African-Americans knew he was incompetent and still voted for him.

    2. Barack Obama: Dumber than Carter; Dirtier than Nixon

      1. Hey, be fair–Carter wasn’t dumb, he was just a micromanaging asshole.

        1. Yeah, it should be
          Barack Obama: Dumber that Bush, Dirtier than Nixon.

  13. “He told us so just days ago”

    Why is this cunt still in office?

    1. Joe. Biden.

      Would you want to be remembered as the guy who created the Biden presidency?

      1. I’m sure Biden would do something impeachment-worthy within the first ten minutes. So then we’d have a Boehner presidency (assuming Congress delays approval of Biden’s Veep, as they should).

        1. Biden as President. That my friends is “sit back and let it all unfold and come to you” material.

          It would be SICK!

      2. Fuck yeah. Just for the lulz.

      3. At this point, fuck yeah I’d take Biden over this dirtbag. At least the press conferences would be a hoot.

  14. Does anyone else think Obama would be a terrible pick up teammate? I imagine he’s the guy who thinks he’s awesome, takes (and misses) every shot and gambles on defense.

    1. He’d guard the white guy instead of his positional counterpart.

    2. Yeah, he’s a total chucker.

      1. BALL HOG!

    3. The best shooters shoot through their dry spells, no matter how many years they last.

      1. Shooting slumps are X number of shots long. The trick is to take X+1 shots as quickly as possible so as to put the slump behind you.

      2. Robert Horry’s 6 or 8 championship rings are a testament to this fact.

        1. So clutch.

    4. Who cares about football anyway?

    5. The JR Smith of the White House.

    6. Could you picture him trash talking?

      I was a jock in school and he reminds me of those guys who thought they were better than they actually were. There’s always a couple at try-outs or on a team. Every so often you have to shut them up or remind them who they are.

      Just an impression. No clue if he sucks. But the dude can’t throw a baseball. Most athletes can play most sports reasonably well, no?

      I’m sure Bush was a better athlete.

      Bah. Neither of them can skate and shoot a puck.

  15. Hey, remember this? More stuff Obama had no idea was happening right under his nose:

    REPORT: DOJ LEAKED DOCS TO SMEAR FAST & FURIOUS WHISTLEBLOWER, SAYS IG

    The Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General published a new report Monday that confirms former U.S. Attorney for Arizona Dennis Burke leaked a document intended to smear Operation Fast and Furious scandal whistleblower John Dodson.

    I don’t think this is actually new information, Burke admitted to doing this a while back. It’s now been officially confirmed in the IG report.

    So when does Dennis Burke face criminal charges?

    1. “So when does Dennis Burke face criminal charges?
      Procedures were followed, mistakes were made, the passive voice was used.

    2. Too bad you can’t use evidence of a double standard in your own defense.

    3. Why would they do that if there were nothing to cover up?

  16. That’s right. Meeting an official and asking questions, which is what journalists do, is interpreted as criminal conspiracy.

    OK, that right there? Yeah – that is some kind of fucked up.

    One of your toadies squeels to the press – go after them, it’s BS, but it’s your toady. Whatever. But go after the press person who talked to your stool pigeon?

    REMEMBER JUDITH MILLER!!!!

  17. Who asked what and when did they ask it!

  18. On a lighter note, this explains so much about why FSU is a 2nd tier team and the Bills are a 3rd tier team. I’m sure EJ will run the system to perfection when it doesn’t count.

    Buffalo Bills quarterback EJ Manuel said Sunday in a radio interview from the NFLPA Rookie Premiere in Los Angeles that he is quickly picking up the team’s offense, which he said is less complex than the system he used at Florida State.

    1. First round pick. I’m still amazed.

    2. That’s funny, but at the same time I wouldn’t get too worked up about it. Half the problem with the NFL is coaches and GMs forgetting that the talent and their ability to all be on the same page is more important than the scheme. They get far too enamored with their own cleverness, and think implementing some offense or defense flavor of the year is going to be a quick fix to turn the team around.

      Vince Lombardi would kick the ass of any coach in the game today, precisely because he kept things simple, preached execution, and had an eye for talent. That’s really all it takes–you don’t need some super-complicated scheme to win games. In fact, that can actually make things worse.

      1. I’m going to see if I can have charge of a team’s offense this year so I can install a jet/fly-oriented sidesaddle T. It’s just one formation from which can be run both single wing and wing T style plays, with an emphasis on jet/fly series. Easier for children to take the snap when the QB is standing sideways to the snapper’s butt, and easier to time out the jet/fly when the QB’s facing where the runner is in motion from. And the other 2 backs are going to be split but close enough to each reach for the snap when it’s delivered blind down the middle, so the snapper can keep his head up. Line’s going to line up tight enough for a good wedge, and only one guard’s going to have to learn to pull, with the QB as a blocking back when he doesn’t get the snap.

    3. Jesus Christ dude, we’re about as far from football season as possible now. Can people never shut up about it?

      1. Football season is still going on. Bayern M?nchen are playing Borussia Dortmund in the Champions League final on Saturday.

        1. Not commie football. Redneck/gangster football.

      2. Spring is football season for some children’s leagues, all the women’s, and a few of the men’s, such as the National Public Safety League. Plus, it’s fall now in the southern hemisphere, where there’s some adult & children’s American football.

  19. So, what with the articles at the Spectator linking the IRS scandal to the NTEU and (thereby) potentially to the WH, some part of me is really hoping that union officials are directly implicated in this. Maybe it would represent a good opportunity to try to eliminate federal labor unions. Call it Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial Union Reform Act.

    1. Oh, yes, please.

    2. No way. The problem is never the institution, it’s always the people running it. Best case scenario is the union boss is replaced with an equally corrupt union boss.

  20. The Law Is Irrelevant

    Obama’s new hatchet man reveals that this Administration not only has no respect for the law, but is fundamentally lawless.

    1. Welcome to the true face of government.

    2. Too be fair, that’s not exactly what he meant.

      1. I know what he meant, but I think he inadvertently stated a revealed preference in his clumsy attempt to make it sound as if Obama actually intended to do something about the IRS’s tactics.

        1. A gaffe: unintentionally telling the truth.

    3. Re: Anonymous Coward,

      Obama’s new hatchet man reveals that this Administration not only has no respect for the law, but is fundamentally lawless.

      I was watching this morning a video of precisely that part mentioned in the link you provided, and I have to say that the guy was simply too incompetent to string the proper words together to convey the idea he clearly had in his head. I understood what he meant when saying “the law is irrelevant because…” but he could’ve been much clearer had he said “leaving aside the legality of what was done which is still to be determined” instead of saying “the law is irrelevant.”

      1. I still think it was a case of parapraxis. Looking at the history of the Obama Administration, it’s not that hard to draw the conclusion that Obama and those around him view the law as a hinderance to their utopian designs.

        1. our country’s elites these days honestly don’t view the Constitution and Bill of Rights as a set of governing principles–they see it as an obstacle to be overcome in the pursuit of power.

          Just look at that asshole law professor that said earlier this year that the Constution is outdated and needs to be removed.

          1. We don’t need rights! Institutions will protect us!

  21. War on the press? Who cares, I don’t work in the press.

    1. But who will speak out when they come for the commentators?

      1. This is when Herc will make his triumphant return.

        1. and the friends of felines will cower in terror

        2. HERC ! HERC ! HERC !

  22. So, in the name of “balancing” government officials’ priorities with core individual freedoms protected in the Bill of Rights, we’re at a point now where journalists can be spied upon to find out their sources of information. And then they may actually be prosecuted for asking the “wrong” questions.

    Aaaannnd now liberals are all about law and order and not letting the terrorists win. No, really, they are seriously going with the ‘Obama is just trying to protect national security’ defense. These people have no shame and no convictions beyond expanding their power and stamping out the opposition.

    1. Until TEAM Red puts one of theirs in the White House again. Then, dissent will be the highest form of patriotism. Again.

  23. Of all the recent scandals (IRS, Benghazi, DOJ/AP), stealing phone records without a warrant is the only actual crime.

    The IRS SHOULD subject applications for tax exempt status from political groups to strict scrutiny. The only problem here was going too far, and not applying that strict scrutiny equally to all groups.

    The Benghazi cover-up was just politicians doing what they do, trying to spin a bad situation for damage control. So they didn’t call it terrorism right away — everyone knew it was.

    But violating the 4th Amendment, and probably the 1st, in an effort to intimidate reporters who are supposed to keep the people informed about what “the most transparent Administration in history” is doing should lead to some indictments being handed down. Oops, the DOJ is the folks who broke the law here, just like Fast & Furious…. time for Holder to resign and face a grand jury.

    1. The IRS SHOULD subject applications for tax exempt status from political groups to strict scrutiny. The only problem here was going too far, and not applying that strict scrutiny equally to all groups.

      I completely disagree. They should automatically approve all such applications. If a group is lying, let the government prove it after the fact. Prior restraint is completely illiberal.

      Standard Libertarian Disclaimer: The IRS shouldn’t be reviewing speech at all.

      So they didn’t call it terrorism right away — everyone knew it was.

      It goes a bit further than that. They blamed it on a video and requested that Youtube take down the video.

      1. It goes a bit further than that. They blamed it on a video and requested that Youtube take down the video.

        And then had the FBI arrest and jail the filmmaker as a scapegoat.

        1. aaaand the President went in front of the UN and gave a speech about it of which he hemmed and hawed about the freedom of speech and pronounced that “the future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam”.

          Yeah well that’s not up to you now is it, douchey McFuckbag.

    2. Content- or viewpoint-based discrimination vis-a-vis political speech is an entirely clear-cut violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Depriving Americans of their civil rights under color of law is a crime (18 US ? 242).

    3. Re: CE,

      The IRS SHOULD subject applications for tax exempt status from political groups to strict scrutiny.

      Yes, if evidence is presented afterwards that the new 501(c)4 is engaging in bankrolling political campaigns or actively campaining for a candidate or party. However, the IRS had NO authorization based on procedure or law to especially target groups requesting their 501(c)4 status only because the name of the organization suggests political proselitism. That in itself violates the 1st Amendment of the Consitution i.e. the group members’ civil rights, something for which people are still sent to jail in this country, CE.

    4. The IRS itself has admitted it abused its power by the way it handled conservative Tea Party groups. This came from the IRS.

      Saying “The IRS SHOULD subject applications for tax exempt status from political groups to strict scrutiny” is nothing more than a diversion from the fact that the IRS abused it’s power.

      It’s a scandal, and Obama is responsible since he manages the Treasury Dept.

      If Obama gave the word to do it (and it’s looking like he did: http://spectator.org/archives/…..e-smoking/) then it’s a major scandal and he should be impeached for abuse of power, and politicizing the IRS (and probably the rest of the executive branch as well).

  24. He wears his mom pants while playing ball? He can’t bowl for shit. Can’t throw a baseball. This is just embarrassing. How have black people not disowned him yet? Clearly his white half is dominant. And his black half is East African, not exactly known for athleticism beyond running really far relatively fast.

    (I don’t have a newsletter, so don’t ask.)

    1. As I noted below, he’s wearing RUNNING SHOES to play b-ball. That’s gonna leave a mark.

  25. Fox is reporting that at least two other Fox reporters were also targeted.

    1. This just keeps getting better and better. The only downside is that the IRS and press-spying scandals have pushed Benghazi off the front pages.

      1. Duh. That was the purpose of this “leak”. A few non-connected-enough IRS flunkies will take the fall, and everyone will escape unharmed- especially The One.

        Benghazi will be a footnote, and long forgotten before the 2016 election season.

        1. That may have been the purpose of the leak, but I think it backfired. Forgotten by 2016? Maybe, but not by 2014. Certainly the IRS scandal has legs and will last a while.

  26. The beauty thing: Now Obama is hamstrung and the rest of his 2nd term will be obfuscation/extrication. Turns out an Obama reelection was the best outcome.

    1. I wouldn’t say that, especially if he gets another Supreme Court nomination or two.

    2. I agree – we can expect little action in the 2nd term though the Republicans will try and might kill Obamacare, simply by not funding it.

      If Romney was elected, he was such a hawk that we might be at war with Iran by now. Romney’s budget wasn’t much different than Obama’s: the Ryan/Romney budget grew government spending by 3.1% each year. Obama used the military in Libya in war, but it seems like we don’t have much if any military in Libya now (but we don’t know for sure).

      While we know Obama’s judicial nominations would be bad, but Romney didn’t appoint limited government judges either, and we’d likely get a statist jurist in either case.

      I voted for Gary Johnson, and believed voting for Romney to be worse than Obama. Even though for the short term I think Romeny would have been much better than Obama.

      Now I’m more convinced then ever voting for Johnson was right. Either of Obama/Romney would be bad, so why vote for it? Now, people are waking up, and we might get some real limited government types elected. The RNC is learning that giving us statist candidates leads to losing, while people are learning what the Democrats are all about. We need more libertarian leaning politicians. Voting for statists doesn’t move us in that direction.

  27. Anyone else notice Obama wears running shoes to play b-ball? Can the guy do ANYTHING right?

    1. reward your friends
      punish your enemies

      that’s two

      1. Apparently, he can’t even do those properly.

    2. What’s the difference?

  28. “This follows the charge that the department secretly obtained two months of phone records from Associated Press journalists as part of a separate leak probe. The department in this case, though, went a step further, as an FBI agent reportedly claimed there’s evidence the journalist in question — Fox News’ James Rosen — broke the law ‘at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator.'”

    http://www.foxnews.com/politic…..z2TrW2JrtC

  29. Maybe I’m being really retarded here, but didn’t the entire Pentagon papers case clear this up thirty years ago?

  30. U.S. national security is dependent on those folks being able to operate with confidence that folks back home have their backs…

    Slightly off topic, but I wonder when Obama started using the term ‘folks’ or how often he uses it in private. I’d wager he did not use this before he started running for political office. I wonder if he used the word before he ran for national office.

  31. And then they may actually be prosecuted for asking the “wrong” questions.

    Well, it’s a lot easier to jump on people for asking the wrong question that worrying about giving the wrong answer.

  32. It’s good to see the administration finally put the screws to FNC. I disagree with everything they stand for and, besides, the feds will never come for our side, right fellas?

    Seriously folks, this is what’s passing for commentary at Huffpo right now. Those folks just don’t get it.

  33. “Leaks related to national security can put people at risk.”

    Obama was thinking of the risk to him here, not the lives of soldiers or spies.

    One thing all 3 scandals (IRS, AP wiretaps, Benghazi) have in common, is that Obama has gotten most government employees to shut up so they don’t get fired or prosecuted. And he hasn’t prosecuted anyone for any of the scandals. Instead some have been reassigned or resigned voluntarily with no financial penalties (to create a narrative that he’s help people accountable). If people aren’t indited and prosecuted, he’s not holding anyone accountable. If they aren’t fired where they lose their pension, then they’ve gotten away with it.

    Obama hasn’t penalized anyone, because he wants to shut them up. Those who’ve done the dirty work got bonuses and better jobs. Those bringing the truth to light get demoted or prosecuted.

    In every case, Obama’s administration has intimidated witnesses.

    1. that’s right. and for all the feckless idiot supplicants in the press, gleefully doing HIS bidding over the last five years, are you getting this memo? i hope some of you actually have the brains to heed this wakeup call. your boy wonder is an arrogant, corrupt, backroom thug. and to keep power, he will go after anyone that dares challenges him. if you know anything about the chicago system, you know what a scary bottom feeding eel this guy really is. so please, media, wake up, and start doing your jobs. vet this dirtbag, and begin to push back against him….

  34. This points up the fact the law discriminates against political speech, which is the Republican stock-in-trade, while indemnifying “social welfare,” which is, and nearly always has been, the Democrat’s. Why should Planned Parenthood be supported and Billy Graham’s son not allowed to buy ads urging voters to vote in line with Christian principles, or the North Carolina Evangelistic Association run an interview supporting Chick-fil-A’s owner in its newspaper columns? Why, indeed, should taxpayers be required to subsidize the president’s foundation to aid Africans, but not allowed to aid political discourse in their own? Surely this is opposed to free speech.

  35. Hats off to you, J.D., it takes cajones to do any honest reporting, or even to publicly express your personal opinion, with the current regime ruling over our lives.

  36. One wonders. In the presence of such a treasonous arsenal of conspiracies, why is Obama still President? Doesn’t matter if he was directly or indirectly involved. These horrible and horrfying events are happening and have happened under his watch. He should be fired. Better yet. He NEEDS to be fired or the America that the soldiers and Patriots died for is over. And that will have happened under OUR watch.

  37. So. Limbaugh was right all along to call this administration ‘the regime?’

  38. my classmate’s ex-wife makes $67 every hour on the internet. She has been without a job for seven months but last month her income was $17038 just working on the internet for a few hours. Here’s the site to read more KEP2.COM

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.