Posts Tagged ‘White House’
If White House reporters are upset about “Secret off-the-record” meetings, there IS a way to stop it
Just get up, and walk out
With Benghazi heating up (finally) in the news, and people demanding answers (still after all these months), the White House announced a Press Conference for today.
WH press briefing scheduled for 12:30, then 1:45, now 3:15
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) May 10, 2013
Suddenly, there turned out to be ANOTHER White House press conference, this one “off the record” -
If there’s one thing you want to do when accusations are flying about an attempted cover up and a disinterested, collusive media, it’s holding an off-the-record briefing.
The White House held an off-the-record briefing with reporters on Friday afternoon to discuss recent revelations about the Benghazi investigation, sources familiar with the meeting tell POLITICO.
The meeting began around 12:45 p.m. and postponed the daily, on-the-record White House press briefing to 1:45 p.m. White House press secretary Jay Carney did not respond to a request for confirmation of the meeting.
The off-the-record session was announced to reporters in the wake of an ABC News report showing that White House and State Dept. officials were involved in revising the now-discredited CIA talking points about the attack on Benghazi.
Were they discussing troop movements or something? What reason could there be to go off the record, and why would the press agree to it? If there’s classified material involved, just redact the bits that can’t be publicized. Or maybe I have this wrong; maybe the reason Carney wanted to huddle is because Ron Fournier was onto something this morning in sensing that the White House is trying to point a finger at Hillary and the State Department for redacting the first draft of the CIA’s talking points. For obvious reasons, if Carney wants to steer them in that direction, he wouldn’t want to do it on the record. Then again, there’s no reason to task the White House press secretary with that; if Team O wants to push Hillary under the bus, they’ll do it the old-fashioned way, through anonymous leaks. So again, why is this briefing off the record?
Yeah, way to be “Open and Transparent, there, Obama.
Twitchy has more. Lots more.
One correspondent, April Ryan, seems especially upset -
Big mistake!!!!!!Reporters are not happy with this off the record briefing before the briefing with a handful of the Press Corps.
— AprilDRyan (@AprilDRyan) May 10, 2013
Dubious, I had to ask her:
.@aprildryan So, would you be upset if you were one of the “invited ones”? Just curious.
— Erick Brockway (@erickbrockway) May 10, 2013
To which she replied:
@erickbrockway they say I can never be satisfied.The answers need to be on the record.
— AprilDRyan (@AprilDRyan) May 10, 2013
…which, I guess, means if she were in the secret meeting, she’d be equally unhappy? I’m again dubious…
Dana Perino, former White House spokesperson after the untimely death of Tony Snow, said it all right here:
@aprildryan y’all should have refused to go.
— Dana Perino (@DanaPerino) May 10, 2013
Yes. If you call yourself a “Journalist” and don’t want it to be said of you you’re nothing but an “Opinion Journalist” – refuse to go unless it’s on the record. Supposed to be watchdogs, aren’t you? Or is this reserved for when a President you don’t agree with ideologically is in office?
Crossposted to Unified Patriots
With all the amazing people Time could’ve picked, they proved their continuing irrelevance by picking their socialist hero, B. Hussein Obama:
We are in the midst of historic cultural and demographic changes, and Barack Obama is both the symbol and in some ways the architect of this new America. In 2012, he found and forged a new majority, turned weakness into opportunity and sought, amid great adversity, to create a more perfect union.
Seriously? His “new majority” is a dubious collection of leftists and low-information voters; his “new America” a collapsing star which is about to become a financial black hole. This is their “more perfect union”?
Rush called it:
We’ve never had a more radical, we’ve never had a more partisan politician in the White House than Obama. It’s only a low-information voter (we used to have call ‘em “morons”) that could think he’s outside of politics, but there you have it. There you have it. TIME Magazine: We chose Obama because he’s a symbol of the new, low-information America. That’s what Stengel meant when he talked about Obama being “the beneficiary and the author of a kind of new America, a new demographic, a new cultural America that he is now the symbol of.”
I wonder what these elite Democrats really think about that. So this guy’s Man of the Year because idiots love him? Because believe me, they think low-information voters are idiots. I guarantee you. They’ll be glad to take their votes. The new stupid America? That should have been Man of the Year. Person of the Year: Stupid people. The low-information voter should have been the Person of the Year.
Here’s who the editors at Time should’ve picked – the teacher who gave her life to save her children:
This can’t be real. Just some trial balloon to make the next name floated seem more realistic. I mean, nothing says a Commander in Chief loves his troops like sticking a reviled war protester who allegedly threw his medals over the White House fence at an anti-war protest (the ones he allegedly didn’t rightfully earn) in as Secretary of Defense.
President Obama is considering asking Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) to serve as his next defense secretary, part of an extensive rearrangement of his national security team that will include a permanent replacement for former CIA director David H. Petraeus.
Although Kerry is thought to covet the job of secretary of state, senior administration officials familiar with the transition planning said that nomination will almost certainly go to Susan E. Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
I try to keep this blog free of profanity, but you gotta be sh*ttin’ me?
I guess the left being hard up for a “War Hero” and all just can’t pass up the chance to grab whatever they’re offered. If Kerry is the “trial balloon” I can hardly wait to see who the real pick will be. As was said elsewhere, “I can’t think of anyone less respected by the troops“.
- Former anti-war protester John Kerry to be Secretary of Defense? (twitchy.com)
- WaPo: John Kerry under consideration for defense secretary (michellemalkin.com)
- Kerry, John Kerry: Defense Secretary (zerohedge.com)
Jay Leno took some surprising shots at President Obama Thursday night.
During the opening monologue of NBC’s Tonight Show, the host said Americans wasted four years for the current White House resident to do something about the economy (video follows with transcribed highlights and commentary):
“I love how the politicians capitalize on this kind of thing,” teased Leno. “Like the minute the replacement refs were fired, President Obama said, ‘See, sometimes losing jobs can be a good thing. It’s a good thing.’”
Read more (Video here also)
Steve Foley wasted no time slapping a Facebook-page-worthy image together, for your pleasure -
h/t Mike Becker
Remember, Obama and Holder are responsible for deaths here. Just as they tried to twist the Clinton impeachment into “It was just about a BJ” rather than what it truly was: a President caught lying under oath, the Democrat-controlled media are pretending this is just a “Partisan Squabble“. No, it isn’t. It’s about a leftist ideology to somehow circumvent the Second Amendment and to do that, they need moral outrage. What better to gin up such outrage than Mexican civilians killed by guns “legally purchased” in the United States?
Bill Whittle explains [pay particular attention to Whittle's Eric Holder quotes. Yes, Holder really said that.]:
Who are the racists here? The leftist Democrats who cared not about the deaths of 300 plus Mexicans, (much less two US Border Agents). As Whittle puts it, if they had been “…300 graphics designers in San Francisco and a university president instead of…peasants and a law enforcement officer…” with a Republican President, the left would be dragging him/her out of the White House with pitchforks instead of covering his backside as they currently are for B. Hussein Obama.
- ‘A Very Nixonian Mistake’… (blogs.telegraph.co.uk)
- Court rulings suggest ‘privilege’ claim over ‘Furious’ docs would fizzle … – Fox News (foxnews.com)
- Editorial: End the secrets on Fast and Furious (denverpost.com)
- Murdered border agent Brian Terry’s parents accuse Obama officials of ‘hiding … – Fox News (foxnews.com)
- Jon Stewart Trashes Obama’s Executive Privilege Assertion On Fast And Furious (mediaite.com)
The political Groveler in Chief really, Really, REALLY wants to stay in that big house, have the cool airplane, and continue his economy-destroying agenda. To do that, he wants your money. Never mind the millions he gets from multiple trips to Hollywood at events no working person (not actually serving him crepes) will ever be invited to.
Hey! Getting married? Why not ask your guests to, rather than helping you and your betrothed start out on your new life together, just send the money they were going spend helping you to him instead? Help him get re-elected?? Cool idea!?
From Weasel Zippers:
Well, don’t know who created the image below, but I like it better than the original;
Could anyone really ever get to be more arrogant than Obama?
Or is he simply as clueless as Harry Reid?
President Obama attempted Friday to improve his chops as an international leader working hard to protect American workers and save Europe from its own political dysfunction. But his morning appearance in the White House briefing room is likely to be remembered, instead, for a single sound bite he surely wishes he could take back: “The private sector is doing fine,” he said.Instantly, Republican strategists on Twitter jumped on the remark, which will no doubt soon be inserted into speeches by his Republican rival Mitt Romney, along with anti-Obama television and Internet advertising. Republicans were already making the case that the President is out of touch with the American people and the workings of the private sector. Obama just made it that much easier.
Read the rest -
I guess this means Billy Boy got taken to the woodshed for his “anti Obama” remarks:
Former President Bill Clinton apologized on Thursday for comments earlier in the week that undermined President Barack Obama’s efforts to raise taxes on upper-income Americans at the end of the year.
In an interview with CNN, Mr. Clinton sought to align his position with that of the White House, saying he agrees with the president’s call for letting the Bush-era tax cuts expire for families earning more than $250,000 at year’s end.
“I support his position,’’ Mr. Clinton told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer.
At issue is the expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts in January 2013. Mr. Obama, in agreeing to temporarily extend the tax cuts in 2010, vowed to veto any future measure that would leave intact the tax cuts for upper-income Americans.
In an interview on CNBC Tuesday, Mr. Clinton suggested that the tax cuts should be extended for all taxpayers until early next year.
“What I think we need to do is to find some way to avoid the fiscal cliff, to avoid doing anything that would contract the economy now,” he said.
- Bill Clinton says he’s ‘very sorry’ for veering off message on Bush tax cuts – ABC News (abcnews.go.com)
- Bill Clinton: “Very Sorry” About Tax Comments (blogs.wsj.com)