Top Administration Official Threatened Woodward

[gatorman_07732]

Of course the administration denies it, but Woodward has the email to prove it. It is pretty clear that the arrogance of this administration has got worse since re-election.

Bob Woodward says he was threatened by White House

CNN) - Veteran journalist Bob Woodward said Wednesday he was threatened by a senior Obama administration official following his reporting on the White House's handling of the forced federal spending cuts set to take effect on Friday.

"They're not happy at all," he said on CNN's "The Situation Room," adding that an e-mail from a senior administration official - who he would not name - communicated a message which caused him great concern.
"It was said very clearly, you will regret doing this," he said.

[wgbgator]

See if you can spot the threat:

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...6.html?hp=t1_3

Bob:

I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today. My bad. I do understand your problems with a couple of our statements in the fall — but feel on the other hand that you focus on a few specific trees that gives a very wrong perception of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here.

But I do truly believe you should rethink your comment about saying saying that Potus asking for revenues is moving the goal post. I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim. The idea that the sequester was to force both sides to go back to try at a big or grand barain with a mix of entitlements and revenues (even if there were serious disagreements on composition) was part of the DNA of the thing from the start. It was an accepted part of the understanding — from the start. Really. It was assumed by the Rs on the Supercommittee that came right after: it was assumed in the November-December 2012 negotiations. There may have been big disagreements over rates and ratios — but that it was supposed to be replaced by entitlements and revenues of some form is not controversial. (Indeed, the discretionary savings amount from the Boehner-Obama negotiations were locked in in BCA: the sequester was just designed to force all back to table on entitlements and revenues.)

I agree there are more than one side to our first disagreement, but again think this latter issue is diffferent. Not out to argue and argue on this latter point. Just my sincere advice. Your call obviously.

My apologies again for raising my voice on the call with you. Feel bad about that and truly apologize.

[T3goalie]

Government intimidation?

Nah... Matthews, et al,will tell us it is just an misunderstanding. Time for a beer with the Prez in the rose garden

[wgbgator]

Originally Posted by T3goalie

Government intimidation?

Nah... Matthews, et al,will tell us it is just an misunderstanding. Time for a beer with the Prez in the rose garden

Where's the intimidation?

[BobK89]

"you will regret" is being interpreted as a possible threat.

Whether it is or not, let the debate begin.

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by wgbgator

Where's the intimidation?

Your blind, bob just pointed it out. When someone says you will regret it, that is a threat. Woodward himself said he perceived it as a threat and he is hardly the partisan like you.

[Row6]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

Your blind, bob just pointed it out. When someone says you will regret it, that is a threat. Woodward himself said he perceived it as a threat and he is hardly the partisan like you.

Poor Bobby. Obviously he's more used to being a willing mouth piece for whatever inside source dictates his books to him. Guess Obama snubbed him somewhere along the line.

[g8trjax]

Woodward should step back in line. It hasn't been established if O can legally drone citizens on American soil.

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by Row6

Poor Bobby. Obviously he's more used to being a willing mouth piece for whatever inside source dictates his books to him. Guess Obama snubbed him somewhere along the line.

Looks like you condone threats. There is nothing this administration could do that you would condemn.

[Row6]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

Looks like you condone threats. There is nothing this administration could do that you would condemn.

I absolutely condone the language of the email that gave Bobby the vapors.

[mocgator]

If this had been Bush there would have been rallies of leftists Myrmidons screaming about the assault on the first amendment. Th main stream press would be frothing.

Our tyrant in chief and his junta simply cannot be questioned. Really starting to look like Germany in the 1930's. you must support the party or you will be punished. What sad times are these.

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by Row6

I absolutely condone the language of the email that gave Bobby the vapors.

Well then you condone making threats. Very nice

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by mocgator

If this had been Bush there would have been rallies of leftists Myrmidons screaming about the assault on the first amendment. Th main stream press would be frothing.

Our tyrant in chief and his junta simply cannot be questioned. Really starting to look like Germany in the 1930's. you must support the party or you will be punished. What sad times are these.

They would already be planning hearings in the House

[Row6]

Originally Posted by mocgator

If this had been Bush there would have been rallies of leftists Myrmidons screaming about the assault on the first amendment. Th main stream press would be frothing.

Our tyrant in chief and his junta simply cannot be questioned. Really starting to look like Germany in the 1930's. you must support the party or you will be punished. What sad times are these.

Bush? Like you said in another post, this is worse than Germany in the 1930's. This is Himmler in the Ukraine, Tojo in China!

[wgbgator]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

Your blind, bob just pointed it out. When someone says you will regret it, that is a threat. Woodward himself said he perceived it as a threat and he is hardly the partisan like you.

Here's how Bob responded to this "threat:"

Gene: You do not ever have to apologize to me. You get wound up because you are making your points and you believe them. This is all part of a serious discussion. I for one welcome a little heat; there should more given the importance. I also welcome your personal advice. I am listening. I know you lived all this. My partial advantage is that I talked extensively with all involved. I am traveling and will try to reach you after 3 pm today. Best, Bob

[gator421]

Originally Posted by mocgator

If this had been Bush there would have been rallies of leftists Myrmidons screaming about the assault on the first amendment. Th main stream press would be frothing.

Our tyrant in chief and his junta simply cannot be questioned. Really starting to look like Germany in the 1930's. you must support the party or you will be punished. What sad times are these.

Bush?

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by wgbgator

Here's how Bob responded to this "threat:"

Did you even listen to Woodward? I don't think you did, because the words came right out of his mouth that this made him uncomfortable. You guys are amazing. There is nothing this administration could do that you would condemn....Nothing

[wgbgator]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

Did you even listen to Woodward? I don't think you did, because the words came right out of his mouth that this made him uncomfortable. You guys are amazing. There is nothing this administration could do that you would condemn....Nothing

Well, Bob is entitled to his feelings. But having seen the actual e-mail and reply, its hard to see any threats or intimidation there, or discomfort on Bob's end in his reply. I doubt any reasonable person would. He seems to have thinner skin than your average Too Hot poster if he actually felt "threatened."

[Row6]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

Well then you condone making threats. Very nice

If you don't stop posting nonsense I won't read it anymore.


Understand!!

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by wgbgator

Well, Bob is entitled to his feelings. But having seen the actual e-mail and reply, its hard to see any threats or intimidation there, or discomfort on Bob's end in his reply. I doubt any reasonable person would. He seems to have thinner skin than your average Too Hot poster if he actually felt "threatened."

This conversation is worthless, you see things one way and are beyond reason. When someone says your going to regret this based on something you wrote, that is an indication of retaliation in some way. You can deny it, but cleary you would not be reasonable for doing so.