Top Administration Official Threatened Woodward

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by jdrgator

Please. Woodward is crying like a stuck pig because he got heat from other journos for getting his facts wrong so now he is playing up something that is not threatening as if it is. Even some conservative journos out there realize this. but the question is, did you read the email exchange? Woodward's response in the email = very different from what he's saying now.

Then again, only in a twisted world where one sends an email to another, opening with an apology and closing with a second apology is it now a threat. I'd say come back to reality, brotha...you are getting played.

You don't know how right you are in the MSM is whipping his ass for him calling out Obama for his lie. He now has a target on his back and they are going to try to destroy him. This is nothing for than street thug mentality. How dare he do what he did against Obama.

[MastaG8r]

Originally Posted by rivergator

Already posted several. You just need to read the thread. But, wait, there's more:

Byron York: After reading Sperling-Woodward email, it's nowhere close to a threat. Agree with @mattklewis: People who made big deal of this got played.

Keith Urbahn: Vintage Woodward: Cherry-pick a friendly exchange, make it sinister & vault himself into the media. Did it with Rummy in State of Denial.

Okay, cool. So next time one of these folks gets quoted in support of a Conservative viewpoint you'll respond to their message rather than attack the messenger. Great!

[vertigo0923]

http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/28/bo...we-got-played/



this whole thing was nothing.

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

Chuck Hagel

Former Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) would probably have agreed with Brooks. According to the Jerusalem Post, he was “one of a handful of senators who frequently didn’t sign AIPAC-backed letters related to Israel and the peace process during his time in the Senate and opposed additional sanctions on Iran.”

Apparently, like Brooks, he has faced criticism for these anti-Israel stances – and has complained that “the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people.”[ii]

Yet Hagel himself doesn’t seem to have been particularly intimidated. In the Senate he amassed a significant track record as one of a hardline hater of Israel who would not affix his name even to the most innocuous pro-Israel initiative. When all but four Senators signed a pro-Israel statement in 2000, Hagel was one of the holdouts. The next year, he was again among the few Senators – eleven this time – who refused to add their names to a statement urging George W. Bush not to meet with Yaser Arafat as long as the Palestinian groups under his control continued to pursue violence against Israel. In 2005, Hagel, along with 26 other senators, opposed a call to the Palestinian Authority to disqualify terror groups from participating in elections. And when twelve senators wrote to the European Union in 2006 asking that the EU join the U.S. in classifying Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, Hagel was once again one of the few.[iii]

[jdrgator]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

You don't know how right you are in the MSM is whipping his ass for him calling out Obama for his lie. He now has a target on his back and they are going to try to destroy him. This is nothing for than street thug mentality. How dare he do what he did against Obama.

hahaha. The response by the media has been to point out how, in fact, Woodward erred on his original criticism since his own reporting undermined it. I've been following this too, you know.

You fancy the term street thug, but that's just creative fiction. Funny though how all of a sudden some love and trust some msm folk. Be careful though, the winds might change tomorrow.

[Row6]

The Staggeringly Bad Judgment Of Bob Woodward
FEB 28 2013 @ 10:05PM

"Well, he asked for it. He is a stenographer, who is very, very well connected to the old Washington (which Obama’s online political revolution disturbed), and a dutiful gatherer of whatever those in power say they do and have done. But after his implosion over the last 24 hours – exposed as a whiny liar by his own email – Chait puts the boot in:

His more recent books often compile interesting facts, but how Woodward chooses to package those facts has come to represent a barometric measure of a figure’s standing within the establishment. His 1994 account of Bill Clinton’s major budget bill, which in retrospect was a major success, told a story of chaos and indecision. He wrote a fulsome love letter to Alan Greenspan, “Maestro,” at the peak of the Fed chairman’s almost comic prestige. In 2003, when George W. Bush was still a decisive and indispensable war leader, Woodward wrote a heroic treatment of the Iraq War. After Bush’s reputation had collapsed, Woodward packaged essentially the same facts into a devastating indictment. Woodward’s book on the 2011 debt negotiations was notable for arguing that Obama scotched a potential deficit deal. The central argument has since been debunked by no less a figure than Eric Cantor, who admitted to Ryan Lizza that he killed the deal."

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/...-bob-woodward/

[fredsanford]

Woodward is a great gatherer of facts. However, he is a terrible analyst of said facts once he has them.

[rivergator]

Woodward seems all ovr the place on this. In an interview with the Wash Post, he says he never characterized it as a threat. Then he tells Hannity the email was code for 'you better watch out.'

[fairfaxgator]

Woodward was his own "Deepthroat"...

[JerseyGator01]

Now all of the ObamaBorg in the media are turning on him. Their messiah worship has no limit. Woodward must be assimilated or die.

[MastaG8r]

Originally Posted by fredsanford

Woodward is a great gatherer of facts. However, he is a terrible analyst of said facts once he has them.

LOL, that's the spin line the Leftosphere has put out so they can reconcile attacking him for going after 0bama and deifying him for getting Nixon.

[Row6]

Woodward justly became famous for working hard as a young reporter with no pull who doggedly pursued the story that ultimately ended Nixon's Presidency. He became the stenographer for the famous and powerful who spoon fed him narratives which he called books, and often from one source who's role became near heroic. Apparently he hasn't gotten traction in this White House with anyone like that and doesn't like looking in from the outside anymore. It's tough to get old and in the way, especially when you're used to having things easy and your way.

[FlyingGatorII]

Originally Posted by Row6

Woodward justly became famous for working hard as a young reporter with no pull who doggedly pursued the story that ultimately ended Nixon's Presidency. He became the stenographer for the famous and powerful who spoon fed him narratives which he called books, and often from one source who's role became near heroic. Apparently he hasn't gotten traction in this White House with anyone like that and doesn't like looking in from the outside anymore. It's tough to get old and in the way, especially when you're used to having things easy and your way.

Same old liberal spin. If they say what we like, they are geniuses. If they go against us, time to attack. I have seen libs quoting guys they usually mock (York, Cain, Carlson, Hume etc) because they are agreeing with them. Forget the fact that several others have said Obama's White House plays dirty pool with the press that doesn't print what they want, just attack Woodward. Their intellectual dishonesty is sickening to me as is their willful ignorance of wrongdoing when their guy is the one violating ethics. Let a guy take a drink of water during a speech though and the attack is back on.

[northgagator]

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.

Over the years who has a better track record when it comes to creditability, Woodard or Obama?

For much of his career Woodard had played it straight. He has criticized and praise leaders from both parties.

Questions:
Did you noticed how Obama handled the question yesterday when a reporter asked him what he could if done better or different about getting a deal with the Repubs? He ducked and dodged for five minutes and stated. In a round about way that he does not have any blame to own.

Are you aware that the Sequester is only going to be $85 billion in cuts?

Are you aware that with the use of contingency plans and funds that these cuts are actually $40 billion

Are you aware that these cuts when compared to a $3 Trillion dollar budgets only represent a reduction of one cent per each dollar?

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by jdrgator

hahaha. The response by the media has been to point out how, in fact, Woodward erred on his original criticism since his own reporting undermined it. I've been following this too, you know.

You fancy the term street thug, but that's just creative fiction. Funny though how all of a sudden some love and trust some msm folk. Be careful though, the winds might change tomorrow.

Come on jdr, you the press has Obama's back.

[Row6]

Originally Posted by northgagator

Over the years who has a better track record when it comes to creditability, Woodard or Obama?

For much of his career Woodard had played it straight. He has criticized and praise leaders from both parties.

Questions:
Did you noticed how Obama handled the question yesterday when a reporter asked him what he could if done better or different about getting a deal with the Repubs? He ducked and dodged for five minutes and stated. In a round about way that he does not have any blame to own.

Are you aware that the Sequester is only going to be $85 billion in cuts?

Are you aware that with the use of contingency plans and funds that these cuts are actually $40 billion

Are you aware that these cuts when compared to a $3 Trillion dollar budgets only represent a reduction of one cent per each dollar?

Obama is a politician an as such is not expected to be objective. Hope that doesn't come as a shock to you, though you're a smart guy and must know that. Woodward established credibility with Watergate but since then has become an insider who publishes books dictated to him by other insiders.

I didn't think this thread is about the sequester so I'm not really feeling a need to respond, though I will note that both sides agreed at the time it was passed that it was stop gap and a bad idea that was supposed to force a better more thought out plan. That most republicans now embrace it interesting and we'll see what happens. As to it's scale, a 1% drop in GDP is similarly a seemingly small amount but in reality involves real pain for many Americans, not to mention could help us reach a tipping point. As I said, we'll see what happens, but I'm not smart enough to try and predict it.

[DaveFla]

Liberals eat their own...

[jdrgator]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

Come on jdr, you the press has Obama's back.

I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out such a categorical statement, gman.