Social Media Marketing Boot Camp: April 16

Need Help?

Employers

Join Today or Log in

Jobs

Hiring?
Post your open positions on our job board.
Satisfaction guaranteed. Learn more.

FAQ Contact Us

Courses

June 6, 2013 | An Interactive Online Event
Implement a complete social media campaign in six weeks. Register now.

FAQ Contact Us

Events

June 4, 2013 | San Francisco

Explore how you can — and should — approach Twitter to make the most of it for your brand. Learn from social media pros at the San Francisco Giants, SFGate, and more. Learn more.

News

How To Network in Any Situation
Our networking guide will help you finally get over your new-people phobia and schmooze with the best of them. Read more

FAQ Contact Us

Shortcuts: scoop jobs, social media jobs, online courses

Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Current Events > Topic: Obama a hypocrite on Executive Privilege

Obama a hypocrite on Executive Privilege

Post Reply Back to Forums

1–22 out of 22 messages

Author	Message

thesecondcoming	Posted - 6/20/2012 2:40:08 PM \| show profile \| flag this post In 2007 Obama attacked the Bush Admin for hiding behind executive privilege. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpwYh9TD6Nc&feature=youtu.be

cruiser	Posted - 6/20/2012 2:54:34 PM \| show profile \| flag this post And Obama hiding behind executive privilege on the issue of Fast and Furious is dishonest, at best. Officially, he's not even supposed to know about Fast and Furious. He's said that. And if he doesn't know, WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD HE NEED TO INVOKE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE? I think the facts are that Obama is in this up to his ears and his buddy, AG Eric Holder, not only knew at the outset but gave his approval for those guns to walk to the Mexican drug cartels. I think when the truth of this entire incident comes out...and it will sooner or later...Obama's legacy as one of the worst and most dishonest presidents in history will be cemented. I hope Issa and his committee can force the truth out before election day by means of the suboena Holder has been ducking and a congressional resolution to hold Holder in contempt.

thesecondcoming	Posted - 6/20/2012 3:03:23 PM \| show profile \| flag this post I doubt much will happen on the issue..... I think Obama and Holder will use this issue to distract away from the horrible economy. Just like the "order" to not enforce the law regarding illegal immigrants. Obama has nothing to campaign on. So he will create wedge issues to deflect attention away from his horrible presidency.

etaoin shrdlu	Posted - 6/20/2012 3:03:51 PM \| show profile \| flag this post It's dishonest, dishonest, I tells ya! No. It's executive privilege. I guess we COULD eliminate it -- in a pure democracy, cruzo. But we have a Republic -- and it includes a separation of powers and a balance of powers between the three branches of government.

thesecondcoming	Posted - 6/20/2012 3:11:25 PM \| show profile \| flag this post But that's not the point ES...... The point is that Obama said in 2007 that hiding behind E.P. was wrong. Now, in 2012, hiding behind E.P. is good, well because he and Holder gave guns to drug cartel's who killed people, and they don't want to tell us about it. Obama is a hypocrite. No one is saying Obama doesn't have a right to use it. He does. But he is a hypocrite. What a propagandist you are E.S.

cruiser	Posted - 6/20/2012 3:12:00 PM \| show profile \| flag this post Obama and his minions are trying to UNbalance those powers. The congress is authorized to issue sobpoenas...and the executive branch is compelled to comply. That is, of course, unless the White House wants to establish ANOTHER area in which the government exempts itself from the rules EVERY OTHER CITIZEN OF THE US MUST FOLLOW. The claim of executive privilege in this instance is an unlawful dodge.

SPC	Posted - 6/20/2012 7:57:47 PM \| show profile \| flag this post What does Obama have to hide?

mpdodgson	Posted - 6/20/2012 10:19:00 PM \| show profile \| flag this post My criticism of the president in this case is pretty simple; people who want to be the president often find out the job is a lot harder than it looks like from the outside. Most ex-presidents quickly agree with that; and this is a case of an old soundbite coming back to bit Obama in the ass. That being said, cruize/coming is comparing apples to oranges. what Obama said in that clip was: "You know, there's been a tendency on the part of this administration to -- to try to hide behind executive privilege every time there's something a little shaky that's taking place. And I think, you know, the administration would be best served by coming clean on this. There doesn't seem to be any national security issues involved with the U.S. attorney question." That's not what I would call an "attack". What he was referring to, and you guys conveniently left out, was that Bush invoked Exec Privilege SIX TIMES. "•George W. Bush invoked executive privilege six times, including to avoid handing over documents to a congressional committee on the FBI’s use of mob informants in Boston, and to deny access to Justice Department correspondence about Clinton’s fundraising tactics. •In 2007, the Bush White House also declined to give Congress documents about the death of Pat Tillman, the football star-turned-Army Ranger, who was killed in Afghanistan. The military initially said Tillman was killed in a firefight with the enemy, but it was later discovered that he was shot in a friendly fire accident. In refusing to hand over the documents, Bush’s counsel said the documents “implicate Executive Branch confidentiality interests.” •Barely a month later, Bush used the privilege to allow Karl Rove, his senior adviser at the time, to avoid testifying before Congress during its investigation into the firing of nine federal prosecutors, allegedly for partisan reasons." (PBS) We've been through all this before. Many presidents have had people in their Administration held in contempt. True? It's usually nothing more than politics. True?? And many presidents have invoked Executive Privilege. True?? But but but but when Obama does it?? Well, damn, it's an outrage I say!!

cruiser	Posted - 6/20/2012 10:29:59 PM \| show profile \| flag this post Just like a deaf, dumb and blind leftist soldier you're trying to justify illegal acts by the president by bringing up what you suppose were bad acts by a previous president. It all depends on whose ox is being gored. And it's your ox this time, pal. All this WILL come out eventually. It always does. I just hope it's before the election so the American people can see what this administration is hiding...and who's being protected.

thesecondcoming	Posted - 6/21/2012 7:54:57 AM \| show profile \| flag this post Why do you lie MP? MP: "And many presidents have invoked Executive Privilege. True?? But but but but when Obama does it?? Well, damn, it's an outrage I say!! " --------------------------------------------------- MP, the title of this topic is Obama being a HYPOCRITE on EP. I have previously stated that Obama has the RIGHT to use it. Yet, you keep writing propaganda and lies that we don't think Obama has a right to use EP. I will say it again. Obama has the right to use executive privilege. He's a hypocrite and now wants to protect himself from the murder of innocent people, based on a policy he claimed he knew nothing about.

mpdodgson	Posted - 6/21/2012 8:12:13 AM \| show profile \| flag this post I don't see where I "lied" anywhere. And I don't see where I wrote any propoganda either. I was pointing out that Exec Priv has been used for far more "purely political purposes" than this. I also said, in my opinion, that Obama NOW is propably looking back at his statements as a Senator and thinking; "if I knew then what I know now..." Now--if you want to call that being a hypocrite, well, I can see that. It may be too strong a word, but I can see your point. But please don't call me a liar when no where I did I state a "mis-truth", ok?

etaoin shrdlu	Posted - 6/21/2012 9:01:49 AM \| show profile \| flag this post Cruzo is being willfully dishonest to our "casual readers" He said: "[Y]ou're trying to justify illegal acts by the president..." Please clarify to our "casual readers" what "illegal acts" the President committed. Also, please cite the particular federal statute he violated. Also, what happened to your beloved position on the presumption of innocence? Could you please explain why you believe that George Zimmerman is entitled to that presumption, but Obama is not? Our "casual readers" will be waiting to see if you can back up your claims with facts or if you will descend into a fit of namecalling. Try to impress them.

cruiser	Posted - 6/21/2012 11:10:30 AM \| show profile \| flag this post Your arrogant imperiousness doesn't impress me or anyone else. It just makes you look small. "Please clarify to our "casual readers" what "illegal acts" the President committed." On several previous occasions the use of executive privilege to cloak a coverup has been adjudged to be illegal. Obama is obviously using the device to cover for high-ranking figures in the Justice Department,..perhaps even himself. The most obvious tipoff is that virtually all of the documentation concerning Wide Receiver (a program begun and ended during the Bush administration) has been released but virtually NONE of the documents concerning Fast and Furious, which is the program begun during OBAMA'S administration by HIS appointee. He's trying to cover his ass and misdirect attention to the previous administration. "Bush did it first." That's the usual lame excuse when the Obama administation gets caught doing something of which the American people would not approve.

etaoin shrdlu	Posted - 6/21/2012 11:57:00 AM \| show profile \| flag this post Cruzo said... "He's trying to cover his ass and misdirect attention to the previous administration. " But you have failed to show how THAT is illegal. It's politics. Both Issa and Obama are using the tools at their disposal.

thesecondcoming	Posted - 6/21/2012 1:13:13 PM \| show profile \| flag this post Here is your lie or propaganda MP MP: "But but but but when Obama does it?? Well, damn, it's an outrage I say!!" --------------------------------------------------------- Where have I stated that I'm outraged by Obama using EP? I'm not outraged by the fact the Obama claimed E.P, which is what you are saying. And that's a lie. I have been clear twice. I will repeat it AGAIN. Obama has every right to use E.P., just like other Presidents have. Obama is NOT wrong for using EP. Obama is NOT unconstitutional for using EP. Obama is NOT the only one to use EP. Obama has every right to use EP. Obama is a HYPOCRITE about the use of EP, based on his 2007 statements when Bush used EP.

cruiser	Posted - 6/21/2012 10:34:25 PM \| show profile \| flag this post Obama's White House has a new set of weasel-words in connection with Fast and Furious. I won't attempt to quote them verbatim but I will accurately characterize them in words of substance. Now they're saying they've turned over every single document PERTAINING TO THE OPERATION of Fast and Furious. Notice how they've parsed that so they can refuse to include any document that might discuss culpability and/or a covereup. And notice that they still are not turning over 9/10ths of the documents known to exist. In addition, they're now claiming that turning over the after-the-fact documents would impinge on their ability to conduct an investigation. IT AIN'T THEIR F-ING JOB. You don't put the fox in charge of the henhouse. It's the job of Issa's committee to conduct the investigation...and the White House needs to stop stonewalling and respond to the subpoena.

Grateful Deadline	Posted - 6/22/2012 12:49:43 PM \| show profile \| flag this post Here's a statement from a backgrounder that doesn't require a high IQ to understand in an election year: "More generally, Democratic lawmakers agree that the whole thing—not just Fast and Furious, but Project Gunrunner in its entirety—was a major screw-up that needs to be probed. But they say the focus on Holder is misplaced, and shows that the investigation is a politically motivated effort to embarrass the administration." It further states: "When was the last time someone was held in contempt? "Not too long ago, actually. In 2008, the Democratic House held Bush White House officials Josh Bolten and Harriet Miers in contempt for refusing to turn over documents relating to the Bush administration’s politicization of the Justice Department. The matter is still ongoing in the courts." The backgrounder from which this comes that doesn't fail to note Operation Fast and Furious was part of Bush's Project Gunrunner. It also lays out the reasons behind turning over 7,600 documents so far but not all of them, the conspiracy theory and other information, with citations of source material at the end. http://leanforward.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/21/12339063-operation-fast-and-furious-all-your-questions-answered?lite

cruiser	Posted - 6/22/2012 2:58:47 PM \| show profile \| flag this post As easy to predict as day following night. The radical left wingers on here are still regurgitating their mantra, "Bush did it first," trying to shift the focus to Bush and obfuscate the lies, deceptions and stonewalling of the Obama administration and its justice department. Note Grateful Dud's post: "was a major screw-up that needs to be probed." In contradiction of that, Representative Issa's committee says it has ALL THE DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO WIDE RECEIVER, the Bush-era justice department operation that tracked firearms into Mexico, have been turned over. Therefore, the probe of Wide Receiver is conplete. Besides that, Wide Receiver was terminated BEFORE the Bush administration left office, making a lie of the current administration's claim that Fast and Furious was an outgrowth of it. And EVERY SINGLE FIREARM FROM WIDE RECEIVER was interdicted and recovered. Not so, of course, with Fast and Furious. Two federal agents and hundreds of Mexicans have been killed with firearms that "walked" as a result of Fast and Furious. What is "politically motivated" is the Obama administration's stonewalling and inappropriate invocation of executive privilege, which, of course, is intended to protect high-level members of the administration -- perhaps even the president himself -- and...uhh, cover up the coverup.

Grateful Deadline	Posted - 6/22/2012 6:18:02 PM \| show profile \| flag this post Note Grateful Dud's post: Cut the crap with the name, cruiser. Grow up.

Grateful Deadline	Posted - 6/22/2012 6:30:38 PM \| show profile \| flag this post Look, cruiser, you don't need to prove anymore that you're an immature twit. Everybody already knows it. Do you think it would be possible for you to find something of value to contribute to any thread on this forum? Anything at all? Or is it always going to be like this, where you make up little kindergarten names for posters whose perspectives are different from yours and challenge them to do your research for you? You're about the biggest waster of digital space I've ever seen. It's flabbergasting to watch you display your bullying and your vapidity so publicly over and over and over and over and over again in a crowd of people with whom you have nothing in common. Don't you ever get bored with yourself? Or embarrassed? Do you have no self-esteem at all, to want to do this every single day? I'm just stunned at you. I have known neo-Nazis, and though they'd never be in my circle of friends, at least it was possible to carry on a human conversation with them. With you, there's some kind of cog missing from the machinery. The pileup of everything you do to go out of your way to be obnoxious and detestable in order to shut down discussions here is astounding.

orthicon	Posted - 6/22/2012 6:33:42 PM \| show profile \| flag this post gratefull we've already diagnosed him.. the classic symproms of NPD.. narcissistic personality disorder.. are impossible to miss..

cruiser	Posted - 6/22/2012 6:56:40 PM \| show profile \| flag this post You can discuss anything you want without a peep from me, dearie...as long as you do it HONESTLY. But it seems you'd rather keep mindlessly regurgitating the radical left wing talking points. And your derogatory commentary doesn't exactly frighten me and make me want to disappear. I rise to a challenge. Believe it or not...this is NOT your exclusive province...nor is it only for journalists or those who fancy themselves to be. Freelance writing is the occupation of many who post on MB. If you can't stand the heat, you might want to consider finding the exit door from the kitchen.