DOJ trying to cover BO's blunder

BO is sure keeping that agency busy for the last few years.....and it's all over an election or a cover your *** situation.

BO's Admin LEAKED freely the names of the SEALs involved in the OBL raid to Hollywood for that movie and now is suing them to stop them from using the names they were given. Good luck with that one, BO.......once the rabbit is out of the hat, it's kinda tough to shove it back in.


Discussion is locked
Reply to: DOJ trying to cover BO's blunder
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: DOJ trying to cover BO's blunder
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
- Collapse -
He should be impeached for that

Malfeasance in office. Reminds me of the Valerie Wilson aka Plame matter.

" In testifying before Congress, Mrs. Wilson described the damage done by her exposure in the following way:

The CIA goes to great lengths to protect all of its employees,
providing at significant taxpayers' expense painstakingly devised and
creative covers for its most sensitive staffers. The harm that is done
when a CIA cover is blown is grave, but I can't provide details beyond
that in this public hearing. But the concept is obvious. Not only have
breaches of national security endangered CIA officers, it has
jeopardized and even destroyed entire networks of foreign agents, who in
turn risk their own lives and those of their families to provide the
United States with needed intelligence. Lives are literally at stake.[41]

In her memoir, Fair Game: My Life as a Spy, My Betrayal by the White House,
Valerie Plame Wilson states that after her covert and
then-still-classified CIA identity "Valerie Plame" appeared in Novak's
column in July 2003, she feared for her children's safety but was denied
protection by the Agency.[197] On October 26, 2005, her former CIA colleague Larry Johnson told Wolf Blitzer, on the CNN program The Situation Room, that she "had received death threats overseas from Al-Qaeda";
according to Johnson, after the FBI contacted her and told her of the
threat made by al-Qaeda, she called the CIA and asked for security
protection but was told: "you will have to rely upon 9-1-1. "

- Collapse -
Too bad

And Obama got BL just like Nixon was the first man on the moon.

- Collapse -
did you even bother reading the article you linked to?

Movie producers asked the DOD to provide a consultant for a movie. The DOD does.

The DOD did not leak "names" - you used the plural.

A conservative watchdog group is trying to make a political coup out of the issue by saying the Fed is trying to publicize the raid through movies.

This begs the question... did Hollywood initiate making the movie or did the Fed.

Sheesh Toni, just imagine how much you could accomplish if you would take all the energy you put into mischaracterizing things you read on the web and put it into actual campaigning, or community action groups.

- Collapse -
Yes, I read it.......

Did you also read the link in the first paragraph: http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/05/pentagon-cia-white-house-opened-up-to-hollywood-on-124293.html

They specifically gave the nameS and gave Hollywood access to talking with them. It's only NOW that they are being called A consultant (singular)

>>>>>In the "Zero Dark Thirty" case, the Justice Department contends that even if the government released the name or names in question, it's irrelevant because the whole "public domain doctrine" doesn't apply in cases where personal privacy is at issue. However, the government did not cite any appellate cases in the D.C. Circuit to support that position.>>>>>

- Collapse -
first off, if that is the article you want...

... to bring attention to, then link to that article.

secondly... from your new link... "Vickers said that the Pentagon would make available a Navy SEAL who was involved in planning the raid from its earliest stages." Still working in the singular and still not a confirmation that this revealed the names of the SEAL who were on the raid.

In other words, no proof of your accusation made in your OP.

One thing I was struck by in the new link was this sentence... "Bigelow, best known for "The Hurt Locker," also chimed in. "That's incredible," she said, gratefully." I find it fantastic that Josh Gerstein is so perceptive that he can tell when someone is "grateful" just by reading a government transcript.

I read the rest of the link you provided and I have to say that a lot of assumptions are presented, and many comments designed to persuade the reader to a certain opinion are presented, but no actual proof of any wrong doing by the government is given.

This is just another sad example of what journalism has degenerated to. It is an op/ed piece designed to look like investigative journalism.

- Collapse -
Grim, remember...

Grim, remember that computer virus that messed up Iran's bomb program? It was well known that it was done, but not by whom. Many people, including me, suspected Israel. But Obama spilled the beans that we did it. What was the purpose of that, other than to take credit.
Remember the second "Underwear Bomber" who was caught before he could act. He was caught by the work of British intelligence. Do you think they minded spilling the details of that unit and how they did it? I don't know, but I'd wager that they wanted all the who and how kept classified. What was the reason for spilling that one? Did that spilling of the beans make British intelligence be hesitant to share classified intelligence with us in the future?

- Collapse -
(NT) the "hey everybody, look at me, look at me" syndrome
- Collapse -
Another reason for revealing it was us.....

.......would be to take the heat off Israel, which is already in Iran's gunsights. Iran might think twice about attacking Israel but they'd think a lot more than twice about attacking the US.

- Collapse -
Toni and the Romney campaign have one thing in common

Neither of them are going to let facts get in their way.

- Collapse -
(NT) I SSOOOOO hope Obama wins the election.
- Collapse -
No Sh.T Sherlock......

And while you're praying can you ask Canada why they just reduced THEIR corporate tax but you think it's ok for BO to RAISE ours?

- Collapse -
RE: can you ask Canada
can you ask Canada why they just reduced THEIR corporate tax

I asked, they said

Because they can, and GW Bush wasn't our leader for 8 years.

but you think it's ok for BO to RAISE ours?

I don't recall expressing an opinion on Corporate tax rate and Obama's feeling on corporate tax rate.

I thought he was cutting corporate tax rate.

Obama Offers to Cut Corporate Tax Rate to 28%

WASHINGTON — President Obama will ask Congress to scrub the corporate tax code of dozens of loopholes and subsidies to reduce the top rate to 28 percent, down from 35 percent, while giving preferences to manufacturers that would set their maximum effective rate at 25 percent, a senior administration official said on Tuesday.

The proposal... raises taxes on oil and gas companies that would lose many large deductions and subsidies.

AAWWWW!!!! they're going to lose their entitlements.

OP was about Navy SEALS now we're talking about oil...SEAL OIL...get it? See how everything fits together?

CNET Forums