• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

White House threatens Bob Woodward

pbrauer said:
...
Click to expand...

Threatens or warns... ROTFLOL...

And for all the Kool-Aid sucking Obamatrons out there... this is at least the second time a journalist has been warned... Lanny Davis was warned by these thugs too...
WMAL : Where Washington Comes to Talk - WMAL EXCLUSIVE: Woodward's Not Alone - Fmr. Clinton Aide Davis Says He Received White House Threat

And for the Commi-Lib who stated Woodward should put up or shut up... Woodward is one guy who is respected by both sides. I've read his books... the guy doesn't make stuff up, and he's not near the political activist as his partner Bernstein is. The guy has earned a reputation as a hard nosed journalist... one of a dying breed.

Here's the put up just in case you are coming off of Obama Kool-Aid:
Behind the Curtain: Bob Woodward at war - POLITICO.com
 
The "unnamed informant" in question was Gene Sperling, and here's the exchange:

Sperling: "I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today. 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 ... My apologies again for raising my voice on the call with you. Feel bad about that and truly apologize."

Woodward: "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."

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/exclusive-the-woodward-sperling-emails-revealed-88226.html

Yeah, real intimidating stuff. Another day, another bull**** sensationalist story.
 
Last edited:
Cardinal said:
The "unnamed informant" in question was Gene Sperling, and here's the exchange:

Sperling: "I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today. 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 ... My apologies again for raising my voice on the call with you. Feel bad about that and truly apologize."

Woodward: "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."

Exclusive: The Woodward, Sperling emails revealed - Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei - POLITICO.com

Yeah, real intimidating stuff. Another day, another bull**** sensationalist story.
Click to expand...
I posted this in a new thread.
 
rocket88 said:
Why? Do we really need to waste the bandwidth on this crap?
Click to expand...


sure we do.. it's a slow news cycle..... well,except for the complete economic Armageddon the administration says is soon coming due to minor discretionary spending caps.
 
rocket88 said:
Why? Do we really need to waste the bandwidth on this crap?
Click to expand...
It should be obvious why I created a new thread, I am sorry you don't see the reason. It's about the title... what it reveals. Did you ding the other thread(s) on the subject??
 
Woodward runs to Fox and whines to Hannity while Politico releases an email that shows Woodward is full of crap.
Exclusive: The Woodward, Sperling emails revealed - Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei - POLITICO.com
Gene
From Woodward to Sperling on Feb. 23, 2013
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
Click to expand...
 
Hatuey said:
Good for him. However in the age of the internet, sources are important. Otherwise your word is worth nothing.



And I don't think he was pressured or threatened. Having now read the e-mails, I think he was told he'd be wrong on his opinion eventually. Hardly the kind of behaviour you'd call threatening or pressuring. The guy was told he was wrong and would be proven wrong. That's nothing out of the norm in Washington. Hardly the threat Woodward & right wing posters on this board made it out to be.
Click to expand...

Why is the White House calling the media personally to say a story is wrong?

The fact is that Woodward is right and has the facts to back it up. His probable 'regret' is that he will lose access to the White House.
 
Thread: White House threatens Bob Woodward
Click to expand...
[emphasis added by bubba]

having read the thread, especially post #111, and have yet been able to identify where an actual threat was made to woodward
would someone please point out said threat
 
calamity said:
Woodward runs to Fox and whines to Hannity
while Politico releases an email that
shows Woodward is full of crap.
Exclusive: The Woodward, Sperling emails revealed - Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei - POLITICO.com
Click to expand...

What does that prove other than a top Obama official contacted Woodward and screamed at him ?

For what ? Reporting the truth ? I mean screw the E-Mail, I'm wondering what was said in the shouting match.

You think its ok for a President to bully the media ? Threaten ?

Woodward, who's been around for decades seems pretty clear he was threatened.

He, is exponentially more qualified to know if it was a threat than you are.
 
justabubba said:
[emphasis added by bubba]

having read the thread, especially post #111, and have yet been able to identify where an actual threat was made to woodward
would someone please point out said threat
Click to expand...

Woodward came forward claiming he felt threatened. the link in this thread includes the portion of the email he felt was a threat. not sure what more you need here to come to your own conclusions.
 
justabubba said:
[emphasis added by bubba]


having read the thread, especially post #111, and have yet been able to identify where an actual threat was made to woodward
would someone please point out said threat
Click to expand...

Who's more qualified to determine whether or not a threat was made ? Him or you ? Him.

Why did a top BO advisor call up and challenge Woodward and then scream at him.

Maybe the ACTUAL threat was in the shouting match.

How much you wanna bet. Woodwards already trying to detach Obama from this. Yea right
 
Is the left actually trying to impune the integrity of Bob Woodward ? To prove Obama isn't a narcistic bully ?
 
I'm a million miles away from this, but it would depend on what he would get to make him feel regret. Mostly, this doesn't make Woodward look so good, unless we get a fuller picture of the shouting match.
 
Fenton said:
Is the left actually trying to impune the integrity of Bob Woodward ? To prove Obama isn't a narcistic bully ?
Click to expand...

Oh Noes! It would be awful if the integrity of Bob Woodward were impugned! That would be, like, the worst thing evar!
 
Last edited:
Cardinal said:
Oh Noes! It would be awful if the integrity of Bob Woodward were
impugned! That would be, like, the worst thing evar!
Click to expand...

Do you know who Woodward is? His history ? His godlike status in the world of journalism ?

He use to be their hero.

But what I think is going on here is that the threat Woodward seemed to be so upset about was actually made in the shouting match.

The BO official admits to raising his voice, things got heated and threats get made.

Because whats in the E-mail doesn't rise to Woodwards initial claim as a "kind of madness ".

Being shouted at and threatened by a White House Higher up ?

Its interesting that the admission and apology was posted too.
 
Yea I'm sure of it now. THE threat that Woodward equated to madness was recieved before the E-Mail.

The White House Apointee admits raising his voice.

Woodward is just trying to back out of it although he sti contends a threat was made.

Not even a Obama appointee is dumb enough to threatdn someone via E-Mail
 
Fenton said:
Yea I'm sure of it now. THE threat that Woodward equated to madness was recieved before the E-Mail.

The White House Apointee admits raising his voice.

Woodward is just trying to back out of it although he sti contends a threat was made.

Not even a Obama appointee is dumb enough to threatdn someone via E-Mail
Click to expand...

the madness line is based on Obama claiming these budget issues demands he keep an Aircraft carrier docked
 
Fenton said:
What does that prove other than a top Obama official contacted Woodward and screamed at him ?

For what ? Reporting the truth ? I mean screw the E-Mail, I'm wondering what was said in the shouting match.

You think its ok for a President to bully the media ? Threaten ?

Woodward, who's been around for decades seems pretty clear he was threatened.

He, is exponentially more qualified to know if it was a threat than you are.
Click to expand...

Well, considered his response back the the WH read like he's saying, "No harm done; no worries, mate." I'd say, he had no problem with it until he saw an opportunity to drum up some controversy.

BTW: Since when are Right Wingers big defenders of the free press? Must be something new because you guys went bananas in 2003 &4 when any journalist said anything negative about Bush-Cheney and the folly called invading Iraq.
 
calamity said:
Well, considered his response back the the WH read like he's saying, "No harm done; no worries, mate." I'd say, he had no problem with it until he saw an opportunity to drum up some controversy.

BTW: Since when are Right Wingers big defenders of the free press?
Click to expand...

I have always been a big defender of the free press.
 
ARealConservative said:
I have always been a big defender of the free press.
Click to expand...

Did you defend Phil Donahue and Bill Maher when they were fired for exercising free speech? How about when Cheney's lacky outed CIA Agent Valarie Plume after her husband wrote an op-ed for NYT, were you defending her, calling for Cheney's head?
 
calamity said:
Did you defend Phil Donahue and Bill Maher when they were fired for exercising free speech? How about when Cheney's lacky outed CIA Agent Valarie Plume after her husband wrote an op-ed for NYT, were you defending her, calling for Cheney's head?
Click to expand...

free speech protects us from government intrusion, not from employers looking to prevent bad publicity.

Why do so many liberals get that wrong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom