• 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

There really is no other way around it. Woodward was on Scarborough today. They did not agree with him but treated him like he was an ol fart who didn't know his name anymore. Woodward looks like a complete idiot, and the more he talks the more he looks senile.

wait, you mean someone on msnbc sided with Obama.

wow. /sarcasm
 
no it's not. and you are not a moderator. either report it or move on.

claiming something relevent to this thread is spam is absurd.


And why are you inserting YOURSELF on this issue? And you have the nerve to tell me to move on when you are the one pertetuating the inident of spamming done by heebie jeebie.
 
Lanny Davis is not very reliable. He was a huge Hillary supporter and I can imagine both sides have an ax to grind there.

Not very reliable at what, telling the truth? Is Ron Fournier also unreliable?

There have been at least 3 claims that are very similiar to each other. Are you claiming they are all untruthful or could there be a pattern forming?
 
Lanny Davis is not very reliable. He was a huge Hillary supporter and I can imagine both sides have an ax to grind there.


And now heebie jeebie is spamming this all over the place.
 
It is still spamming.

According to the forum rules this is what spamming is:

"2. Spamming - What constitutes spamming can be, but is not limited to, "A message (typically an advertisement) sent indiscriminately to a wide set of discussion lists [forums] or newsgroups."[google] Also, any message or series of messages promoting a product, site or service made by a member who does not demonstrate the intention and willingness to participate in the normal discourse of the DPMB can be considered spamming. Spamming and/or spam bots will not be tolerated and can result in immediate banning of the spammer."

So please report me if you think I am spamming because I don't see it.
 
wait, you mean someone on msnbc sided with Obama.

wow. /sarcasm
Well if you watched the show you would know the day before they started out acting like Woodward had been mistreated. At the very end of the show they dsclosed what actually happened. Today they hd him on. He made a complete fool of himself.
 
Not very reliable at what, telling the truth? Is Ron Fournier also unreliable?

There have been at least 3 claims that are very similiar to each other. Are you claiming they are all untruthful or could there be a pattern forming?
The term regret is used a lot. I think we can agree on that. What it means...shrug.

If Rahm Emanuel was still COS, I'd say such a word might mean something threatening. But, with this mouse in charge of the white house messaging...GMAB. It'd be like be threatened by Alex Keaten.

Besides, Obama is probably in a gym playing hoops with Scottie Pippen and a few other retired former Bull Superstars right now. He doesn't really give a crap about this sequestration stuff. I doubt he even cares about the job of being president, to tell the truth.
Barack Obama played Election Day basketball game with Scottie Pippen

Now Hillary. She would have cared.
 
And why are you inserting YOURSELF on this issue? And you have the nerve to tell me to move on when you are the one pertetuating the inident of spamming done by heebie jeebie.

because if you notice, I have been active in this thread.

now I see you trying to hijack it while not being aware of the forum rules.
 
Well if you watched the show you would know the day before they started out acting like Woodward had been mistreated. At the very end of the show they dsclosed what actually happened. Today they hd him on. He made a complete fool of himself.

color me skeptical
 
The term regret is used a lot. I think we can agree on that. What it means...shrug

I think that given the claims use the same words and each person thought there was a threat invoked to some degree I think it is troubling at the least. I don't think it is in anyone's interest for the government to be threatening the press in any manner.
 
I think that given the claims use the same words and each person thought there was a threat invoked to some degree I think it is troubling at the least. I don't think it is in anyone's interest for the government to be threatening the press in any manner.

I don't see it that way. The emails didn't really play out like anyone was being threatened, just warned that the story would blow up on them.
 
I don't see it that way. The emails didn't really play out like anyone was being threatened, just warned that the story would blow up on them.

We only have e-mails from Woodward. Now they can be interpreted different ways but Davis and Fournier are just telling what happened. We only have their side BUT they do sound very similiar to Woodwards claim as far as the words used and what was implied. So are we to believe these three people are conspiring on their claims for some reason or could it be that there really is something to the claims?
 
We only have e-mails from Woodward. Now they can be interpreted different ways but Davis and Fournier are just telling what happened. We only have their side BUT they do sound very similiar to Woodwards claim as far as the words used and what was implied. So are we to believe these three people are conspiring on their claims for some reason or could it be that there really is something to the claims?
That someone at the White House was throwing around the term "regret" is not in doubt. The interpretation of that word seems to be up for grabs. IMO, Obama doesn't care enough to threaten anyone (it's the one thing the Right actually had right, if only they stuck to it---Obama doesn't give a crap about governing--instead of going all "he's a dictator, marxist and fascist" with their claims). Now, if it was Hillary's administration or Bill's, I'd be all in.
 
That someone at the White House was throwing around the term "regret" is not in doubt. The interpretation of that word seems to be up for grabs. IMO, Obama doesn't care enough to threaten anyone (it's the one thing the Right actually had right, if only they stuck to it---Obama doesn't give a crap about governing--instead of going all "he's a dictator, marxist and fascist" with their claims). Now, if it was Hillary's administration or Bill's, I'd be all in.

Not only throwing the term regret around but also making the journalists feel 'threatened'. Davie and Fournier both use that term also. So unless they are all the same thinned skinned type of people who fell threatened at the drop of the hat or they are colluding there seems to be at least enough to look a little deeper into it.

I think Obama cares very deeply, about his image. I agree he does seem to not care about governing or leading.
 
Your interpretation is debatable. I have not come up with one yet, I am waiting for more information

For instance, Life exists outside of that email. What happened in the hours after the email? Did Woodward see any action that made him believe he needed to take this line about regret more seriously?

Or maybe he was immediately threatened and backed down for the threat. “oh don’t worry buddy. We are friends. I appreciate you yelling at me. I need that”. Then later he was ashamed of him lack of journalistic courage and came back out firing.

You have your mind made up. A closed mind is not something I respect at all.

Looks like you not only drink the kool-aid, you bathe in it.

Read the emails, no threat, case closed.
 
Looks like you not only drink the kool-aid, you bathe in it.

Read the emails, no threat, case closed.

I did read them. So did Woodward and he claims a perceived threat. case reopened.
 
Yes I have my mind made up on this issue. It was entertaining watching Woodward make a fool of himself, but it is time to move on. The story was supposed to be about the sequester, and now it is all about Woodward. I'm not sure if that is what he intended, but it discredits him, nonetheless.



This is nothing new.

For a long time now Bob Woodward always ends up making anything that he gets involved in all about him.

He can't separate himself from the story.
 
I did read them. So did Woodward and he claims a perceived threat. case reopened.
He claims a perceived threat now, yet in his reply e-mail he did not. He also is adamant that he was not threatened. What's up with that?
 
This is nothing new.

For a long time now Bob Woodward always ends up making anything that he gets involved in all about him.

He can't separate himself from the story.

I'd be willing to place a bet that we will soon read that Woodward is suffering from Alzheimer's.
 
He claims a perceived threat now, yet in his reply e-mail he did not.

We know. I already detailed this. It is a valid question he needs to address, but it does not invalidate the possibility that Woodward’s initial reaction was to cower in the face of the perceived threat.

He also is adamant that he was not threatened. What's up with that?

I have no idea what you are talking about here. Where was he adamant he was not threatened?
 
We know. I already detailed this. It is a valid question he needs to address, but it does not invalidate the possibility that Woodward’s initial reaction was to cower in the face of the perceived threat.



I have no idea what you are talking about here. Where was he adamant he was not threatened?
On Morning Joe Woodward adamantly denied he ever used the word threaten to describe what happened.
 
Back
Top Bottom