Tuesday, June 12, 2012


 Much ado about White House leaks. But beware. Yes the leaks are despicable. Lives were lost. People went to jail. People are in hiding. People are being hunted. And for what? To make the "gay" President look more macho?


 Diane Feinstein wants it to stop.


Pat Kaddel "outs" the Leaker:

 McCain wants a "non-partisan or "independent" investigator.

 And Andrew McCarthy says a Special Counsel is a farce:
 "The whole thing is a farce. You don’t need a special prosecutor to know who talked to the Times. All you need to do is read the two stories — the first on Obama’s assassination list and the follow-up on cyber-warfare. The Times tells you who its sources are. At the very beginning of the 6300-word kill-list epic, it says: “In interviews with The New York Times, three dozen of [Obama's] current and former advisers described Mr. Obama’s evolution since taking on the role, without precedent in presidential history, of personally overseeing the shadow war with Al Qaeda.” The account goes on to quote, for example, former White House chief-of-staff Bill Daley, who not only confirms the existence of a kill-list but describes the considerations behind adding names to it. Current and former national security officials are quoted, in many instances by name (e.g., national security adviser Thomas Donilon and former national intelligence director Dennis Blair). And when names are not given, the Times quotes, for example, “one participant” in the approximately weekly meetings — videoconferences run by the Pentagon but involving national security officials across the administration — who describes some of the criteria for adding or removing terrorists from the kill-list." 
McCarthy continues with the merciless onslaught (not exactly undeserved):
"President Obama’s mock outrage at yesterday’s press conference — “The notion that my White House would purposely release classified national security information is offensive!” — was laughable, albeit with an Alinskyesque flair. Notice he referred to “my White House” not “my administration.” This allows him to feign indignation while later saying he was referring only to current (not former) members of his White House staff. But if you know how these things work, the information the Times got is almost certainly not coming directly from the current White House staff; it comes (just as the stories themselves expressly indicate) from intelligence agencies, other administration officials, and former White House staffers who no doubt got the green-light to speak. And note that the Times reporters — who would ordinarily refuse to discuss their sources at all, but make an exception when it comes to covering for The One — are careful to deny, as the Daily Beast put it, that “the information was spoon fed to them from the White House.” Well, no — it was fork-lift fed to them by executive branch agencies and former administration officials."
Wait. There's more: (See The full article Here)  But please understand that this will once again be BURIED by the Socialist Liberal media (SLIME)  machine, which some people still refer to as the "main stream media." The big question is how, to what extent, and certainly until after the election. 

McCarthy impugns the crimes and the denials. And he says a Special Investigator is Unconstitutional:
"...special counsels are unconstitutional — for the reasons outlined by Justice Scalia, whose brilliant Morrison v. Olson dissent has repeatedly proved prescient since he wrote it in 1988. Prosecution is an executive responsibility, and the Constitution vests all executive power in the president. If the prosecutor appointed is not independent of the executive branch, he cannot investigate credibly; but if he is independent of the executive branch, he cannot investigate legitimately. And the Constitution aside, the institution of the special counsel (or independent prosecutor) has been a catastrophe, dogging administrations of both parties, substantially undermining their capacity to govern..." 
And then he indicts with this:
 "..with their “special counsel” folly, Republicans have given the administration the means to throw the curtain over this debacle. They’ve also enabled Holder, with the help he’ll get from the press, to portray the administration as taking swift, decisive action to root out leakers — even though the reality is that there will be nothing swift or decisive about it..." 
 Go ahead and scream. Go ahead and rage. Do it HERE... And then do it with a Super Majority on November 6th.

No comments:

Post a Comment