This is about the Socialist Liberal Media (SLIME) and Attorney General Eric Holder's "Secret Meeting," and the arrogance of a Justice Department, which has now positioned itself as bribing the Media with "protections" against prosecution, when the Media already has those rights under the Constitution.
The meeting between media representatives took place, but it was "off the record." According to Sari Horwitz of the Washington Post "...participants...reached an agreement with the Justice Department under which they could describe what occurred during the meeting in general terms..."
I know this is not obvious to many, but it should be: This "agreement" between the media and a top government official additionally solidifies a collusion between government and "the media" to withhold information from the American people.
Regardless of who was there and what was discussed, the very idea that the media agrees to keep quiet about what was said, effectively and officially creates the media as a propaganda arm of the government.
How can anyone, who is not complicit in that arrangement, ever trust the government and the media again? Even if the media were to "fess-up" and expose completely the content of that meeting, how can anyone know that their version of the meeting is the truth? Did they not agree to keep the meeting "off the record?"
That the media knowingly participated, in effect, in its own demise as an independent watchdog of government, would be perplexing, if they had not already been suspected of being "in the tank" for this administration in the first place.
However, this meeting effectively seals the pact and cements a relationship that forever taints the role of the media in a Constitutional Republic.
You have witnessed this yourselves. You tell me.
Eric Holder is a savvy lawyer, prosecutor, Attorney General, politician and ideologue. He is essentially the legal enforcer of the Obama Administration's agenda. Do you sincerely believe that he arranged this meeting, as Horwitz writes, "... to take concrete steps to address concerns that the Justice Department has overreached in its leak investigations...[to]... seek procedural and possibly legislative changes to protect journalists’ First Amendment rights...?"
If that was the intent, the result has surely been the opposite. Ideally if one wants to set the record straight, one does not do it "off the record."
Why would anyone who had at stake the credibility and integrity of the nation's highest "Justice" arm want to keep the content of a meeting secret from those it served, except for a privileged few? Who exactly is he protecting by keeping the meeting secret, and for what reason?
Moreover, who made Eric Holder the granter of Constitutional rights?
The media is already granted rights under the first amendment; it does not need Eric Holder to grant it to them. The Constitution is there to protect the Media from Eric Holder!
Kudos to those media who refused to attend such a meeting, and mark the ones who did participate, for, whether they intended it or not, they now participate in at least the apparency of a cover-up in collusion with the Obama Administration and his Chief Concigliere, and by default have set up Eric Holder as their "protector" against prosecution or persecution from Eric Holder.
Is that not the very epitome of a protection racket?
Vanguard Of Freedom