Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (824623)	12/22/2014 10:53:52 AM
From: joseffy	2 Recommendations Recommended By FJB locogringo Respond to of 1578282

E-mails show White House tried to muzzle Sharyl Attkisson hotair.com One of the documents provides smoking gun proof that the Obama White House and the Eric Holder Justice Department colluded to get CBS News to block reporter Sharyl Attkisson. Attkisson was one of the few mainstream media reporters who paid any attention to the deadly gun-running scandal. In an email dated October 4, 2011, Attorney General Holder’s top press aide, Tracy Schmaler, called Attkisson “out of control.” Schmaler told White House Deputy Press Secretary Eric Schultz that he intended to call CBS news anchor Bob Schieffer to get the network to stop Attkisson. Schultz replied, “Good. Her piece was really bad for the AG.” Schultz also told Schmaler that he was working with reporter Susan Davis, then at the National Journal, to target Rep. Darrel Issa (R-CA). Issa led the House investigation into Fast and Furious. Davis now works at USA Today. In the email chain, Schultz tells Schmaler that he would provide Davis with “leaks.” Davis wrote a critical piece on Issa a few weeks later.

To: Bill who wrote (824623)	12/22/2014 11:02:15 AM
From: joseffy	3 Recommendations Recommended By FJB locogringo TideGlider Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578282

OBAMA’S AMAZING LUCK: A PATTERN OF BLACKMAIL Recall the bizarre history of President Obama’s unlikely string of incredible luck that resulted in his election victories first in Illinois and then to the United States Senate. At each level, sudden embarrassing personal disclosures about his rivals forced their last-minute withdrawals. Sealed divorce records, for example, suddenly became unsealed, and were handed to Obama-friendly reporters. Just as in the removal of General Petraeus, blackmail and the well-timed disclosure of hidden scandals are an established part of Team Obama’s modus operandi. Therefore, is it reasonable to assume that agents of the Obama administration would not seek and then misuse embarrassing personal information in order to blackmail and control key members of Congress, or even the Supreme Court? Rumors surrounding Chief Justice Roberts, and his 11th hour conversion on the constitutionality of Obamacare come to mind. I contend that after Barack Obama’s history of mysterious election victories resulting from last-minute disclosures about his opponents, and the manipulation and forced resignation of CIA director Petraeus, it would take an unwarranted leap of faith to assume that the Obama administration’s bad actors would not engage in spying upon and blackmailing Congressional leaders. Therefore, in light of the recent extra-constitutional “executive actions” taken by President Obama, it is dangerously naive to assume that we can expect remedies to this creeping tyranny either from Congress or the Supreme Court. I would contend that for our national safety, we must assume that many of our key leaders are already under the control of blackmail and the threat of scandalous disclosures. Spying upon and then blackmailing opponents is in President Obama’s political DNA down to the center of his bone marrow. Consider that key Obama advisors such as Valerie Jarrett have been part of his team since his early political life in Chicago, when the blackmail pattern first became evident.

To: Bill who wrote (824623)	12/22/2014 12:10:03 PM
From: combjelly	Respond to of 1578282

In the early to mid 1990s? Correct. But after that, there were indications that things were changing. Iraq was not a particularly transparent regime, but info did get out. By the late 1990s, the CIA was backing away from Iraq being a direct threat. All of that went down the memory hole when Bush became president. Events didn't stop in the 1990s like you are pretending. Cheney and his minions picked Maliki as their treasured source, despite CIA scepticism, because he was telling them what they wanted to hear. They seem to have been ok with his ties to Iran. They took his advice on marginalizing the Sunnis in Iraq and as president Maliki elevated Iran's interests over Iraq's much less our's. Maliki is the one most directly responsible for ISIS.