Don't take my word for it, just read Dana Milbank's assessment of the story so far: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...673758-1f06-11e4-ab7b-696c295ddfd1_story.html In my opinion, we could forget about Benghazi, the IRS, the VA and the border situation — this CIA scandal and the tepid, lying response to it coming from Obama is nothing short of a constitutional crisis. It's the most flagrant violation of the separation of powers that I have ever heard of. It would have brought down a Republican Presidency by itself. Yet Obama has been getting a pass on it even though it's the third or fourth scandal to come out of his administration. Even Dana Milbank, one of the most far-left commentators taken seriously in modern politics, can no longer keep silent about it. This doesn't mean he isn't soft balling his attack on Obama: he declined to mention that Brennan, an Obama appointee, initially lied about whether any of this was happening. In reality it was a coverup and an attack on both Democrats and Republicans. Yet the media and Obama's supporters refuse to hold Obama responsible. I hope they find some integrity and change their minds while this country still has whistle-blowers and patriots willing to risk their lives to bring us the truth in the hope that people will act upon it.
That's the thing I hate about spies. They think they can do anything they want to in order to protect the nation. They really need to be reigned in and if it were me I'd prosecute them, and tif that fail, take them out and shoot them.
One of the many shocking things about this is that it is in part Obama covering for Bush. Since the CIA's programs that were originally at issue originated under Bush, the facts being investigated here would have in all likelihood reflected badly upon Bush. So what does it tell us that Obama, who ran against Bush in both of his elections and is in many ways still running against Bush, suddenly wants to cover for him? I have a feeling that Obama continued the CIA's torture and extraordinary rendition programs from day one. Otherwise there would be no reason for Obama to cover for Bush while the Democrats are getting their asses kicked in the polls. So yes, let's chew on that for a bit, especially if we're Democrats or liberals.
Obama told us all the scandals were 'phony' but if this gets legs I'm sure he'll have one of his top donors on it within the next three years... Sad thing is the media won't cover it. You don't snitch on spies, or they start spying on you...
Well, this is a pretty bad scandal, but I'm not so sure it's worse than the what we're doing in afghanistan. We're actually making $40 billion dollars a year off of the drug trade over there.
I apologize, I only browsed the article and put up a snarky comment. Then it hit me, the CIA has no authority to spy on American Citizens unless they meet a specific set of criteria, and the US Senate Intelligence Committee is well vetted and has the highest clearances, clearly they would not fall within that criteria. That alone is a huge breach of protocol. Move on to what they are actually doing, and you are correct, this may well be the biggest scandal in the last 40 years or so. I'm not big on categorizing scandals and such, so I'm not so bold as to say the worst in history... Sadly I rather feel sorry for the spies being asked to break our laws under the direction of somebody, well we all know who... Just in case they are watching... https://www.cia.gov/about-cia/faqs
I think people have scandal shock in regards to Obama now, this was as bad or worse than Iran-Contra and no one is really doing anything about it. Some of the liberal bodies are talking a bit but there seems to be no momentum to have anything done. Why, even my forum thread on it has gone nowhere. Here's a bit from the left-leaning Mother Jones: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/cia-chief-brennan-senate-spying-scandal
It is scandal shock, but the reason for it is that the MSM absolutely refused to See, Hear, or Speak any evil about Barack Obama or his administration whatsoever until after the 2012 election rolled around and then (and only then) did some of them remove their permanent and voluntarily donned journalistic blinders to begin seeing some genuine warts where their precious Anointed One and his scummy administration was concerned. So people went from thinking that this was the cleanest and best behaved administration in history to saying "Holy hell! WTF is going on with these sleaze balls?!" It's too damn many scandals 'discovered' by the MSM and thus the public in too damn short of a time period.
It's interesting that no one in media or the forum is defending Obama and friends on this, I guess it's just that bad but if they won't hold him accountable either then it doesn't mean much.
Obama has never been held accountable by his supports, especially the press... It's rather pathetic though, I doubt many people let their children get away with what they allow Obama to get away with, like all the excuses and blaming the last guy...
Truth to tell? I think that aside from the partisan political loyalties of the Mainstream Media, making it mostly loyal to the Dem Party here and now the biggest reason that they and most leftwingers do not hold this president of theirs or his administration up to the standards demanded by any reasonable code of ethical behavior is that most of them themselves no longer believe all that firmly in codes of ethical behavior, believing that it's all relevant and dependent on the nature of stated goals; i.e., the end justifies the means type of thinking, which for whatever reason the Left inclusively adopted as their intellectual guide in life in 2008. So while this sort of thing would have been positively huge and meaningful in the eyes of the average Democrat back in -- say -- the 1990s, mostly none of it is any sort of ETHICAL big deal to them here and now. Essentially, what you no longer believe in . . . simply no longer matters.
Yeah, I generally agree with you. It seems like most leftists reject most kinds of objective values, integrity seems to have no inherent value to them at all anymore. All that's really left is a vaguely post-Christian and cynical desire to help the poor. There is no agreeable limit for helping the poor though so they just have a consensus of sorts that people they don't like aren't doing enough (regardless of what actual statistics regarding charity tell us about who is doing what). They follow the only needle on their moral compass to seek after their ideological enemies, no holds barred. Nixon was before my time but I know that the Republican Party ditched him when his denials crossed the line of plausibility, I am not so sure that would happen with Obama since this is not the first lie one of Obama's major appointees has been caught in over a very serious matter.
