1 hour ago Bob Woodward says he was threatened by White House

[ploto]

Are some of you really trying to claim that you have never known someone about to do something stupid and told him that he will one day regret it?

[spursncowboys]

Are some of you really trying to claim that you have never known someone about to do something stupid and told him that he will one day regret it?

It was after the fact. He's also a senior wh admin.
What Woodward said tonight was that he has credibility so they can't really do much. But he has gotten alot of emails from young journalists who have gotten the same treatment and they cave in.

[z0sa]

Definitely did with the last president.Are you sure?

Well played. Nothing to say except the email was unnecessary. Along with this thread.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Whoops is right...Wow I sure do have egg on my face...

I guess this works perfect as a control because the press treated the bush presidency and obama presidency the same...

"The press?" I know its fun to act like its Fox News, the Washington Times, and 'the press,' but gmfb.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

This is the email in question in it's entirety where I have bolded the entire sentence in question.

Bob:

I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today. My bad. I do understand your problems with a couple of our statements in the fall — but feel on the other hand that you focus on a few specific trees that gives a very wrong perception of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here.

But I do truly believe you should rethink your comment about saying saying that Potus asking for revenues is moving the goal post. I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim. The idea that the sequester was to force both sides to go back to try at a big or grand barain with a mix of en lements and revenues (even if there were serious disagreements on composition) was part of the DNA of the thing from the start. It was an accepted part of the understanding — from the start. Really. It was assumed by the Rs on the Supercommittee that came right after: it was assumed in the November-December 2012 negotiations. There may have been big disagreements over rates and ratios — but that it was supposed to be replaced by en lements and revenues of some form is not controversial. (Indeed, the discretionary savings amount from the Boehner-Obama negotiations were locked in in BCA: the sequester was just designed to force all back to table on en lements and revenues.)

I agree there are more than one side to our first disagreement, but again think this latter issue is diffferent. Not out to argue and argue on this latter point. Just my sincere advice. Your call obviously.

My apologies again for raising my voice on the call with you. Feel bad about that and truly apologize.

Gene

This is the response:

From Woodward to Sperling on Feb. 23, 2013

Gene: You do not ever have to apologize to me. You get wound up because you are making your points and you believe them. This is all part of a serious discussion. I for one welcome a little heat; there should more given the importance. I also welcome your personal advice. I am listening. I know you lived all this. My partial advantage is that I talked extensively with all involved. I am traveling and will try to reach you after 3 pm today. Best, Bob

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...led-88226.html

If Woodward really is asserting that the point of the sequester was not to force the two sides to negotiate a bargain or that said bargain would not include cuts and taxes then I don't know wtf.

[Wild Cobra]

"you will regret doing this"

that's a THREAT?

Absolutely. The question is, that is the threat level?

[SA210]

The President actually murders American citizens without proof, charges, trial or any due process whatsoever, he mass murders innocent civilians including women and children every week almost, just wipes their existence off the face of the earth..he throws whistle-blowers in jail more than ALL Presidents in HISTORY combined... Gibbs just admitted he was ordered by the White House to NEVER even admit that a drone program exists..

But to simply threaten a reporter???? Nah, he'd NEVER do that...


morons

[boutons_deux]

Absolutely. The question is, that is the threat level?

[boutons_deux]

off the bottom of chart: Wild Cobra's shriveled

[boutons_deux]

BW goes full-blown right-wing-bat nuts

Bob Woodward Agrees With Hannity: Journalists Should Ask Obama About Bill Ayers

HANNITY: The fact that the president was never asked a lot about the 6 trillion in debt that he ac ulated prior to this election, in this first election wasn’t asked about his association with Bill Ayers was troublesome to me, I think we’ve got a media that’s not as critical as perhaps it once was in, for example, the days of Watergate.

WOODWARD: Well, I agree with that. We need to be very aggressive and it’s one of the judges that said democracies die in darkness and I really think that’s true.

http://thinkprogress.org/media/2013/...ut-bill-ayers/

"the days of Watergate." Woodward peaked early!

Yoni agrees!

"democracies die in darkness"

TRUTH AND LIGHT and THE AMERICAN WAY shine forth from Fox Repug Propaganda network and out of Roger Ailes' ass!

[BobaFett1]

Media love me some Obama.

[George Gervin's Afro]

So it turns out there was no threat.. and the resident dummies are still claiming it was...

[George Gervin's Afro]

Come to think of it.. we have the same people creaming themselves because of a supposed threat... yet those same people were ok with outing a CIA agent..

threat..lol

[DarrinS]

I've watched several interviews of Woodward and can't find a single one where he states "I was threatened". Story is not even reported factually.

[spursncowboys]

So it turns out there was no threat.. and the resident dummies are still claiming it was...

So are we taking Woodward's comments to be credible now that it isn't a threat. Because he does state that the WH is bullying the press and Obama lied... Further that he is for the press being aggressive towards the president, which he believes they aren't.

[Th'Pusher]

But after I posted a link to the email exchange, you said:

How is it anything other than a threat?

[boutons_deux]

I've watched several interviews of Woodward and can't find a single one where he states "I was threatened". Story is not even reported factually.

The bogus "threat" was in an email. You are not even informed factually.

[George Gervin's Afro]

So are we taking Woodward's comments to be credible now that it isn't a threat. Because he does state that the WH is bullying the press and Obama lied... Further that he is for the press being aggressive towards the president, which he believes they aren't.

you will accept anything that makes this administration look bad... define bullying the press and then maybe we can discuss this intelligently

[DarrinS]

I've watched several interviews of Woodward and can't find a single one where he states "I was threatened". Story is not even reported factually.

You be the judge. I think the entire thing is mischaracterized.

[sjacquemotte]

Unlike you with bush, I am against what I disagree with and not a party.

[DarrinS]

Unlike you with bush, I am against what I disagree with and not a party.

Who are you talking to?

[sjacquemotte]

Bullying the press: imo calling up an editor and telling them not to let his reporters be negative of Obama. Telling reporters there will be repercussions of they push a negative line of questioning. Kicking a journalist out of the press corp

[sjacquemotte]

Who are you talking to?

Gga

[George Gervin's Afro]

Unlike you with bush, I am against what I disagree with and not a party.

It was never bullying to begin with so this is a stupid thread.

[Th'Pusher]

You be the judge. I think the entire thing is mischaracterized.

Then why did you say, how is it anything other than a threat?