Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Legal Insurrection)   How much has Obama overreached? Other news organizations might have to defend Fox News   (legalinsurrection.com ) divider line
    More: Amusing, obama, rosen, damage control, News Corp., Charles Schulz  
•       •       •

1815 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 May 2013 at 3:00 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



149 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-05-20 02:14:46 PM  
This might just push Obama's approval numbers above 60%
 
2013-05-20 02:21:20 PM  
I don't know what that site is, but greenworthy?  Really?

It farking says "I said "might" not "would" " right at the top of the story.

Why not green a thread with the title "Obama MIGHT be from Ceti-Alpha Five."
 
2013-05-20 02:24:22 PM  
Is it considered spying if you have a warrant?
 
2013-05-20 02:43:02 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: I don't know what that site is, but greenworthy?  Really?

It farking says "I said "might" not "would" " right at the top of the story.

Why not green a thread with the title "Obama MIGHT be from Ceti-Alpha Five."


THIS IS CETI ALPHA FIVE!
 
2013-05-20 02:44:27 PM  
"They obtained a search warrant for the reporter's personal e-mails.

I'm sure none of the other reporters will have a problem with this.
 
2013-05-20 03:04:09 PM  

James!: Is it considered spying if you have a warrant?


Apparently, and its considered wiretapping to look at records of who called who and when.
 
2013-05-20 03:05:44 PM  
Whatever Obama did, I am sure the Family Research Council can point to his black genetics as the cause for his queerdom.
 
2013-05-20 03:05:56 PM  

WelldeadLink: "They obtained a search warrant for the reporter's personal e-mails.

I'm sure none of the other reporters will have a problem with this.


I don't understand how the administration could think this would a) be a good idea; b) end well.  There is no way that the press will let this slide.  Obama could do most anything but threaten the press, and they're smart enough to know that if he can do it to one of them, he could do it to any of them.  Plus, the administration hasn't exactly been press-friendly, even with their "friends."  Cue the "cunning plan" .jpg.
 
2013-05-20 03:07:10 PM  
Once again, the GOP does not think their cunning plan all the way through.

I sincerely doubt the GOP wants FOX news being highlighted after their successful court battle to have the legal right to lie to its viewers.
 
2013-05-20 03:07:55 PM  

James!: Is it considered spying if you have a warrant?


There's a difference between "legal to do" and "smart to do."  This fiasco will vividly illuminate the difference.
 
2013-05-20 03:09:37 PM  
DOJ implementing laws Republicans fought for is now Obama overreaching.
 
2013-05-20 03:10:10 PM  
and another post says mitch mcconnell was ok with the leak of the AP story cause of national security reasons, why does mitch hate fox news??
 
2013-05-20 03:10:32 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: AdolfOliverPanties: I don't know what that site is, but greenworthy?  Really?

It farking says "I said "might" not "would" " right at the top of the story.

Why not green a thread with the title "Obama MIGHT be from Ceti-Alpha Five."

THIS IS CETI ALPHA FIVE!


You lie! On Ceti Alpha Five there was life! A fair chance! Here there is nothing but whaargarbl and derp...
 
2013-05-20 03:11:04 PM  

Infernalist: Once again, the GOP does not think their cunning plan all the way through.

I sincerely doubt the GOP wants FOX news being highlighted after their successful court battle to have the legal right to lie to its viewers.


You have no clue.  This affects all the press.  If allowed to stand, this legitimizes the actions of a future conservative administration against its ideological opponents in the press.  It also reduces everyone's (in the press) ability to get sources inside the administration.  The media will come together on this.  Obama is only for another three years.  They've got their careers to protect.
 
2013-05-20 03:11:16 PM  
The case of Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, the government adviser, and James Rosen, the chief Washington correspondent for Fox News....

That's like saying the fiesta corn niblets I ate last night are now the mayors of Diarrhea Town today.
 
2013-05-20 03:11:42 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: James!: Is it considered spying if you have a warrant?

There's a difference between "legal to do" and "smart to do."  This fiasco will vividly illuminate the difference.


The AP printed information that put a British undercover operative and his family in danger.  The DOJ went looking for the leak which involved seeking and receiving a warrant to collect these records.

Should they have allowed the leak to continue until someone got killed?
 
2013-05-20 03:12:39 PM  

mediablitz: DOJ implementing laws Republicans fought for is now Obama overreaching.


This is not a republican v democrat thing.  This is an administration v press thing.  Common ideology and politics will not protect Obama from the press outrage.
 
2013-05-20 03:12:45 PM  

James!: Galloping Galoshes: James!: Is it considered spying if you have a warrant?

There's a difference between "legal to do" and "smart to do."  This fiasco will vividly illuminate the difference.

The AP printed information that put a British undercover operative and his family in danger.  The DOJ went looking for the leak which involved seeking and receiving a warrant to collect these records.

Should they have allowed the leak to continue until someone got killed?


Scooter Libby: "Yes"
 
2013-05-20 03:12:50 PM  
What the hell is up with these stories today
 
2013-05-20 03:14:26 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: mediablitz: DOJ implementing laws Republicans fought for is now Obama overreaching.

This is not a republican v democrat thing.  This is an administration v press thing.   Common ideology and politics will not protect Obama from the press outrage.


BSABSV potato?
Concerned?
Independent™?

Not sure what angle I am supposed to attribute this doozy to.
 
2013-05-20 03:15:20 PM  

James!: Should they have allowed the leak to continue until someone got killed?


The important fact you are overlooking here is that liberals are involved, therefore comma
 
2013-05-20 03:15:36 PM  

Jackson Herring: What the hell is up with these stories today


I think a few news execs got together and decided that the people were uniting behind Obama a little too much, there wasn't enough drama or conflict to sell papers.

That's my guess anyway.
 
2013-05-20 03:16:20 PM  

James!: Is it considered spying if you have a warrant?


I don't think the DoJ needs a warrant to conduct surveillance of someone
 
2013-05-20 03:16:29 PM  

Jackson Herring: What the hell is up with these stories today


img.fark.net

UnskewedScandals.com

Study it out, lib
 
2013-05-20 03:16:53 PM  

skullkrusher: James!: Is it considered spying if you have a warrant?

I don't think the DoJ needs a warrant to conduct surveillance of someone


Yet they went and got one.
 
2013-05-20 03:17:16 PM  

James!: Galloping Galoshes: James!: Is it considered spying if you have a warrant?

There's a difference between "legal to do" and "smart to do."  This fiasco will vividly illuminate the difference.

The AP printed information that put a British undercover operative and his family in danger.  The DOJ went looking for the leak which involved seeking and receiving a warrant to collect these records.

Should they have allowed the leak to continue until someone got killed?


Not the question that the press is upset about.  Also, this has been going on for decades, all the way back to the Pentagon Papers case.  NY Times disclosed we had tapped the Soviets' undersea cables, etc.  Lots of examples.  The question is, should the administration be able to investigate reporters.  No one, it seems, as done that before.

As a side point, AP held the story, and only went public when they were asked to hold it one more day so the Administration could announce it.  At that point it ceased to be national security and became letting the administration scoop them.  AP said "fark that".
 
2013-05-20 03:18:06 PM  
You mean the same Fox news that repeatedly attacked Obama for having leaks? That Fox news?
 
2013-05-20 03:18:40 PM  

coeyagi: Jackson Herring: What the hell is up with these stories today

[img.fark.net image 400x300]

UnskewedScandals.com

Study it out, lib


Brilliant. Simply Brilliant.
 
2013-05-20 03:19:06 PM  

James!: skullkrusher: James!: Is it considered spying if you have a warrant?

I don't think the DoJ needs a warrant to conduct surveillance of someone

Yet they went and got one.


for his emails.
 
2013-05-20 03:19:10 PM  

coeyagi: Galloping Galoshes: mediablitz: DOJ implementing laws Republicans fought for is now Obama overreaching.

This is not a republican v democrat thing.  This is an administration v press thing.   Common ideology and politics will not protect Obama from the press outrage.

BSABSV potato?
Concerned?
Independent™?

Not sure what angle I am supposed to attribute this doozy to.


Did not mean to imply that all the press shared ideology and politics with Obama.  I meant that even those media types that do share common ideology and politics with Obama will be upset at this.  My bad.  I overreached, it appears.
 
2013-05-20 03:20:01 PM  
THIS IS A NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE!!!!!

/That's what all the GOP shills said about the Patriot Act when this shiat was being done by a white guy.
 
2013-05-20 03:21:01 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: Infernalist: Once again, the GOP does not think their cunning plan all the way through.

I sincerely doubt the GOP wants FOX news being highlighted after their successful court battle to have the legal right to lie to its viewers.

You have no clue.  This affects all the press.  If allowed to stand, this legitimizes the actions of a future conservative administration against its ideological opponents in the press.  It also reduces everyone's (in the press) ability to get sources inside the administration.  The media will come together on this.  Obama is only for another three years.  They've got their careers to protect.


Heck, the law itself is morally repugnant. The unPatriot Act and expanded FISA should both be repealed. The only reason the complicit press cares now is that THEY were investigated. They should enjoy the irony, but they don't.

Of course I don't hear for too many calls to change the law, probably because most don't know this was technically legal.
 
2013-05-20 03:21:29 PM  
I don't think it's hyperbole to say that Fartbango has Hitlered everything forever.
 
2013-05-20 03:22:26 PM  

Citrate1007: THIS IS A NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE!!!!!

/That's what all the GOP shills said about the Patriot Act when this shiat was being done by a white guy.


1/20/2009 changed EVERYTHING!
 
2013-05-20 03:22:29 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: Not the question that the press is upset about.


The DOJ isn't concerned about their feelings.
 
2013-05-20 03:24:10 PM  

Citrate1007: THIS IS A NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE!!!!!

/That's what all the GOP shills said about the Patriot Act when this shiat was being done by a white guy.


what were you saying about the PATRIOT Act then?
 
2013-05-20 03:24:18 PM  
Question: What is the most sad and pathetic part of the Obama administration?
Answer: The minions who support it.

HOPE AND CHANGE! BWAHAHAH!
 
2013-05-20 03:24:18 PM  

InmanRoshi: I don't think it's hyperbole to say that Fartbango has Hitlered everything forever.


It certainly wouldn't be a statistical quirk needing harmonization to surmise that Fartgoebbels is secretly breeding a race of MechaHolders ready to "pimp-slap with his porn stache" all of the God-fearing angels over at FoxNews.
 
2013-05-20 03:24:44 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: As a side point, AP held the story, and only went public when they were asked to hold it one more day so the Administration could announce it.  At that point it ceased to be national security and became letting the administration scoop them.  AP said "fark that".


I'm not sure why you think "It was a business decision" is a valid defense, or why "free press" somehow confers immunity from being subpoena'd for evidence or testimony...
 
2013-05-20 03:25:01 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: mediablitz: DOJ implementing laws Republicans fought for is now Obama overreaching.

This is not a republican v democrat thing.  This is an administration v press thing.  Common ideology and politics will not protect Obama from the press outrage.


Sigh. I see you read my sentence, but didn't comprehend it.
 
2013-05-20 03:25:38 PM  

James!: Galloping Galoshes: Not the question that the press is upset about.

The DOJ isn't concerned about their feelings.


That's funny.  Their bosses are, so by extension, they are too.
 
2013-05-20 03:25:38 PM  

skullkrusher: Citrate1007: THIS IS A NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE!!!!!

/That's what all the GOP shills said about the Patriot Act when this shiat was being done by a white guy.

what were you saying about the PATRIOT Act then?


Were you complaining about the expansion of Executive Branch then?
 
2013-05-20 03:26:45 PM  

mediablitz: Galloping Galoshes: mediablitz: DOJ implementing laws Republicans fought for is now Obama overreaching.

This is not a republican v democrat thing.  This is an administration v press thing.  Common ideology and politics will not protect Obama from the press outrage.

Sigh. I see you read my sentence, but didn't comprehend it.


I read it.  I understand it.  I note it's irrelevancy.
 
2013-05-20 03:26:47 PM  
Other news organizations?
 
2013-05-20 03:27:36 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: James!: Galloping Galoshes: Not the question that the press is upset about.

The DOJ isn't concerned about their feelings.

That's funny.  Their bosses are, so by extension, they are too.


They're showing how concerned they are by charging that Fox reporter with conspiracy.
 
2013-05-20 03:28:15 PM  

qorkfiend: Galloping Galoshes: As a side point, AP held the story, and only went public when they were asked to hold it one more day so the Administration could announce it.  At that point it ceased to be national security and became letting the administration scoop them.  AP said "fark that".

I'm not sure why you think "It was a business decision" is a valid defense, or why "free press" somehow confers immunity from being subpoena'd for evidence or testimony...


It doesn't, but the administration will look very foolish attempting to justify why such measures were necessary to protect "national security" when they themselves were about to announce the information.
 
2013-05-20 03:28:32 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: mediablitz: Galloping Galoshes: mediablitz: DOJ implementing laws Republicans fought for is now Obama overreaching.

This is not a republican v democrat thing.  This is an administration v press thing.  Common ideology and politics will not protect Obama from the press outrage.

Sigh. I see you read my sentence, but didn't comprehend it.

I read it.  I understand it.  I note it's irrelevancy.


It's irrelevant only if you think laws exist for sh*ts and giggles.

//which would kind of explain a lot about the 111th and 112th congresses
 
2013-05-20 03:28:59 PM  

James!: Galloping Galoshes: James!: Galloping Galoshes: Not the question that the press is upset about.

The DOJ isn't concerned about their feelings.

That's funny.  Their bosses are, so by extension, they are too.

They're showing how concerned they are by charging that Fox reporter with conspiracy.


They haven't charged him with anything.  Please reread today's stories.
 
2013-05-20 03:29:25 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: qorkfiend: Galloping Galoshes: As a side point, AP held the story, and only went public when they were asked to hold it one more day so the Administration could announce it.  At that point it ceased to be national security and became letting the administration scoop them.  AP said "fark that".

I'm not sure why you think "It was a business decision" is a valid defense, or why "free press" somehow confers immunity from being subpoena'd for evidence or testimony...

It doesn't, but the administration will look very foolish attempting to justify why such measures were necessary to protect "national security" when they themselves were about to announce the information.


Goodness, I remember a time when any questions about the operation of the White House were greeted with a laugh and a slamming door.
 
2013-05-20 03:29:55 PM  

unlikely: MaudlinMutantMollusk: AdolfOliverPanties: I don't know what that site is, but greenworthy?  Really?

It farking says "I said "might" not "would" " right at the top of the story.

Why not green a thread with the title "Obama MIGHT be from Ceti-Alpha Five."

THIS IS CETI ALPHA FIVE!

You lie! On Ceti Alpha Five there was life! A fair chance! Here there is nothing but whaargarbl and derp...


Liking where this is going...
 
Displayed 50 of 149 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report