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.

(Washington Post)   Racist Keebler Elf Jefferson Beauregard Sessions might change a rule in leak investigations that would utterly decimate the free press   ( washingtonpost.com) divider line
    More: Scary, Eric Holder, media guidelines, attorney general, Justice Department, news media, Journalism, Barack Obama, Mass media  
•       •       •

3380 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Sep 2017 at 11:20 AM (36 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


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

 
2017-09-14 07:59:16 AM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-14 08:05:54 AM  
One of every ten news media outlets will be destroyed?
 
2017-09-14 08:06:06 AM  
That has been one of the goals of this administration.  Their war on the press has been unrelenting.  The obvious answer is for the administration to be more evil.
 
2017-09-14 08:06:40 AM  
I get that the leaks are damning and therefore bad to have happen for the administration, but if nothing leaked is *actually* classified, not just a private conversation without any legal protections, then how the heck do they think they have a case?

if the Pentagon Papers can't shut down the NYT and WaPo with a Nixon in the White House, what makes KKKeebler Elf think he can shut down stories on palace intrigue?

seriously, for the head of the DoJ, he knows nothing about the law
 
2017-09-14 08:07:20 AM  
Stop using the word "decimate" incorrectly, dickweed.
 
2017-09-14 08:19:13 AM  

somedude210: what makes KKKeebler Elf think he can shut down stories on palace intrigue?


He probably doesn't, but that doesn't mean it won't have to go to court for it to get slapped down.
 
2017-09-14 08:19:34 AM  
This isn't a bug, but a feature. This Administration has brought together folks who REALLY hate light as a disinfectant...

But then again, the press hasn't been leaked classified material, and oddly enough, Donnie has been sort of lax about trying to classify communications within his White House, so really, the leaks have been just the damning shop talk that gets put forward. If there's any classified information getting out...it's on the heads of the folks like Flynn while he was there, and others, who can't keep their gobs shut...
 
2017-09-14 08:49:15 AM  

somedude210: I get that the leaks are damning and therefore bad to have happen for the administration, but if nothing leaked is *actually* classified, not just a private conversation without any legal protections, then how the heck do they think they have a case?

if the Pentagon Papers can't shut down the NYT and WaPo with a Nixon in the White House, what makes KKKeebler Elf think he can shut down stories on palace intrigue?

seriously, for the head of the DoJ, he knows nothing about the law


He wasn't selected for his knowledge of the law. His loyalty and desire to inflict hurt on minorities are unquestioned.
 
2017-09-14 08:52:16 AM  

Jake Havechek: Stop using the word "decimate" incorrectly, dickweed.


Sounds like a commie metric term anyway.
 
2017-09-14 08:53:25 AM  

somedude210: I get that the leaks are damning and therefore bad to have happen for the administration, but if nothing leaked is *actually* classified, not just a private conversation without any legal protections, then how the heck do they think they have a case?

if the Pentagon Papers can't shut down the NYT and WaPo with a Nixon in the White House, what makes KKKeebler Elf think he can shut down stories on palace intrigue?

seriously, for the head of the DoJ, he knows nothing about the law


Chilling and intimidation are their own rewards.
 
2017-09-14 09:04:06 AM  
If we lose these rights, who is to say we will ever get them back?
 
2017-09-14 09:15:42 AM  

hubiestubert: This isn't a bug, but a feature. This Administration has brought together folks who REALLY hate light as a disinfectant...

But then again, the press hasn't been leaked classified material, and oddly enough, Donnie has been sort of lax about trying to classify communications within his White House, so really, the leaks have been just the damning shop talk that gets put forward. If there's any classified information getting out...it's on the heads of the folks like Flynn while he was there, and others, who can't keep their gobs shut...


So does classifying material or discussion after the fact of said material or discussion being released by the press actually make it classified, or are they just now trying to build the barn after the corralled horses got out?
 
2017-09-14 09:32:52 AM  

somedude210: seriously, for the head of the DoJ, he knows nothing about the law


In all fairness to Sessions he's probably completely aware of what the law says.. he just doesn't give a fark.
 
2017-09-14 09:35:08 AM  
How does it feel to want?
 
2017-09-14 11:23:03 AM  
Quelle surprise.
 
2017-09-14 11:29:14 AM  
Remember when we used to decry other Countries for jailing journalists.
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-14 11:29:26 AM  
This, of course, has been part of the regime's goals since the beginning.
 
2017-09-14 11:31:00 AM  
Can't we just arrest him?
 
2017-09-14 11:31:05 AM  

somedude210: I get that the leaks are damning and therefore bad to have happen for the administration, but if nothing leaked is *actually* classified, not just a private conversation without any legal protections, then how the heck do they think they have a case?

if the Pentagon Papers can't shut down the NYT and WaPo with a Nixon in the White House, what makes KKKeebler Elf think he can shut down stories on palace intrigue?

seriously, for the head of the DoJ, he knows nothing about the law


Fear will keep the Local Systems In Line...
 
2017-09-14 11:34:44 AM  

harleyquinnical: hubiestubert: This isn't a bug, but a feature. This Administration has brought together folks who REALLY hate light as a disinfectant...

But then again, the press hasn't been leaked classified material, and oddly enough, Donnie has been sort of lax about trying to classify communications within his White House, so really, the leaks have been just the damning shop talk that gets put forward. If there's any classified information getting out...it's on the heads of the folks like Flynn while he was there, and others, who can't keep their gobs shut...

So does classifying material or discussion after the fact of said material or discussion being released by the press actually make it classified, or are they just now trying to build the barn after the corralled horses got out?


"The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia."

Classify it after the fact and Fox News gets to blowhard about the media leaking classified info because anyone who fact checks them isn't who Fox News cares about.

Trump even does this with his public statements.  He gives two or three different sound bites so that his supporters can do a pull quote for their own purposes.

For Charlottesville, he can point to statement #1 as proof he condemned the bad guys:
"Racism is evil," said Mr. Trump, delivering a statement from the White House at a hastily arranged appearance meant to halt the growing political threat posed by the unrest. "And those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the K.K.K., neo-Nazis, white supremacists and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans."

And then literally 24 hours later, statement #2, he throws some red meat out there for his white nationalist buddies:
"I think there is blame on both sides," the president said in a combative exchange with reporters at Trump Tower in Manhattan. "You had a group on one side that was bad. You had a group on the other side that was also very violent. Nobody wants to say that. I'll say it right now."

So if you're criticizing Trump, his defender pulls a quote from statement #1.  If you like Trump, you look at his #2 that he vomited out of his mouth and are happy he's doing something about those deep state lefty terrorists who....keep demanding equality?
 
2017-09-14 11:36:46 AM  

Diogenes: somedude210: I get that the leaks are damning and therefore bad to have happen for the administration, but if nothing leaked is *actually* classified, not just a private conversation without any legal protections, then how the heck do they think they have a case?

if the Pentagon Papers can't shut down the NYT and WaPo with a Nixon in the White House, what makes KKKeebler Elf think he can shut down stories on palace intrigue?

seriously, for the head of the DoJ, he knows nothing about the law

Chilling and intimidation are their own rewards.


During the Bush II administration Karl "Ham" Rove was known for calling up and delivering blistering nastygrams to anyone who gave unfavorable press, as well as threatening denying access to the White House press pool.
 
2017-09-14 11:37:02 AM  
They can't find or stop the leakers so they are going after the press? Sounds like a plan. Another bad plan.
 
2017-09-14 11:37:37 AM  

Jake Havechek: Stop using the word "decimate" incorrectly, dickweed.


It's my pet peave too, but I've learned to let it go.  Yes, I still twitch a little when people use it when they mean "devastated," but it's not like there's a valid use for the term anymore.  Unless you're talking Roman military strategy, the meaning is clear, and it's not going to confuse anyone.
 
2017-09-14 11:37:55 AM  
The freedoms instilled in the Bill of Rights are designed to prevent a French Revolution-style overthrow of the government. If you whittle them away, guess what the Trump administration is in danger of?
 
2017-09-14 11:40:16 AM  

Corn_Fed: The freedoms instilled in the Bill of Rights are designed to prevent a French Revolution-style overthrow of the government. If you whittle them away, guess what the Trump administration is in danger of?


Creating another movie musical staring Hugh Jackman?
 
2017-09-14 11:43:22 AM  

Jake Havechek: Stop using the word "decimate" incorrectly, dickweed.


But...  but...  it's going to UTTERLY decimate!!!

Totally, majorly utterly!!!

I think Subby is ten.
 
2017-09-14 11:43:36 AM  
All I see in that article is butt hurt.   They worked with the DOJ for a couple of years to get rules that were favorable to them and now the new DOJ doesn't like them... so they are whining.
 
2017-09-14 11:45:03 AM  

Jake Havechek: Stop using the word "decimate" incorrectly, dickweed.


Fark that. I see people every day who have no idea whether to use "lay" or "lie," who have no idea whether to use "imply" or "infer," who refuse to concern themselves with making pronouns agree with their antecedents, who dangle modifiers, who use adjectives when adverbs are called for, who think "flammable" is a real word, who have literally no problem with "literally" coming to mean "figuratively," and every other imaginable act of violence against the language. If I object, I am told that the language must evolve and I am standing in the way. But I guess because it comes up in sword and sorcery fiction or something like that, the strict and technically precise meaning of the word "decimate" - a word which has mostly been used in a metaphorical way for decades now, maybe centuries - and the nerd squad goes nuts. Like I said, fark that.
 
2017-09-14 11:46:53 AM  
Am I the only one who can't read these articles? Sorry Bezos, not paying to read your paper..
 
2017-09-14 11:48:12 AM  

MrWhipee: Am I the only one who can't read these articles? Sorry Bezos, not paying to read your paper..


Yeah, paying for goods and services is stupid. Shoplifting is where it's at!
 
2017-09-14 11:52:58 AM  

Lucky LaRue: One of every ten news media outlets will be destroyed?


Does 'decimate' mean 'destroy one tenth'?

Most people have a linguistic pet peeve or two, a useful complaint about language that they can sound off about to show other people that they know how to wield the English language. Most of these peeves tend to be rather irrational, a quality which should in no way diminish the enjoyment of the complainer. A classic example of this is the word decimate.

The complaint about the word typically centers on the fact that decimate is used improperly to refer to 'destroying a large portion of something', when the 'true' meaning of the word is 'to put to death (or punish) one of every ten'.

There are several problems with this complaint. The first, and most obvious, is that language has an ineluctable desire to change, and there are almost no words in English which have been around for more than a few hundred years without taking on new meanings, changing their old ones, or coming to simultaneously mean one thing and the opposite (a type of word known as a contronym).

http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/09/does-decimate-mean-destroy​-​one-tenth/
 
2017-09-14 11:53:55 AM  

BMulligan: Jake Havechek: Stop using the word "decimate" incorrectly, dickweed.

Fark that. I see people every day who have no idea whether to use "lay" or "lie," who have no idea whether to use "imply" or "infer," who refuse to concern themselves with making pronouns agree with their antecedents, who dangle modifiers, who use adjectives when adverbs are called for, who think "flammable" is a real word, who have literally no problem with "literally" coming to mean "figuratively," and every other imaginable act of violence against the language. If I object, I am told that the language must evolve and I am standing in the way. But I guess because it comes up in sword and sorcery fiction or something like that, the strict and technically precise meaning of the word "decimate" - a word which has mostly been used in a metaphorical way for decades now, maybe centuries - and the nerd squad goes nuts. Like I said, fark that.


And, of course, I omitted the predicate in my last sentence. Oh, well. No one read that far anyway.
 
2017-09-14 11:53:59 AM  

BMulligan: Jake Havechek: Stop using the word "decimate" incorrectly, dickweed.

Fark that. I see people every day who have no idea whether to use "lay" or "lie," who have no idea whether to use "imply" or "infer," who refuse to concern themselves with making pronouns agree with their antecedents, who dangle modifiers, who use adjectives when adverbs are called for, who think "flammable" is a real word, who have literally no problem with "literally" coming to mean "figuratively," and every other imaginable act of violence against the language. If I object, I am told that the language must evolve and I am standing in the way. But I guess because it comes up in sword and sorcery fiction or something like that, the strict and technically precise meaning of the word "decimate" - a word which has mostly been used in a metaphorical way for decades now, maybe centuries - and the nerd squad goes nuts. Like I said, fark that.


Merriam-Webster thinks flammable is a word.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/flammable-or-inflammable
Cambridge too.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/flammable
 
2017-09-14 11:55:51 AM  

BMulligan: Like I said, fark that.

And, of course, I omitted the predicate in my last sentence. Oh, well. No one read that far anyway.


Did you?

"fark that" is a full sentence.

Climb this.

Drive here.
 
2017-09-14 11:56:17 AM  

Smackledorfer: BMulligan: Jake Havechek: Stop using the word "decimate" incorrectly, dickweed.

Fark that. I see people every day who have no idea whether to use "lay" or "lie," who have no idea whether to use "imply" or "infer," who refuse to concern themselves with making pronouns agree with their antecedents, who dangle modifiers, who use adjectives when adverbs are called for, who think "flammable" is a real word, who have literally no problem with "literally" coming to mean "figuratively," and every other imaginable act of violence against the language. If I object, I am told that the language must evolve and I am standing in the way. But I guess because it comes up in sword and sorcery fiction or something like that, the strict and technically precise meaning of the word "decimate" - a word which has mostly been used in a metaphorical way for decades now, maybe centuries - and the nerd squad goes nuts. Like I said, fark that.

Merriam-Webster thinks flammable is a word.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/flammable-or-inflammable
Cambridge too.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/flammable


Dictionaries (with a handful of exceptions) are descriptive, not prescriptive. They document how language is used, not how it is supposed to be used.
 
2017-09-14 11:57:11 AM  

Smackledorfer: BMulligan: Like I said, fark that.

And, of course, I omitted the predicate in my last sentence. Oh, well. No one read that far anyway.

Did you?

"fark that" is a full sentence.

Climb this.

Drive here.


Another egregious error on my part. I meant the penultimate sentence, not the last sentence.
 
2017-09-14 12:01:29 PM  

BMulligan: Smackledorfer: BMulligan: Jake Havechek: Stop using the word "decimate" incorrectly, dickweed.

Fark that. I see people every day who have no idea whether to use "lay" or "lie," who have no idea whether to use "imply" or "infer," who refuse to concern themselves with making pronouns agree with their antecedents, who dangle modifiers, who use adjectives when adverbs are called for, who think "flammable" is a real word, who have literally no problem with "literally" coming to mean "figuratively," and every other imaginable act of violence against the language. If I object, I am told that the language must evolve and I am standing in the way. But I guess because it comes up in sword and sorcery fiction or something like that, the strict and technically precise meaning of the word "decimate" - a word which has mostly been used in a metaphorical way for decades now, maybe centuries - and the nerd squad goes nuts. Like I said, fark that.

Merriam-Webster thinks flammable is a word.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/flammable-or-inflammable
Cambridge too.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/flammable

Dictionaries (with a handful of exceptions) are descriptive, not prescriptive. They document how language is used, not how it is supposed to be used.


So how do things become words then? Can flammable ever become one for realsies? Or dost thou thinketh one mightst require official recognition from ye olde language mastre?
 
2017-09-14 12:01:42 PM  
It is amazing how prophetic Babylon 5 (under the Clark Administration) and Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri were.

"As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."

img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-09-14 12:06:39 PM  

cloudofdust: Lucky LaRue: One of every ten news media outlets will be destroyed?

Does 'decimate' mean 'destroy one tenth'?

Most people have a linguistic pet peeve or two, a useful complaint about language that they can sound off about to show other people that they know how to wield the English language. Most of these peeves tend to be rather irrational, a quality which should in no way diminish the enjoyment of the complainer. A classic example of this is the word decimate.

The complaint about the word typically centers on the fact that decimate is used improperly to refer to 'destroying a large portion of something', when the 'true' meaning of the word is 'to put to death (or punish) one of every ten'.

There are several problems with this complaint. The first, and most obvious, is that language has an ineluctable desire to change, and there are almost no words in English which have been around for more than a few hundred years without taking on new meanings, changing their old ones, or coming to simultaneously mean one thing and the opposite (a type of word known as a contronym).

http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/09/does-decimate-mean-destroy-​one-tenth/


Grammar trolls are the lowest of a low species.
 
2017-09-14 12:10:05 PM  

somedude210: seriously, for the head of the DoJ, he knows nothing about the law


With congressional and presidential support and 5/4 supreme court backing him, the law is what he says it is.  Dark times ahead my friend.
 
2017-09-14 12:12:42 PM  

Jake Havechek: Stop using the word "decimate" incorrectly, dickweed.


While we're at it, how about we start using 'racist' correctly too.  I.E., hating based on religion isn't racism - it's prejudice.

/he's also racist
 
2017-09-14 12:13:35 PM  
The beautiful part of the first amendment is it renders anything that "would decimate the free press" glaringly unconstitutional.
 
2017-09-14 12:14:03 PM  
ISN getting stormed
Youtube vC20Ej6E99A


Poor quality picture, but witness the future.
 
2017-09-14 12:15:02 PM  

somedude210: if the Pentagon Papers can't shut down the NYT and WaPo with a Nixon in the White House, what makes KKKeebler Elf think he can shut down stories on palace intrigue?


It is a completely different world than it was back then.

After 9/11 the Cheney administration proved you can get away with anything as long as you claim it has something to do with national security. Almost every court on every issue will defer to you and screw your rights.

That is why Snowden is in Russia instead of defending himself here in court. There would simply be no way to get a fair trial with the rules that have been actually applied to related cases. Ellsberg under those rules would have been in prison for 25-to-life.
 
2017-09-14 12:19:04 PM  
You mean to tell me that the administration that just called for someone to be fired over things they said, Also has disdain for a free press?

My shocked face, let me show you. -_-
 
2017-09-14 12:22:08 PM  

AntiNerd: somedude210: if the Pentagon Papers can't shut down the NYT and WaPo with a Nixon in the White House, what makes KKKeebler Elf think he can shut down stories on palace intrigue?

It is a completely different world than it was back then.

After 9/11 the Cheney administration proved you can get away with anything as long as you claim it has something to do with national security. Almost every court on every issue will defer to you and screw your rights.

That is why Snowden is in Russia instead of defending himself here in court. There would simply be no way to get a fair trial with the rules that have been actually applied to related cases. Ellsberg under those rules would have been in prison for 25-to-life.


The only reason Ellsberg wasn't convicted was that evidence against him was illegally obtained by the government. It had nothing to do with legal protections for whistleblowers.
 
2017-09-14 12:22:51 PM  

UncleDirtNap: Corn_Fed: The freedoms instilled in the Bill of Rights are designed to prevent a French Revolution-style overthrow of the government. If you whittle them away, guess what the Trump administration is in danger of?

Creating another movie musical staring Hugh Jackman?


Too late...
 
2017-09-14 12:25:52 PM  

hubiestubert: This isn't a bug, but a feature. This Administration has brought together folks who REALLY hate light as a disinfectant...

But then again, the press hasn't been leaked classified material, and oddly enough, Donnie has been sort of lax about trying to classify communications within his White House, so really, the leaks have been just the damning shop talk that gets put forward. If there's any classified information getting out...it's on the heads of the folks like Flynn while he was there, and others, who can't keep their gobs shut...


Give the GOP that which it hates most: Accountability.
 
2017-09-14 12:30:28 PM  
seriously, for the head of the DoJ, he knows nothing about the law

He Is a very busy man. Why don't YOU try to be the Attorney General of The United States and make that many cookies and crackers ... IN A TREE!
 
2017-09-14 12:32:12 PM  
The resulting changes we made were both significant and necessary. The new policy expressly stated that a member of the news media will be notified before the department uses legal process - such as subpoenas and warrants - to obtain records

I would have thought that would naturally occur.  I'm trying hard to figure out a way in which you could require someone to hand over records about who leaked something to them that wouldn't involve them knowing you were asking them to hand over records.
 
Displayed 50 of 82 comments


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


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  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