Oh please, Mr. Risen who cares about leaks prosecution when u and your colleagues constantly miss reporting on stories with real news that impacts real people -- before they do their damage ... like WMDs and Voter IDs.
15
So interesting to see how the tables are turning. Now, yeah let's start blaming everything wrong on Obama's policy and decisions.
19
So you're upset?! You're journalists, the 4th estate, do something about it. And don't just fo it for your business' interests. Do it for all of us. Stop whining. Do your job.
26
Whatever happens to the media is self-inflicted and well-deserved.
Being an arm of a political party (Democrats), beating the drum for what's wrong with America and obsessed with exposing any and all national security secrets for fun and profit is not the path to journalistic success.
Being an arm of a political party (Democrats), beating the drum for what's wrong with America and obsessed with exposing any and all national security secrets for fun and profit is not the path to journalistic success.
27
This is disturbing, to say the least. Is this the last ditch effort to curry favor with The Trump Train or an attempt to make nice to the far left who have turned to RT as reality. Either way, you have made an excuse for Trump, which is far worse than the year of not covering the reality of what a Tump presidency would do to America. All of the email scandal coverage while not a moment of policy. This is far worse than normalizing him.
26
Disagree with Obama's stance on whistleblowers, but blaming Obama for Trump's excesses is like blaming Jack Dorsey for Trump's idiotic tweets.
Can the news media please stop treating every Trump utterance on Twitter as "Breaking News"? Each one is false, a distraction, meaningless, hateful, or all of the above.
Can the news media please stop treating every Trump utterance on Twitter as "Breaking News"? Each one is false, a distraction, meaningless, hateful, or all of the above.
19
With less than three of the more than 400 weeks left in the Obama administration, one of the most ironic -- some might say hypocritical -- aspects is its stated policy on Transparency and Open Government:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment
As Mr. Risen and the various N.S.A. and C.I.A. whistleblowers can testify, it certainly didn't work out that way. Google the name "Thomas Drake," for instance, or "Thomas Tamm."
The Economist's Ann Wroe, in an article titled "Barack Obama's pauses," summed up all the unfulfilled promises about as well as anyone:
"The result, in sum, was a presidency conducted in a state of steadily declining suspense. Things would change! Certainly./ Probably./ Possibly./ Tomorrow./ Next week./ By the end of 2016./ And then time was up—"
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment
As Mr. Risen and the various N.S.A. and C.I.A. whistleblowers can testify, it certainly didn't work out that way. Google the name "Thomas Drake," for instance, or "Thomas Tamm."
The Economist's Ann Wroe, in an article titled "Barack Obama's pauses," summed up all the unfulfilled promises about as well as anyone:
"The result, in sum, was a presidency conducted in a state of steadily declining suspense. Things would change! Certainly./ Probably./ Possibly./ Tomorrow./ Next week./ By the end of 2016./ And then time was up—"
7
It is a shame those same powers have not been used against Apple and other computer/phone software/hardware manufacturers in forcing their cooperation in investigating domestic and international terrorism cases. I would like to see Apple's CEO and others who participated in the non-cooperation decisions behind bars for a year or more until they decided to provide more patriotic cooperation where deemed necessary to track and figure out terrorists networks. Maybe President Trump and his AG will take a more aggressive approach to that kind of obfuscation.
1
If Trump trumps journalist integrity THINK Obama - who is the headline writer lately for NYT, SUCH negativity, the world is HARDLY coming to an end - honestly!
5
Nonsense. Taking executive action to protect our national security and to allow for the effective pursuit of terrorists is called making tough choices and doing the right thing.
If Trump goes after journalists who investigate how he will use he White House to advance his business empire, help Putin undermine Western democracies, or expose the secrets in his tax returns, then you can thank Trump himself for that.
The means must be evaluated against the ends. Obama's actions were to protect our country. Trump actions would unfold to protect himself and sinister elements of his entourage who are intent on harming out country.
If Trump goes after journalists who investigate how he will use he White House to advance his business empire, help Putin undermine Western democracies, or expose the secrets in his tax returns, then you can thank Trump himself for that.
The means must be evaluated against the ends. Obama's actions were to protect our country. Trump actions would unfold to protect himself and sinister elements of his entourage who are intent on harming out country.
28
Thank you for writing this. There is an honesty to the evaluation here that is much aprreciated. And that evaluation revolves around one main point...that the element determining action is not party affiliation so much as power. Obama & Trump might act similarly because they both sip from the chalice of power. And Obama has betrayed that his sipping has made him drunk. Accompanying his claim that he could have won a third term is the idea that he would be a better option than anybody else. Power drunk on power. Not only Trump but Obama. And the best way to protect power...keep its mechanism hidden. Hinder the Press. Keep the people in the dark.
13
Mr Risen is absolutely correct. As a supporter of President Obama's it is appalling how he used the press and also the press' manipulation of the public about Obama. Birth certificate controversy covered non stop, Rev Wright, a secret Muslim and his of course Bill Ayers relationship. It was a non-stop press coverage which all added up to nothing but made the press look petty and inaccurate. The one thing that Mr. Risen didn't address was how the ground work for this relationship was laid - racism by the Republican Party. Most of this problem was the press keeping up with the fake news of Fox and the web focused on destroying the Obama Presidency. President Obama and the press abused each other rather than refocusing on policies.
7
It's tragic (and I don't use that word loosely) that the mainstream press only sees the threat from these policies once Trump is on his way to the White House. Where was all this concern for "press freedom" when Obama was trampling the press (and often the truth) for eight years? It says as much about the NYT as it does about Obama that this editorial didn't appear until the last gasp of the Obama presidency.
29
This is a terrifying proposition given Trump's temperament. We must all remain vigilant and support a free press or we are doomed. It is unlikely that the courts will help considering Trump will be making the appointments; therefore the power of public opinion may have to be invoked more often than in the past 40 years.
7
As someone who received information on banking praxtices back in th days of the s&l crisis, i benefited from private sector leaks in my job as a reporter.
But leaks should not happen. If citizens demanded more acxountability from its public servants then leaks would not be needed. What is the FDA doing? What is the defense dept doing, etc.
If more scrutiny and public reporting were demanded by our generally lazy elwctorate, the media could just tell the story.
But government does not report its actions so the media must use leaks and FOIA so the people know what is going on.
But leaks should not happen. If citizens demanded more acxountability from its public servants then leaks would not be needed. What is the FDA doing? What is the defense dept doing, etc.
If more scrutiny and public reporting were demanded by our generally lazy elwctorate, the media could just tell the story.
But government does not report its actions so the media must use leaks and FOIA so the people know what is going on.
4
Suggesting that Trump will be influenced by Obama's decisions belies the fact that Mr Trump is quite capable of going after the press by following his own lights. I am completely sympathetic to Jim Risen, but he is grinding an axe here.
10
True, the Obama Administration was not only abusive but extremely dishonest as well. From Obama and Holder on down, they lied and misled. It's no coincidence that Obama invoked Executive Privilege to protect Holder in that gun running case (Fast & Furious). They were particularly adept at stonewalling while claiming to be open and honest.
But the media doesn't deserve a pass for its biased reporting. Too often it started with a premise and found people to backup it up. It ignored people who didn't corroborate its views. A story on raising the minimum wage, for example, would cover people marching but not publish that they were not, in fact, minimum wage workers but people paid to march. The agenda -- ex., that minimum wage needed to increase -- was the objective. The fuller story, that some workers didn't want it because they didn't want the increased responsibility, never got reported.
But the media doesn't deserve a pass for its biased reporting. Too often it started with a premise and found people to backup it up. It ignored people who didn't corroborate its views. A story on raising the minimum wage, for example, would cover people marching but not publish that they were not, in fact, minimum wage workers but people paid to march. The agenda -- ex., that minimum wage needed to increase -- was the objective. The fuller story, that some workers didn't want it because they didn't want the increased responsibility, never got reported.
13
I just hope those in charge of codes and buttons, etc. are having serious discussions about what they would do in the event of receiving Captain Queeg/Jack Ripper-like orders. Are they prepared to follow orders? Have they prepared a protocol in the event they find themselves unwilling to follow orders? Is there a line they have agreed upon they will not cross? Can our institutions and political structures withstand major psychological and physical upheaval and possible civil unrest?
None of this stuff we built our government on came from the sky. A bunch of guys dreamed up a pretty workable outline. It's had to have some tweaking over the years. But it's not like there's some impenetrable wall keeping us on this side. We can cross through the looking glass and end up on the other side looking back. We'll be able to see where we were, but we won't be able to get back there.
They say you can never miss what you never had. But, I don't believe that. I'll always miss what could have been. And I regret where we're going. Sorry, but that's how I see it.
None of this stuff we built our government on came from the sky. A bunch of guys dreamed up a pretty workable outline. It's had to have some tweaking over the years. But it's not like there's some impenetrable wall keeping us on this side. We can cross through the looking glass and end up on the other side looking back. We'll be able to see where we were, but we won't be able to get back there.
They say you can never miss what you never had. But, I don't believe that. I'll always miss what could have been. And I regret where we're going. Sorry, but that's how I see it.
7
It's important that we differentiate between "genuine whistle blowers" and political hacks who leak for the purpose of hurting a particular person or party, e.g., Comey and friends. We should protect the real ones and expose the hacks!
15
Or,
If Donald Trump tries to target journalists, and fails, Credit Obama.
That would be more representative of the dialectical unfolding forces of history. Indeed, Trump's birther racism may advance civil rights as much as the over-reach of the 'defense of marriage' act did for LGBT rights. "Strategic" conservative propaganda is disturbingly efficacious in the short term, but downright stupid over the longer term. This is why we should not give up hope!
If Donald Trump tries to target journalists, and fails, Credit Obama.
That would be more representative of the dialectical unfolding forces of history. Indeed, Trump's birther racism may advance civil rights as much as the over-reach of the 'defense of marriage' act did for LGBT rights. "Strategic" conservative propaganda is disturbingly efficacious in the short term, but downright stupid over the longer term. This is why we should not give up hope!
The press can rightfully sue for First Amendment violations. Once Trump puts his pick on SCOTUS, that may not succeed.
In the past, SCOTUS refused to protect Nixon from his own Oval Office recording system and told Ken Starr that attorney-client privilege survived the death of a client.
We have to wait to see who Trump nominates and the Hill approves for the Supreme Court before we can continue to depend on the Bill of Rights.
While I'm a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, I have no confidence that Trump will tolerate anyone but the rich owning firearms.
In the past, SCOTUS refused to protect Nixon from his own Oval Office recording system and told Ken Starr that attorney-client privilege survived the death of a client.
We have to wait to see who Trump nominates and the Hill approves for the Supreme Court before we can continue to depend on the Bill of Rights.
While I'm a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, I have no confidence that Trump will tolerate anyone but the rich owning firearms.
3
I don't see what the big fuss is.
The MSM has not needed to talk with Trump in the past in order to make up stories about him.
Why start now? Going to pretend to do real journalism?
The MSM has not needed to talk with Trump in the past in order to make up stories about him.
Why start now? Going to pretend to do real journalism?
10
I have trouble feeling bad for journalists. Over the past ten years or so I feel like journalism has died. The Obama administration repeatedly mislead the public and the media never challenged the assertions. To this day we hear "hands up don't shoot" by BLM and video caused Benghazi. A responsible media would have shut down these myths. The media never challenged the absurd notion " you can keep your plan". We have watched members of the media move in and out administration and thanks to Wikileaks we know some seek editorial approval for articles by HRC. We were introduced to ridiculous terms like "white Hispanic" so the NYTs could advance a racist narrative. Finally the media jumped to condemn a UVA fraternity without any facts. Just a hunch but the current "Russia stole my election" might prove to be false. You wouldn't know it now because the media accepts everything.
10
No, that's not fair. Trump demeans and alternately ignores the press and individual journalists. That is a whole new level and you cannot fairly attribute to our outgoing President, whatever else you can say about whistle blowing and the like.
10
Does James Risen really think Trump needs precedents set by Obama to retaliatie against his "many enemies" and the "lame" MSM? For what Trump does, thank Trump.
Risen is a very fine investigative journalist and this article was inspired by personal experience. Thank you. But his excessive pursuit of leakers was not the worst way Obama fell short of his campaign promises and fell short of his duty to protect the Constitution. Officially endorsing targeted assassination without judicial process using weapons that are readily available is a hideous precedent that will come back to haunt us. The legal memo excusing it belongs side by side with the memo used by Bush to "redefine" torture.
Risen is a very fine investigative journalist and this article was inspired by personal experience. Thank you. But his excessive pursuit of leakers was not the worst way Obama fell short of his campaign promises and fell short of his duty to protect the Constitution. Officially endorsing targeted assassination without judicial process using weapons that are readily available is a hideous precedent that will come back to haunt us. The legal memo excusing it belongs side by side with the memo used by Bush to "redefine" torture.
3
May your slings be keyboards and pens, notebooks, newspapers and cyberspace. May your stones be the truth. Thank you for the work you do and the work to come.
4
President Obama has been a trailblazer when it comes to extrajudicial killing of Americans via drone strikes, mass surveillance, persecution of journalists, and the torture of whistlblowers. Things even Bush hesitated to do now have Obama's stamp of approval for President Trump.
7
To blame Obama for anything that our ignorant, vindictive, narcissistic present elect might do is profoundly insulting.
15
Obama was a good president of the domestic front, but when it came to foreign affairs and military over-reach less so. His protecting of some of our "Defense" Department's dodgy doings has left us a less informed electorate.
3
Good way to start blaming Obama for all the bad things that will happen under Trump.
7
Thank you.
It has been Kafkaesque watching people apoplecticly accuse not-yet-POTUS Trump of doing what POTUS Obama does routinely. Yours is but one example, but improves the credibility of the NYT.
It has been wonderful to see Americans again raise concern over authoritarian rule. But their silence over 8 years reveals an actual love affair with authoritarians--as long as the authoritarian belongs to their tribe. Sadly, this hypocrisy is why they can't be taken seriously. Once a D-authoritarian comes to power again, they will all be silent or gushing again, probably demanding even more authoritarian powers for their god, as though a devil will never again hold their reins.
Kudos to the NYT for beginning to crack this hypocritical fantasy. Hopefully they will find a way to do much more while still holding Trump accountable once he actually has some power.
Hold truth to power, not to party, for a change.
It has been Kafkaesque watching people apoplecticly accuse not-yet-POTUS Trump of doing what POTUS Obama does routinely. Yours is but one example, but improves the credibility of the NYT.
It has been wonderful to see Americans again raise concern over authoritarian rule. But their silence over 8 years reveals an actual love affair with authoritarians--as long as the authoritarian belongs to their tribe. Sadly, this hypocrisy is why they can't be taken seriously. Once a D-authoritarian comes to power again, they will all be silent or gushing again, probably demanding even more authoritarian powers for their god, as though a devil will never again hold their reins.
Kudos to the NYT for beginning to crack this hypocritical fantasy. Hopefully they will find a way to do much more while still holding Trump accountable once he actually has some power.
Hold truth to power, not to party, for a change.
9
The tenets of journalistic ethics are:
Truthfulness
Accuracy
Objectivity
Without number 3, 1&2 or worthless.
I don't know when objectivity was lost, but it is dead.
Journalism is dead, as a result.
Opinion and personal feelings are all that exists in what is called the media.
Truthfulness
Accuracy
Objectivity
Without number 3, 1&2 or worthless.
I don't know when objectivity was lost, but it is dead.
Journalism is dead, as a result.
Opinion and personal feelings are all that exists in what is called the media.
10
We no longer have "whistleblowers" who are to be admired but "spies" to be prosecuted. This is not all that new. Remember the "Pentagon Papers"?
The NYT itself has complicated the issue by acting as shill for the Bush administration in the run-up to the Iraq war, using "confidential informants" who turned out to be Ahmed Chalab and Dick Cheney's office and then trying to hide its role by claiming confidentiality of its sources. The paper had the nerve to argue that its sources were to blame for false reporting of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and then refusing to divulge the identities of the sources of the information as a well known liar on the subject (Chalab) and Cheney. The NYT still tries to conflate the issue of its role as a government propagandist and the Plame issue.
The NYT itself has complicated the issue by acting as shill for the Bush administration in the run-up to the Iraq war, using "confidential informants" who turned out to be Ahmed Chalab and Dick Cheney's office and then trying to hide its role by claiming confidentiality of its sources. The paper had the nerve to argue that its sources were to blame for false reporting of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and then refusing to divulge the identities of the sources of the information as a well known liar on the subject (Chalab) and Cheney. The NYT still tries to conflate the issue of its role as a government propagandist and the Plame issue.
4
Yes, thank Obama for everything. Thanks for the racism you left us with. Thanks for ignoring the persecutions going on in Syria and creating an army of immigrants. And thank you for borrowing from Medicare to pay for Obama Care. Thanks for bowing to Saudi Arabia leaders. Thanks for the rediculous stimulus you just had to have ASAP in January of 2008. You wasted most of that money on weird, unsuccessful environmental initiatives. Thanks for supporting Michael Moore, the black thug who was attacking the policeman, who had an excellent record, And Trevon Martin on a school suspension when he encountered George Zimmerman.
Michael Moore should have been made an example of to educatge all American youths of how we respect the law and order in this country, in spite of the current president, and we show respect to the law by listening and following direction from the policeman interacting with us.
Too late to protect your failed administration. But maybe Ben Rhodes can rescue you with his fine fiction.
Michael Moore should have been made an example of to educatge all American youths of how we respect the law and order in this country, in spite of the current president, and we show respect to the law by listening and following direction from the policeman interacting with us.
Too late to protect your failed administration. But maybe Ben Rhodes can rescue you with his fine fiction.
7
Leaks obviously make a reporter's life easier. It is much easier to report what someone else told you rather than do actual analysis or search for real evidence. As our politics get more partisan it is obvious that any disgruntled government worker opposed to the present administration can selectively leak damaging information to a more than willing press corp. The recent election showed that the pres was much more interested in discussing Hillary Clinton's emails than reporting on her policy proposals. Any damaging information will surely find its way into the news. President Obama simply did what was necessary.
1
The First and Fourth Amendments certainly are weaker than they were eight years ago, and if it weren't for the Snowden revelations, they would be weaker still. Privacy and the public's right to know have taken a beating under the Obama administration, despite all the "let me be clear" lip service to the contrary.
Rather than a rollback from the Bush-Cheney excesses, there has been a doubling down in important respects. The chilling effect on national security reporting in particular has made it that much easier for the Trump agenda to double down yet again and allow less sunlight than ever on the extent of government intrusiveness without probable cause.
This article also unintentionally raises a journalistic issue that blurs the picture further on what a reader can expect from a given byline. Is the author a reporter or a commentator? Apparently both, given that there doesn't seem to be a bright line between hard news and opinion anymore.
However, at a time when media credibility and motivation are surrounded by more public doubts than ever, especially regarding slant and spin, that's just the kind of murkiness The Times doesn't need. Unless you have two heads, it's best not to wear two hats.
And to close this annus horribilis on a positive note, highest compliments to Adam Maida on his accompanying illustration. It might be the best depiction yet of the disconnect between this president's words and deeds.
Rather than a rollback from the Bush-Cheney excesses, there has been a doubling down in important respects. The chilling effect on national security reporting in particular has made it that much easier for the Trump agenda to double down yet again and allow less sunlight than ever on the extent of government intrusiveness without probable cause.
This article also unintentionally raises a journalistic issue that blurs the picture further on what a reader can expect from a given byline. Is the author a reporter or a commentator? Apparently both, given that there doesn't seem to be a bright line between hard news and opinion anymore.
However, at a time when media credibility and motivation are surrounded by more public doubts than ever, especially regarding slant and spin, that's just the kind of murkiness The Times doesn't need. Unless you have two heads, it's best not to wear two hats.
And to close this annus horribilis on a positive note, highest compliments to Adam Maida on his accompanying illustration. It might be the best depiction yet of the disconnect between this president's words and deeds.
2
In 2000, half of America elected a naif feel-good goofball who mirrored the 1960s rich bad boy era. Naturally, the other half then in 2008 elected a naif feel-good egghead who mirrored the 1980s MTV narcissist era. You get what you pay for. One of these days, perhaps, the nation will get a whole individual.
4
Maybe I misread the article but I make a distinction between Manning and Snowden, both of whom may be patriots deserving of clemency but are not "journalists", and any legal action against news media as such. Legal immunity for "whistle-blowing" leakers, as opposed to reporting journalisits, is a vexed problem. I'd certainly like to see Obama pardon Manning and Snowden, and appreciate their leaks but the practical political dynamics of coddling quite obvious lawbreakers is understandable. The only thing in this article that troubles me is Dana Priest's allegation, which is not very well explained.
2
Whether the Trump administration is as aggressive at reining in press freedom as the Obama administration is debatable. I suspect it won't be because Sessions is a true constitutionalist.
What is not debatable is that the NYT and like minded publications will be much more scathing in their coverage of government attempts to strong arm journalists than they were of the Obama administration. The term "pussycat" comes to mind.
The Obama administration emulated the example of left-wing governments down through history in its attempts to intimidate the press. While not as bad as Putin who has reputedly had his critics killed in gruesome ways, they were nevertheless blatant in their disregard of freedom of the press. Holder even lied about it to the Congress in the case of James Rosen, whose treatment at the hands of the Justice Department certainly deserved mention in this editorial. I doubt you will ever see a Republican DoJ do to a reporter what was done to Rosen.
What is not debatable is that the NYT and like minded publications will be much more scathing in their coverage of government attempts to strong arm journalists than they were of the Obama administration. The term "pussycat" comes to mind.
The Obama administration emulated the example of left-wing governments down through history in its attempts to intimidate the press. While not as bad as Putin who has reputedly had his critics killed in gruesome ways, they were nevertheless blatant in their disregard of freedom of the press. Holder even lied about it to the Congress in the case of James Rosen, whose treatment at the hands of the Justice Department certainly deserved mention in this editorial. I doubt you will ever see a Republican DoJ do to a reporter what was done to Rosen.
5
Here's one problem;
It's generally accepted that a reporter for the N.Y. Times is a member of The Press, the fourth estate, but how about a blogger who publishes from his home computer. Mr. Risen implies that the reporter alone should be allowed to evaluate the legitimacy of the source, and then whether the release of sensitive information will be more beneficial than harmful.
We are about to have a President where evidence indicates this position is only one along with his other ventures as real estate developer and television producer, so the assumption that a man who was elected by, and dedicating his life to the American people does not apply. This as the effect of casting doubt on the reasons for intimidating anyone who discloses information to the people.
It's generally accepted that a reporter for the N.Y. Times is a member of The Press, the fourth estate, but how about a blogger who publishes from his home computer. Mr. Risen implies that the reporter alone should be allowed to evaluate the legitimacy of the source, and then whether the release of sensitive information will be more beneficial than harmful.
We are about to have a President where evidence indicates this position is only one along with his other ventures as real estate developer and television producer, so the assumption that a man who was elected by, and dedicating his life to the American people does not apply. This as the effect of casting doubt on the reasons for intimidating anyone who discloses information to the people.
2
Obama hates the nation's press...they absolutely loved him for eight years, though, and Obama knew it:
"I am Barack Obama. Most of you covered me. All of you voted for me."
All of the NY Times' reporters did, anyway.
"I am Barack Obama. Most of you covered me. All of you voted for me."
All of the NY Times' reporters did, anyway.
1
Honest reporting? Objective journalists? For the next 4 years, my main source of so-called news will be this odious President-elect's Twitter account.
Not hard to figure out how President Obama got such good (and uncritical) press.
A President who could not even draft a grandfather clause in his signature legislation showed time and again how inept he was - yet the media never heaped the scorn upon him that he so richly deserved.
A President who could not even draft a grandfather clause in his signature legislation showed time and again how inept he was - yet the media never heaped the scorn upon him that he so richly deserved.
2
Fair point regarding the Obama Administration's enforcement of whistle-blower/leaker laws, but ultimately, you're obfuscating the Trump threat. The nonsensical, dangerous crackdown Trump has intimated about doesn't concern leakers and spies, but attacking his critics - a different, infinitely more draconian notion.
4
Stories of the kind that Risen wrote need to be vetted carefully by editors, based on the value to the public of the information as opposed to potential damage to the public interest in disclosing that information. As great as the NYT is, there are occasions when its editorial judgment on national security stories has been has been questionable. Risen's story was one of them. At the risk of belaboring the obvious, media organizations in a market economy are commercial entities that need to maintain and boost readership in order to sell advertising. Media managers --yes, even NYT editors --sometimes confuse public interest with potential reader clicks. (In Risen's case, I'm not sure the Times even gained more readers. Most of the attention seemed to come after he was subpoenaed). Trump is sui generis when it comes to media coverage. The press needs to focus on the threat he poses here and now and stop picking scabs from wounds that are old and minor.
1
This op-ed is one of the few eureka moments I have had reading a NYT op-ed. It says to me the nation's newspaper of record hires uneducated dolts and expects them to write Shakespeare because they are trained to be journalists. Mr Risen is probably still blaming the iceberg for the Titanic.
We are at the wake up and smell the coffee moment in Western history and the NYT gives us people like Risen, Friedman and the Arthur Brooks to guide us through the iceberg.
We are having the Socrates/Plato debate and we expect the Platonists to rescue our democracy. Doesn't anybody understand that if want to get back on the road to democracy somebody who believes in Socrates and democracy must be given an opportunity to speak.
We desperately need to educate philosophers, historians and poets and we have more than enough capable sane and competent young men and women who would like to spend their lives learning. There is no reason that our society can't shift some emphasis away from production and marketing to an area where we really need talent.
I understand men like Friedman and the Arthur Brooks are the best propagandists money has bought but the corporatist agenda has brought us to the brink and neither neoliberalism nor neoconservatism can pull us away from the edge.
Barack Obama is better than we deserved and 2016 brought only Donald and Hillary.
We are at the wake up and smell the coffee moment in Western history and the NYT gives us people like Risen, Friedman and the Arthur Brooks to guide us through the iceberg.
We are having the Socrates/Plato debate and we expect the Platonists to rescue our democracy. Doesn't anybody understand that if want to get back on the road to democracy somebody who believes in Socrates and democracy must be given an opportunity to speak.
We desperately need to educate philosophers, historians and poets and we have more than enough capable sane and competent young men and women who would like to spend their lives learning. There is no reason that our society can't shift some emphasis away from production and marketing to an area where we really need talent.
I understand men like Friedman and the Arthur Brooks are the best propagandists money has bought but the corporatist agenda has brought us to the brink and neither neoliberalism nor neoconservatism can pull us away from the edge.
Barack Obama is better than we deserved and 2016 brought only Donald and Hillary.
1
Amazing! James Risen is one of the most valuable and courageous reporters we have and the fact that most readers fail to credit his warning is shocking. This level of sentimentality towards Obama, this preemptive nostalgia, shows how little attention Times' readers have paid to Obama's actual record. Do they realize that Obama himself lost this election with his abysmal failure to leave our country either more live-able or more humane? More sanctimonious, more hostile to painful information, it certainly is.
2
Blame Obama stills sells. Article makes sense, if you don't think about it.
Another example of "journalist " trash talk displacement of meaningful reporting.
Another example of "journalist " trash talk displacement of meaningful reporting.
3
Another Baby Boomer crying about the "good old days."
Here's a better idea - let's stop pretending that every article isn't an Op Ed piece in disguise. Let's stop pretending that journalists are all paragons of virtue.
Maybe if reporters got back to reporting - rather than yelling things like "why did you murder your wife" while a suspect is led away in handcuffs -we'd have a little more respect for the press.
The disrespect of the press has been earned on the backs of the press' own behavior. Take your job more seriously and maybe people will take you more seriously.
Here's a better idea - let's stop pretending that every article isn't an Op Ed piece in disguise. Let's stop pretending that journalists are all paragons of virtue.
Maybe if reporters got back to reporting - rather than yelling things like "why did you murder your wife" while a suspect is led away in handcuffs -we'd have a little more respect for the press.
The disrespect of the press has been earned on the backs of the press' own behavior. Take your job more seriously and maybe people will take you more seriously.
2
Obama's administration didn't enabled Trump. Suppressing illegal leaks is vital. The media enabled Trump. He was given a free ride throughout his campaign until it was too late. Now that journalist want to get tough, Trump has taken his ball and gone home. He should have been exposed long ago and sent back up the escalator.
2
I am willing to take James Risen at his word that Obama has pursued more aggressive legal action against reporters than his predecessors, I think he is conflating Obama's actions to protect intelligence and operatives with Trump's hostility over how he and his family are portrayed in the media. Not only has Trump already targeted reporters (and a union boss, our former Secretary of State, and others), he has also set a precedent for his own presidency of just denying media access to his activities. Meanwhile, he tries to undermine all journalism by dismissing anything he dislikes as lies, and trying to pass his own party propaganda as news. (Of course, if he gets backlash for any of his "news updates" he backpedals and claims he's just tweeting.)
Regardless of how anyone feels about Obama, he is leaving office on January 20 and Trump is taking over. Trump has been clear that he is going to do what he wants to do and nobody is telling him otherwise. Do you seriously think Obama's treatment of the press has anything to do with it? If Trump wasn't so obsessed with his own hatred of the press, he would probably have reporters follow him everywhere and constantly tweet for him just because Obama didn't do that.
Do what you need to do to get over your own experience of being targeted, but Trump is all about doing Trump.
Regardless of how anyone feels about Obama, he is leaving office on January 20 and Trump is taking over. Trump has been clear that he is going to do what he wants to do and nobody is telling him otherwise. Do you seriously think Obama's treatment of the press has anything to do with it? If Trump wasn't so obsessed with his own hatred of the press, he would probably have reporters follow him everywhere and constantly tweet for him just because Obama didn't do that.
Do what you need to do to get over your own experience of being targeted, but Trump is all about doing Trump.
7
I am not sure Journalists are the answer to America's problem. In fact, I really don't know the answer, but just thought I would offer a suggestion based on a childhood experience. Many of us who grew up in small towns or on farms back during the Depression eventually discovered an "unfixable" problem: a dog. Yes, a dog. I have always been a "dog lover" or, if it be known, a lover of 'all creatures great and small". But sometimes one comes along which is beyond reach, beyond reason, beyond dogdom and beyond humanity. Now, bear with me, I only bring this up to talk about elections, and leaders - those we like and the others, you know whom I mean. This "beyond reach" dog chased everything including cars, tractors, wagons, skates, kids, EVERYTHING. And nobody knew what to do.... he hated every living creature _ he didn't attack, he didn't bite, he ANNOYED. More than any living creature has a right to do. Like the single, buzzing and biting mosquito; or the horn-honker behind you, or the parent of your girl-friend. THAT kind of annoyance....And now we have elected a similar creature to be OUR President, and we have nowhere to turn. Perhaps that suave, smooth, man-of-the-world Vladimir Putin could help. Nothing else has worked. Trump is still with us.......
1
Useless reporters who did nothing to stop Trump thanks for nothing
4
Under what distorted definition do you list Spec. 4 Manning in your article on whistle blowers? He as much a whistle blower as Aldrich Ames. He just did it for free.
I'll give Risen the benefit of the doubt that President Obama deserves some criticism, but this headline is ridiculous: "If Trump Targets Journalists, Thank Obama." Obama's interactions with journalists never extended beyond clamping down on leaks. Trump has made it clear that he would take action against journalists with whom he merely disagrees.
This is yet another false equivalence. If the press wants more respect, a little more care with the facts would help.
This is yet another false equivalence. If the press wants more respect, a little more care with the facts would help.
8
Trump might just embrace these powers with gusto, twisting them into a means to punish any journalist who doesn't tow the Trump line.
He might do something else, though. Something unexpected. He might just huff and puff, and vent on twitter, and then...do nothing. In Trump's world, everything has value for publicity and entertainment. Even leaks and negative stories. I can easily see him allowing damaging leaks and unflattering stories if they keep his name in the news. I could be wrong, but...it wouldn't surprise me. Nothing he does surprises me anymore.
He might do something else, though. Something unexpected. He might just huff and puff, and vent on twitter, and then...do nothing. In Trump's world, everything has value for publicity and entertainment. Even leaks and negative stories. I can easily see him allowing damaging leaks and unflattering stories if they keep his name in the news. I could be wrong, but...it wouldn't surprise me. Nothing he does surprises me anymore.
Whatever credibility the first half of this article may have carried was blown, by the use of the Valerie Plame scandal as an example. Miller and the Times were assisting the White House in disseminating false information about Iraq, while Plame's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson was refuting it. History has proven the Times to have been on the wrong side of that particular propaganda war.
3
Not to worry. When our new Republican totalitarian government kills ObamaCare, everything will be fine again, just like it was in 1929.
2
What a strange article! You start: "If Donald J. Trump decides as president to throw a whistle-blower in jail for trying to talk to a reporter, or gets the F.B.I. to spy on a journalist, he will have one man to thank for bequeathing him such expansive power: Barack Obama." But you only describe Obama using existing laws for his alleged crackdown. If Trump also cracks down on journalists, won't that be Trump's responsibility? Or is Trump a helpless tool of Obama? Will the author and a largechorus of journalists excuse Trump by loudly singing, "Obama made him do it"?
1
Obama is responsible for what Obama s did to the president
Trump is and will be responsible for what he did and and will do toward the press.
To think Trump treats the press poorly because of Obama's precedent, is to acknowledge a deep ignorance ofwhat makes Trump tic.
You got mugged by one guy. The media at large is getting mugged by the other. The guy who was the perpetrator in your case was not even the model of a copy- cat model for Trump's abuse and attack on ALL the media.
To blame Obama for Trumps egregious assaults on the free press is beyond stupid. Stupid, stupid article.
Trump is and will be responsible for what he did and and will do toward the press.
To think Trump treats the press poorly because of Obama's precedent, is to acknowledge a deep ignorance ofwhat makes Trump tic.
You got mugged by one guy. The media at large is getting mugged by the other. The guy who was the perpetrator in your case was not even the model of a copy- cat model for Trump's abuse and attack on ALL the media.
To blame Obama for Trumps egregious assaults on the free press is beyond stupid. Stupid, stupid article.
1
Obama's prosecutions and investigations of the press are not his only legacies of executive overreach. He has also set new standards for substantive executive action that will create a precedent that a president such as Trump may well find too intoxicating to avoid. First, Obama articulated the discredited constitutional notion that a president is free to take executive action with respect to domestic matters if the legislative branch fails to act (at least fails to act in a manner consistent with the executive's wishes). The overreaching danger of such a principle is obvious, especially in the hands of a Donald Trump. Second, a US president will never again submit an international agreement to Congress under the Treaty provisions of the Constitution. Obama's successful treatment of the Iran agreement as an executive action not requiring congressional approval makes it very easy for future presidents to sidestep a treaty vote in Congress. By pushing the limits of executive authority to execute his unilateral agenda without congressional involvement or approval, both domestically and internationally, Obama has left a very troubling legacy of unchecked executive authority. Democrats, be careful what you wished for.
So the Obama administration has targeted a Fox News reporter named James Rosen, and a New York Times reporter named James Risen, in similar circumstances involving their reporting from confidential sources? No wonder I've had trouble keeping them straight.
1
Federal employees who have the dirty secrets of their employers can always report them to their congressional representatives. Their senators and congressmen have a security clearance by virtue of their elected office. The whistleblowing employee can't be charged with giving classified information to unauthorized individuals. Maybe they won't see the thrill of having those secrets exposed in the media but someone will know about the situation that is problematic. They might even be protected from retaliation.
It's called Karma. Just as the Senate will find it's Karma..thank you Harry Reid. The irony is palpable.
I believe President Obama has done a good job in difficult circumstances, but the Justice Department under his administration has been disappointing.
It's disturbing that the Justice Dept devotes time & recourses to prosecute journalists, yet White Collar / Wall Street criminals get a slap-on-the-wrist fine, at best.
I think we all know why.
It's disturbing that the Justice Dept devotes time & recourses to prosecute journalists, yet White Collar / Wall Street criminals get a slap-on-the-wrist fine, at best.
I think we all know why.
1
While this is about pressure on the press, it is difficult to understand if the Administration was truly threatening freedom of the press. It sounds as if the Administration wanted to send the message that leaking information wasn’t to be tolerated. There isn’t enough information in the article to weigh the significant information the Administration wanted to control versus information reporters were sharing. But, about the premise that Obama paved trumps way, trump didn’t need any help.
It’s human nature. In the absence of information rumors become the truth and once someone believes rumors, it’s nearly impossible to get them to believe the truth, and THAT’s what trump employed for 2-years. Trump villainized reporters so much that his followers learned to believe trump, in spite of the reported truth refuting trump. With daily coverage of trump rallies, he made reporters his complicit villains who flooded the air with trumps obfuscations and outright lies. Reporters repeatedly aired statements against Clinton, comments re her likability and trustworthiness, so much they ringed true to the untutored ears. Reporters created the monster and reporters didn’t learn anything with all the free information. Now you’re worried that trump is going to be an adversary? If trump is called on his lies, he has two combat forms, public humiliation and law suits. If you don’t succumb to one, you’ll go bankrupt with the other. Don’t blame Obama for the future that the press helped create.
It’s human nature. In the absence of information rumors become the truth and once someone believes rumors, it’s nearly impossible to get them to believe the truth, and THAT’s what trump employed for 2-years. Trump villainized reporters so much that his followers learned to believe trump, in spite of the reported truth refuting trump. With daily coverage of trump rallies, he made reporters his complicit villains who flooded the air with trumps obfuscations and outright lies. Reporters repeatedly aired statements against Clinton, comments re her likability and trustworthiness, so much they ringed true to the untutored ears. Reporters created the monster and reporters didn’t learn anything with all the free information. Now you’re worried that trump is going to be an adversary? If trump is called on his lies, he has two combat forms, public humiliation and law suits. If you don’t succumb to one, you’ll go bankrupt with the other. Don’t blame Obama for the future that the press helped create.
This article appears to be nonpartisan and objective, and it raises an important point about Obama's administration. But the analogy with Trump and the claim that it was the present government that paved the way for Trump's attacks on press is unjustified and unfair. Mr. Obama has generally treated journalists with respect and care, while Mr. Trump has been openly threatening the freedom of press. The title and the message of this articles have very little to do with the arguments presented.
1
Maybe when your newspaper starts calling out these abuses on the front page when they happen, instead of relegating them to vacation week op-ed pieces 8 years too late, the media will be able to begin the long road toward rehabilitating its image.
1
If you think Obama's administration has been bad for the press, blame Obama. But, the writer's complaints about Obama are a relic of the old universe; they are like watching the light from a star now burned out. This is not the world that now exists after Trump's arrival.
If you think Trump is bad for the press, blame social media or, of course, specifically, 140-character messaging. With twitter, there's no need for the press, free or otherwise, and that's the point. Trump doesn't need to control the press or seek out leakers, etc. With twitter, he creates his own factual universe and makes "the press" irrelevant. I've seen no indication that anyone or anything has any control over this, and that includes Obama.
If you think Trump is bad for the press, blame social media or, of course, specifically, 140-character messaging. With twitter, there's no need for the press, free or otherwise, and that's the point. Trump doesn't need to control the press or seek out leakers, etc. With twitter, he creates his own factual universe and makes "the press" irrelevant. I've seen no indication that anyone or anything has any control over this, and that includes Obama.
1
I wonder if it's occurred to Mr. Trump, as intelligent as he is purported to be, that as you bask in the affection of your admirers, that nevertheless it might not be a good idea to have literally millions of people out there that absolutely hate your guts. especially since you're proud of the fact that you can spit in their faces with impunity
No president since JFK has charmed the press more than Obama. All those lengthy, thoughtful interviews given to friendly outlets (The New Yorker, The Atlantic, etc.). The joshing pleasantries during news conferences. The cool, insider references to pop culture and sports. And yet, as James Risen's excellent, necessary piece points out, no president has been so relentlessly unforgiving - one might say contemptuous - toward the media in First Amendment cases. Historians will have a field day when it comes to exploring the many troubling facets of the Obama Paradox.
An idiotic thought. If Trump and his people decide to lock up journalists they disagree with we should blame and "thank"them. Why should we "blame" the ex-president who did not lock any journalists up? This is classic diversionary thinking from a "respected" journalist who will certainly not be locked up. Obama hate remains strong.
1
A Times editor with a more nuanced view of reality should take Mr. Risen aside and explain that freedom of speech and a free press do not entail limitless unfettered access to official information. Many of Mr. Risen's arguments range from naive to downright embarrassing. Morison, Manning, and Snowden were government employees/contractors with security clearances and access to classified information. While they may have thought of their disclosures as "whistle blowing," they were also violations of national security laws, and any administration, including Obama's, is obliged to prosecute such behavior.
Bringing up Valerie Plame doesn't help Mr. Risen's arguments against Obama, who had nothing to do with her case. Scooter Libby, under the direction of VP Cheney, deliberately disclosed the identity of a covert US intelligence agent in direct violation of national security laws for political reasons that had nothing to do with whistle blowing. Rather than breaking down any "informal understanding...that leaks would not be taken seriously," the fact that Cheney dodged legal culpability for this crime and that Bush quickly commuted Libby's prison sentence set a dangerous precedent (by Bush, not Obama) for official misuse of national security information for political ends. The fact that journalists were cynically used as dupes in this endeavor speaks poorly of the judgement demonstrated by the journalists involved, not of Obama.
Bringing up Valerie Plame doesn't help Mr. Risen's arguments against Obama, who had nothing to do with her case. Scooter Libby, under the direction of VP Cheney, deliberately disclosed the identity of a covert US intelligence agent in direct violation of national security laws for political reasons that had nothing to do with whistle blowing. Rather than breaking down any "informal understanding...that leaks would not be taken seriously," the fact that Cheney dodged legal culpability for this crime and that Bush quickly commuted Libby's prison sentence set a dangerous precedent (by Bush, not Obama) for official misuse of national security information for political ends. The fact that journalists were cynically used as dupes in this endeavor speaks poorly of the judgement demonstrated by the journalists involved, not of Obama.
4
The author is correct. But I assumed all politicians are owned just front men for paid up supporters. So the real question is which of his backers requested he take this route.
And this is how Trump was elected: falsely equating liberals with conservatives. Some "government officials who talked to journalists."should be held accountable for their communications with the media. It is a central point of our democracy that individuals should not be invested with power that belongs to law and institutions, even if those laws or institutions are wrong and need to changed. If the individual chooses civil disobedience then so be it; they are not entitled to take the law into their own hands. That is bad precedent, just as it is okay to let some guilty person go free if their process was violated. The precedent is more important, otherwise we have no system and it is not rule of law but of whims of men. Snowden and Assange are the worst kind of criminal; they and others still do not know what they did was wrong. Why should one man, Assange, have had the power over the election where he was trying to ruin Clinton, with the result being Trump? Why not let a democracy pass laws where stricter oversight occurs, when there is a misuse of intelligence? Why should this be in the hands of one person?
1
Mr. Risen's point is well taken. President Obama has never had the heart of a liberal and this is but one of the ways that his presidency has been a disappointment. Of course he's not as bad as Trump in his treatment of the press, but the fact remains that he went after more whistleblowers than his predecessors, not only the author of this editorial, after promising transparency. If Trump is a 1 on a ten-point scale of democratic principles, Obama is only a 5, and that's important.
Obama's hypocrisy is also apparent in his failure to prosecute banksters after the Great Recession and his relentless deportations of undocumented immigrants. Let's also remember that he ignored unions when they needed him most.
Finally, Obama gets a F for his "support" of public education. I would love to see a similar editorial detailing all the ways that Obama has paved the way for Trump to destroy public schools. I will never forget that on Teachers Day, he publicly thanked - charter teachers. Not a word to the teachers who teach over 90% of our students in public schools.
We need to pay attention to these details, because they underline a key reason Democrats continue to lose elections: they have abandoned core values, and most of all, a sense of fairness and justice. They will continue to flounder until they can articulate a clear moral purpose.
Obama's hypocrisy is also apparent in his failure to prosecute banksters after the Great Recession and his relentless deportations of undocumented immigrants. Let's also remember that he ignored unions when they needed him most.
Finally, Obama gets a F for his "support" of public education. I would love to see a similar editorial detailing all the ways that Obama has paved the way for Trump to destroy public schools. I will never forget that on Teachers Day, he publicly thanked - charter teachers. Not a word to the teachers who teach over 90% of our students in public schools.
We need to pay attention to these details, because they underline a key reason Democrats continue to lose elections: they have abandoned core values, and most of all, a sense of fairness and justice. They will continue to flounder until they can articulate a clear moral purpose.
1
Once again, the Times is too late to report on an major issue that might have affected the Obama administration.
Whistle Blowing through the Police, FBI or Congress for criminal wrong doing within government is completely different for "leakers" sharing confidential information with a third party such as the press. I go crazy every time I hear the press report something that came from confidential sources within a government agency. First, there is no way to verify the authenticity of the information and two just because you are an employee in a position to know does not give you the unilateral right to divulge the information to other than a crime fighting organization without proper authorization.
Trump has no ambition to lock up reporters. As he's said, all he wants to do is change the libel laws so he can sue and make lots of money. That's it. Money. That's all he's been interested in all his life.
43
I disagree. He's just as desperate to protect his "image", if not more so. We've already seen him using his social media power to punish anyone who tarnishes it. I expect to see him use both once he assumes the presidency.
1
The comments here show that to the left, Obama is some sort of God figure who can do no wrong. Keep on ignoring that Obama has given Trump the precedent and the tools to crack down on journalists. Your outrage to predicted Trump prosecutions of journalists will always be weakened by the praise of Obama for doing the same exact thing. Just as was your protesting of the election of Trump when you lectured that protest against the coronation of Hillary would be outrageous.
12
Mr. Obama sure is a smooth talker, saying all the right buzz words and laying out his preferences, but then goes and does the exact opposite. It's really sad to see actual video of Obama talking so many progressive positions juxtaposed to the results of what he has done, or through his weakness, allowed to have been done. Whether it's giving us a national Romney care plan hatched out of the Herritage Foundation, permanent Bush tax cuts, more wars than Cheney could probably stomach, the suspension of habeas corpus, or this, the man has been a bitter disappointment. Just as the disaster of the Bush administration had led to the U.S. electing a black, junior senator with a muslim name, Obama has given us the disaster that awaits us in Trump.
4
Mr. Risen: I thought that Mr. Holder letting you off the hook was ill-advised, and I hope General Sessions, once confirmed, revisits it.
5
Obama is weak coward, his actions explain this. Notwithstanding, journalism is a media joke now. Nothing can be trusted. Everything is spun. I do not think it will recover. It will continue to decline. Another victim of technology.
5
Mr. Risen, you must be kidding. To claim that Pres. Obama has laid a path for Trump to act against journalists who publish articles he (Trump) doesn't like, is to make an absurd connection equal to marijuana use leading to heroin use. Donald Trump will most likely try to silence dissenting voices. But there are no moral obstacles for him, in case you haven't noticed. The man says and does whatever he wants. He's bullied disabled people, Gold Star parents, union leaders and even Boeing. Journalists should expect to bullied by President Trump. He'll call you unpatriotic, liars and worse. He's nuts. Don't blame that on President Obama.
1157
Just like CNN,MSNBC, abc, cbs & abc has silenced conservative talk. Wake brain dead radical liberals. Thats what trump is mad about, they are not news stations they are radical liberal mouth pieces. Why do you think Radicals lost the election?
2
Trump will have walked a path paved by a progressive(?) democrat.
Any my feeling is he will be no worse than Obama in this realm.
Any my feeling is he will be no worse than Obama in this realm.
Much of our problem with leaks of information has to do with our inability to deal with our new technology the internet. The ability to hack far out strips our ability to stop it and tweets and facebook only make it more difficult.
Hillary Clinton squandered an excellent chance for us to have a conversation about our leaky information systems as so much of the campaign was about her email servers. At least part of this discussion and her decision to keep her own server was triggered by the need for security which is a problem we all face when faced with our computers which give possible access to our information to anyone.
We have created the internet as a convenience , but people being who and what they are will abuse it and we have not faced this problem squarely.
Hillary Clinton squandered an excellent chance for us to have a conversation about our leaky information systems as so much of the campaign was about her email servers. At least part of this discussion and her decision to keep her own server was triggered by the need for security which is a problem we all face when faced with our computers which give possible access to our information to anyone.
We have created the internet as a convenience , but people being who and what they are will abuse it and we have not faced this problem squarely.
148
Beatrice, her decision might have been "very smart," but it cost her the Presidency.
No matter what Colin Powell might have told her, the rules had changed.
And shouldn't the person who yas ago told us all of a "vast right wing conspiracy" have been particularly scrupulous in following every rule and regulation, having already told us of that "vast right wing conspiracy" lying in wait? Even when she said that was at a time before Faux News was up and running with the following it has now, and hate radio was so widespread.
So, was she remarkably arrogant to think the rules did not apply to her, or unforgivably naive to think there would be no consequence to her action? After all, she took the Secretary of State job to burnish her foreign policy credentials IN ANTICIPATION OF RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT, right?
No matter what Colin Powell might have told her, the rules had changed.
And shouldn't the person who yas ago told us all of a "vast right wing conspiracy" have been particularly scrupulous in following every rule and regulation, having already told us of that "vast right wing conspiracy" lying in wait? Even when she said that was at a time before Faux News was up and running with the following it has now, and hate radio was so widespread.
So, was she remarkably arrogant to think the rules did not apply to her, or unforgivably naive to think there would be no consequence to her action? After all, she took the Secretary of State job to burnish her foreign policy credentials IN ANTICIPATION OF RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT, right?
1
I suggest that you blame Donald Trump for what Donald Trump does.
1001
@kwc
Care to give any examples other than what is presented here in this article?---
Sorry, but that would involve a bit of independent tought and research.
Care to give any examples other than what is presented here in this article?---
Sorry, but that would involve a bit of independent tought and research.
no way. HRC caused her own loss. Obama watched a thousand elected officials swing republican. This is all on a craven, feckless, naive and hubristic Dem party. They got what they had coming -- thanks to their own stupefying incompetence. Ivy League Liberals - what are they worth? Not much..! Hopeless.
1
Well done. Bravo!
Now Kelly Anne Conway can quote this New York Times column to blame Obama while defending Donald Trump from his many sins.
She keeps citing New York Times whenever it suits her talking points (on Russia: Obama is boxing Trump in; on Clinton emails), in case no one has noticed.
Now Kelly Anne Conway can quote this New York Times column to blame Obama while defending Donald Trump from his many sins.
She keeps citing New York Times whenever it suits her talking points (on Russia: Obama is boxing Trump in; on Clinton emails), in case no one has noticed.
545
Kelly Ann Conway is a twit. She couldn't find an original talking point is she was handed the alphabet.
2
I would hope that the New York Times will recall the credo of objectivity, and publish a rebuttle to this "analysis", which is clearly opinion and motivated by personal animosity. The fact that the Supreme Court sided with the Justice Department ought to merit a more nuanced approach than "it's all Obama's fault". And there are quite a lot of people, myself included, who don't think publishing the names of the people who serve as our spies - at extreme risk to themselves - is justified on right-to-know grounds.
603
They won't post my previous comment that included this link. Let's see if the NYT can handle a dissenting opinion.
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-pub...