...than any administration in history.
But then, they were rightfully exposing things like Fast and Furious, Solyndra, I.R.S. targeting.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Must have done well in Logic at ND.
(no message)
I don't think these people were whistleblowers using the "form" or whatever that went through the proper channels, like the current Ukraine WB.
I think these articles are using "whistleblower" to describe people that leaked sensitive information to the press, and not using the IG/Congressional channels.
It bothers me that you are engaging in this campaign to muddy the waters. It doesn't seem that the journalistic profession cared much for Obama's actions, but they seem unrelated to what is going on here.
which made him/her look like a 2nd-hand info leaker not a whistleblower. Only after contacting house D members and likely with external help, he/she filed the formal complaint form. At this moment technically say he/she no longer is a whistleblower. It is just that he didn't tell ICIG that he already leaked the info to the House D office. ICIG let him fill the form without knowing it.
(no message)
(no message)
If what Eli is saying was true, then he contacted select members of Congress, and apparently was put on the proper path.
Is there precedent to say that those actions are not going through proper channels?
anything about it. I just don't like to be informed only by soundbite report or headline news.
Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/02/us/politics/adam-schiff-whistleblower.html
Everything I read seems to say that he turned it into the IG first, and then Congress had to demand it.
Are you saying that he leaked information to members of Congress before he wrote the report? Is that what people were prosecuted for during the Obama administration?
I guess I'd like to see examples of that.
(no message)
(no message)
I was more or less saying that the "liberal media" agreed with your overall assessment of Obama's handling of leaks. They thought he as being an asshole. They and you may well be right. It just has nothing to do with the current situation, in my opinion. At least as far as I can tell.
(no message)
I am missing the joke.
I am interested to hear whether you think there is journalistic professionalism only in media outlets that support your personal political views.
Such mindless partisan bullshit.
It turns out that Congressmen often spoke to an empty chamber. Knowing that, and not wanting to be embarrassed about that, both sides agreed that the C-SPAN cameras would never be zoomed out to show the chamber...the cameras (again, by mutual agreement) would be kept in close-up on whomever was the speaker at the moment.
And yet, Tip O'Neill decided one day to pull the cameras out to embarrass a Republican who was speaking as if to a full House. O'Neill had the cameras expose the fact that he was speaking to an empty chamber.
It occurred to me that if we fast forward to the Clinton years, and if Gingrich did the same thing to a Democrat, and if you cried foul about the evil GOP violation of the mutual agreement, and I said, "Hey...Tip O'Neill did it." You would then say, "Whataboutism. You are just like the Soviets."
The Dem strategy is to always be the first to violate a rule of law or ethics, and then when the GOP does it, you pursue their violation, and not allow "whataboutism" as a defense. It is a brilliant political strategy, but it is also cynical and unethical to the utmost. And, you make your unethical behavior worse when you act like you are being noble. You are taking the lowest road with this "no whataboutism" strategy, because you know that you are being two-faced about pursuing non-Democrats, and you don't want people to talk about that fact, so you are now trying to demonize "whataboutism" to avoid discussing the substance of your hypocrisy.
The main reason whataboutism is awful is because it deflects from the current issue.
But it is also awful when it is used to compare apples with oranges. Much of what Trump does has no precedent.
Like what is happening now. No IGs have ever gone to Congress like this.
It’s bad, Ned.
(no message)
Where somebody submitted a WB complaint to the IG's office, and then was prosecuted, during the Obama administration?
(no message)
(no message)
The left makes up the rules. One of their rules is that their rules don't apply to them. Sort of like the laws that Congress passes that don't apply to them. So they can play the whataboutism card against the right but it doesn't apply to them.
Aided and abetted by a corrupt MSM they get away with it.
That’s where the term comes from.
We’d point out that they had thousands of people in gulags; they’d say “what about all thb black people who were lynched in your country?!”
It is a convenient way to avoid addressing the issue at hand. It distracts the tards.
That's all we have left in the US, though.
The left constantly accuses the Right of doing X, Y and Z...things the Left did when the Left was in charge before...and apparently things you will do again. You aren't actually saying that X, Y and Z shouldn't be done at all. You are only saying that the right shouldn't do them. I say whataboutism to point out true hypocrisy.
It is only partisan politics if you never intend to recognize that you do these things...it is only partisan politics if you intend to engage in the same behavior. It is you who makes it partisan.
if you would say, "Yes, we did it too. Let's create a system of checks to make sure that no one ever does this," then it would be us working together to create a system of fair governance. But you don't do that. When you are in power, we start hearing about how the Constitution is a living breathing document and it was never intended to stop good people like you from doing things. Of course, that is total partisan BS.
Makes sense, since this crap is indefensible. Trump’s has to deflect and pretend that all sides do the same thing.
We ought to be able to have general principles, one of which might just be that trying aid to investigations off political opponents is wrong.
I do agree we ought to have general principles. What we don't need is people who want to enforce those principles only when such enforcement is to their own political advantage.
Or is it "whataboutism" to point out that you do the very thing you accuse others of doing?
(no message)
(no message)
You really should not worship the man like that. He does not give two shits about you.
Demanding that they investigate Trump?
Oh boy...
That devious sob