The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Politics
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Politics Where we learn not to think less of others who don't share our views

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-09-2013, 08:59 AM   #1
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
Call Adak..... It's baaaaack !

Name:  Benghazi.jpg
Views: 473
Size:  1.8 KB

Remember Lindsey Graham's political manoeuvre of blocking ALL of Obama's nominees ....

NY Times
BILL CARTER and MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT
11/8/13

CBS to Correct Erroneous Report on Benghazi
Quote:
As it prepared to broadcast a rare on-air correction Sunday
for a now-discredited “60 Minutes” report, CBS News acknowledged on Friday
that it had suffered a damaging blow to its credibility.
Its top executive called the segment “as big a mistake as there has been”
in the 45-year-old history of the celebrated news program.

The executive, Jeff Fager, conceded that CBS appeared to have been duped
by the primary source for the report, a security official who told a
national television audience a harrowing tale of the attack last year
at the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya.

On Thursday night it was disclosed that the official, Dylan Davies, had provided
a completely different account in interviews with the F.B.I.,
in which he said he never made it to the mission that night.

After that revelation, CBS decided to take multiple actions Friday.
It removed the report from the CBS News website,
and the correspondent for the segment, Lara Logan, appeared on the CBS
morning news show to apologize personally for the mistakes in the report.
And the company’s publishing division, Simon & Schuster, said it was suspending
publication of a book by Mr. Davies, in which he tells the same narrative
he recounted on “60 Minutes.”<snip>

Informed Thursday night by The Times that the F.B.I. version diverged
from what Mr. Davies said on “60 Minutes,”
CBS News quickly checked its own F.B.I. sources, Mr. Fager said, and learned
that what Mr. Davies had told the F.B.I. “differed from what he told us.”<snip>

The compelling account from Mr. Davies had provided congressional Republicans
with new ammunition to criticize the Obama administration.
<snip>

The day after the CBS report, several Republican senators held a news conference,
demanding that the administration allow congressional investigators to interview
survivors of the Benghazi attack.

In particular, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said that he would block
all administration nominations until it met the Republicans’ demands.

Last edited by Lamplighter; 11-09-2013 at 09:06 AM.
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2013, 08:02 AM   #2
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
As a kid in California, I was taken by the name.... Point Mugu...
thinking it's where everyone wore coke bottle glasses.

LA Times
11/17/13

Drone hits Navy ship, 2 sailors hurt; officials seek cause

Quote:
Officials are trying to determine why a drone being used as part of
a Navy training exercise malfunctioned off the Ventura County coast Saturday.
Two sailors suffered minor burns in the incident, the Navy said in a statement.<snip>

The sailors aboard the USS Chancellorsville were using the drone
to test the ship's radar-tracking system, something done on a regular basis.
The drone, a 13-foot-long aircraft with a wingspan of nearly 6 feet,
was being controlled from Point Mugu.

Around 1:25 p.m., the drone slammed into the port side of the ship,
a guided missile cruiser with a crew of about 300.
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2013, 12:38 PM   #3
tw
Read? I only know how to write.
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
It could have been worse. The original battle of Chancellorsville used obsolete technology and resulted in 30,400 casualties. This time only two were hurt. And it may have cost about the same amount of money.
tw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2013, 09:28 AM   #4
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplighter View Post
Call Adak..... It's baaaaack !

NY Times
BILL CARTER and MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT
11/8/13

CBS to Correct Erroneous Report on Benghazi
As a followup to this event...

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
David Hinckley
11/26/13

Lara Logan, producer ordered to take leave in aftermath of '60 Minutes' Benghazi reporting scandal
Quote:
An embarrassed CBS News Tuesday sent reporter Lara Logan on a leave of absence
in the wake of her discredited "60 Minutes" report on the Benghazi attack.

CBS News Chairman Jeff Fager called the report "a regrettable mistake."
He said Logan and her producer, Max McLellan, had been asked to take
the leaves of absence and had agreed to do so. There was no indication how long they will last.

In a CBS memo obtained by the Huffington Post, Fager also said,
"As executive producer (of '60 Minutes'), I am responsible for what gets on the air.
I pride myself in catching almost everything, but this deception got through and it shouldn't have."
As CBS News Chairman of 60 Minutes, Jeff Fager says he is responsible.
IMO: ... so Fager should also take a leave of absence.
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2013, 06:19 PM   #5
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
I suspect Grace Hopper was a much better programmer than the
Google mathematician/editor who created this Google Doodle...
Attached Images
 
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2013, 07:21 PM   #6
Adak
Lecturer
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 796
You know how Obama and Co. have said they didn't lose anything saving GM?

Seems the facts now coming out, show that to be a 10 Billion dollar lie:

Quote:
US government lost around $10bn on GM bailout
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25309673

I believe Obama did the right thing by saving GM, but he should STOP lying about it, over and over.

On Benghazi:

I was duped as well as CBS and the reporter. I guess Davies wanted to be a "big shot" for awhile, and made up the story quite well.

Unfortunately, we STILL can't speak to the actual survivors of the attack at the Consulate in Benghazi, by Obama's decree!

What a sorry state for getting the truth out - which would make Obama look like a stupid ass, of course. That's WHY we have the shut up decree in place. If his popularity dropped any lower, we'd have to use negative numbers - and mid-term elections are coming up in 2014.

Last edited by Adak; 12-09-2013 at 07:32 PM.
Adak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2013, 10:54 PM   #7
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
It was 12 Billion, but subtract the preserved $39.4 billion in personal and social insurance tax collections in 2009 and 2010.
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 12:35 PM   #8
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adak View Post
You know how Obama and Co. have said they didn't lose anything saving GM?

Seems the facts now coming out, show that to be a 10 Billion dollar lie:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25309673

I believe Obama did the right thing by saving GM, but he should STOP lying about it, over and over.

<snip>
We'll call that one Adak#3

But to your point about GM...there were two components to the GM bail out:
1) Loans to GM which GM did paid back in full years ago,
2) and then just last Friday the Government sold it's stock in GM" - at a loss of ~$10B

- No "Obama lie" with either one of these components

Stock and bond owners and others did lose $ with the GM bankruptcy
and sale of GM operating assets to a "new GM" financial body.
So did the government, but people like to say: "That's capitalism"

But since you say you "believe Obama did the right thing by saving GM", where's the beef ?

USA Today
24/7 Wall St.
December 9, 2013

Report: GM bailout saved 1.2 million jobs
Quote:
Here is an analysis by 24/7 Wall St. of the report on bailout benefits in jobs and taxes:

That bailout involved about $51 billion in taxpayer funds overall -- with $49.5 billion going
into GM directly for what was originally a 60.8% equity stake in the company.
The Treasury Department said late today that it recouped $39 billion from the sale of that stake, for a loss of $10 billion.

In a new report released Monday, the Center for Automotive Research
Quote:
(CAR) reckons that the federal government bailout of General Motors Co. (NYSE: GM)
saved 1.2 million U.S. jobs and preserved $34.9 billion in personal income
and social insurance (Social Security, Medicare) payments.

The bulk of those jobs and tax payments would have been lost in 2009 and 2010
and would have recovered (mostly) by now without federal intervention,
but the U.S. auto industry would look considerably different had both GM and Chrysler been allowed to go under. ...

... Ford Motor Co. (NYSE: F) did not accept any federal bailout funds,
but CEO Alan Mullaly said last year,
Quote:
"If GM and Chrysler would've gone into free-fall,
that could've taken the entire supply base into free-fall also,
and taken the U.S. from a recession into a depression.
That is why we testified on the behalf of our competitors even though
we clearly did not need precious taxpayer money."
Chrysler received $1.9 billion in federal funds before being taken over by Italy's Fiat SpA.

What U.S. taxpayers avoided, according to CAR, was the loss of about $105.3 billion
in transfer payments plus the loss of personal and social insurance tax collections
to the tune of 768% of the net investment of $11.8 billion in GM
and $1.9 billion (none recovered) in Chrysler.
Including jobs related to the auto industry, the federal bailout preserved 2.6 million jobs'
in the U.S. economy in 2009 alone and $284.4 billion in personal income in 2009 and 2010.

<snip>
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 12:12 AM   #9
BigV
Goon Squad Leader
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Seattle
Posts: 27,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adak View Post

Adak #2
On Benghazi:

I was duped as well as CBS and the reporter. I guess Davies wanted to be a "big shot" for awhile, and made up the story quite well.

Unfortunately, we STILL can't speak to the actual survivors of the attack at the Consulate in Benghazi, by Obama's decree!

What a sorry state for getting the truth out - which would make Obama look like a stupid ass, of course. That's WHY we have the shut up decree in place. If his popularity dropped any lower, we'd have to use negative numbers - and mid-term elections are coming up in 2014.
I bet you can't prove this, mr "getting the truth out".

Of course, you ALREADY believe the President looks like a stupid ass, so, whatever you find will only reinforce your already made up and closed mind. Your posts are simple and boring.
__________________
Be Just and Fear Not.
BigV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2013, 12:57 PM   #10
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
How's this for 'in your face' jurisprudence...

Business Insider
Brett LoGiurato
Dec. 20, 2013

Judge Completely Trolls Justice Scalia In Striking Down Utah's Gay Marriage Ban
Quote:
When U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia handed down a scathing dissent
in United States v. Windsor
— the case in which the high court deemed the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional —
he warned of the domino effect it would have on state bans on gay marriage.

Scalia warned that the Supreme Court's reasoning that struck down the Defense of Marriage Act
— which denied federal benefits to same-sex couples —
could be used to strike down state laws banning same-sex marriage.

Scalia, who's notoriously anti-gay marriage, was saying this was a bad thing. In an interesting twist,
Utah's Judge Shelby quoted Scalia's negative prophecy in his pro-gay marriage opinion.

Shelby then wrote that he "agreed" with that part of Scalia's opinion, and offered his response.
Though Scalia meant it as some kind of dire warning,
Shelby cited the Supreme Court's decision as a reason to overturn Utah's law:

Quote:
The court agrees with Justice Scalia’s interpretation of Windsor
and finds that the important federalism concerns at issue here are nevertheless insufficient to save
a state-law prohibition that denies the Plaintiffs their rights to due process and equal protection under the law.
Shelby also cited Scalia's dissent in 2003's Lawrence v. Texas, the landmark case
in which the Supreme Court ruled that laws banning sodomy were unconstitutional:
Quote:
The court therefore agrees with the portion of Justice Scalia’s dissenting opinion
in Lawrence in which Justice Scalia stated that the Court’s reasoning logically extends
to protect an individual’s right to marry a person of the same sex.
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2013, 10:36 AM   #11
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402

Washington Post

Andrea Peterson
December 20,2013

This FBI agent had a boneheaded plan to copyright a secret interrogation manual
Quote:
<snip>The author of a sensitive FBI interrogation manual submitted the document for copyright protection
-- in the process, making it available to anyone with a card for the Library of Congress to read.<snip>

First is that the American Civil Liberties Union fought a legal battle with the FBI over access to documents just like this
… But the copy they released to the ACLU was heavily redacted --
unlike the 70-plus page version of the manual Baumann reviewed at the Library of Congress.
<snip> For instance, the full version includes a sentence that says
the manual is intended for the FBI's "clean" teams
-- the investigators charged with collecting information for use in federal prosecutions.
"That raises the question of whether teams collecting information that's not for use in federal courts
would have to follow the manual's (already permissive) guidelines at all," says Baumann.

And second, the manual almost certainly shouldn't even qualify for a copyright because it is a government work.
Anything "prepared by an officer or employee of the United States government
as part of that person's official duties" is not subject to copyright in the United States.

And yet, according to Baumann, the author of the manual deposited a version
of the interrogation manual dated 2008 with the U.S. Copyright Office in 2010.
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:21 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.