General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGreenwald: White House leaks for propaganda film
http://www.salon.com/2012/05/23/wh_leaks_for_propaganda_film/singleton/As is now well documented, the Obama administration has waged an unprecedented war on whistleblowers, prosecuting more of them under espionage statutes than all prior administrations combined: twice as many as all prior administrations combined, in fact. They are attempting, or have attempted, to imprison whistleblowers who exposed corrupt and illegal NSA eavesdropping, dangerously inept efforts to impede Irans nuclear program (which likely strengthened it), the destructive uses of torture, and a litany of previously unknown U.S.-caused civilian deaths and other American war crimes.
But theres one type of leak of classified information that the White House not only approves of but itself routinely exploits: the type that glorifies the President for propagandistic ends. The transparency group Judicial Watch brought FOIA lawsuits against the administration seeking information regarding the Osama bin Laden raid, but the administration insisted in federal court that the operation is secret and thus not subject to disclosure (even as they were leaking details about the raid to the press).
At the same time, Judicial Watch has also sued the White House seeking documents showing the administrations collaboration with Hollywood filmmakers The Hurt Locker director Kathryn Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal who have been planning a big-budget, studio film from Sony recounting the raid that killed bin Laden, oh-so-coincidentally scheduled for release in October, 2012, just before the election (thats clearly a coincidence because Democrats, unlike those Bush/Cheney monsters, do not exploit national security for political gain). And, oh, just by the way: as The New York Times reported in January, Michael Lynton, the Sony Pictures chief executive, has been a major backer of President Obama and last April attended and paid the donation fee for a high-priced political fund-raising dinner for the president on the Sony studio lot in Culver City, Calif., which was rented by the Democratic National Committee. As Maureen Dowd wrote last year:
snip
FarLeftFist
(6,161 posts)Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)time movies hoping for Oscars hopefuls are released (which this clearly will be), but I am queasy at the connections/timing. "The Right Stuff" release was also held the same problem for John Glenn's run.
RZM
(8,556 posts)Since the cutoff is the end of the year and the holiday season is a big time for movies, you often see Oscar contenders bunched together around Christmas.
Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)with September being the start. A lot of smaller films hit theaters in a limited run around December to qualify.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)And this:
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Or did he merely mock the notion that he wouldn't do any reporting?
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)I'm sure you don't agree.
And fwiw, you bet I'm glad if there was some sort of positive movie about Obama and getting bin Laden.
I welcome it. You see, I prefer Democrats and I prefer winning.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)classified info about an operation that the Admin claims that they cannot talk about because the info is classified.
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)Can't wait to see this movie.
struggle4progress
(118,041 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)struggle4progress
(118,041 posts)immigration as he is quick to support the Citizens United decision
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Three half truths but who's counting.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)Time to lash out with unsupported allegations, and put two and two together and get twenty-two.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)There is an actual legal process to be followed in order to fall under the 'whistleblower' law; one cannot unilaterally do what, say, Bradley Manning did and then call for legal protection under that law.
Greenwald calls people whistleblowers that are engaged in illegal activity, and that cheapens the term for those that are actually whistleblowers.
Greenwald isn't the guy that gets to make that determination.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)A whistleblower is an informant who reveals information of wrongdoing in order to inform the public and, if the wrondoing is ongoing, stop it.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)If you take the extra-legal route, don't be surprised when charged criminally.
Matters not what used to be, this law is in place now, and has been put in place in order to protect informants.
You cannot act unilaterally outside of the legal process, unless you are a vigilante.
Manning acted unilaterally.
He didn't have to, but he did.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)we'd be critical.
There are 4 other people who have been prosecuted during the Obama Admin under the Act. Manning isn't the only one being prosecuted.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)it's good to see Greenwald doing the bidding of a RW hack group:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Watch#Funding
In 2010 Judicial Watch released their list of "Washington's ten Most Corrupt Politicians." [38] Appearing on the list are:[39]
Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
Rahm Emanuel, Former Obama White House Chief of Staff
Senator John Ensign (R-NV)
Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA)
Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL)
President Barack Obama
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY)
Rep. Hal Rogers (R-KY)
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA)
Thanks Glenn, you're officially a hack!
struggle4progress
(118,041 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Link to the documents here:
http://www.scribd.com/JWatchDC/d/94447718-Judicial-Watch-Bin-Laden-Movie-DoD
It's amazing. I learned more about the raid while reading those 153 pages than a year's worth of chatter from the Admin.
villager
(26,001 posts)...but Bush-era tactics (like attacking the messenger!) are used to do it...
Tarheel_Dem
(31,211 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)brentspeak
(18,290 posts)Hear that, everyone? Criticize Obama - get called the Grand Wizard.
There are Fox News acolytes with higher standards than that.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)And here is his response: (Oh the horror of the evolution of an informed citizen. THE HORROR. THE HORROR!)
GG note: This post was written in 2005, one month after I began blogging. It was recently dug up by some Obama cultists trying to discredit my criticisms of the President (to understand what I mean by "Obama cultists," see this 2006 post I wrote about Bush cultists: exactly the same mentality). As my subsequent writing reflects over the next many years, this post does not remotely reflect my views on immigration. My response to someone who recently asked about it is here:
That was a 6 yrs ago: 3 weeks after I began blogging, when I had zero readers. I've discussed many times before how there were many uninformed things I believed back then, before I focused on politics full-time - due to uncritically ingesting conventional wisdom, propaganda, etc. I've written many times since then about how immigrants are exploited by the Right for fear-mongering purposes. I'm 100% in favor of amnesty, think defeat of the DREAM Act was an act of evil, etc. That said, I do think illegal immigration is a serious problem: having millions of people live without legal rights; having a legal scheme that is so pervasively disregarded breeds contempt for the rule of law; virtually every country - not just the U.S. insists on border control because having a manageable immigration process is vital on multiple levels. But that post is something I wrote literally a few weeks after I began blogging when nobody was reading my blog; it was anything but thoughtful, contemplative, and informed, and - like so many things I thought were true then - has nothing to do with what I believe now.
brentspeak
(18,290 posts)i.e. things like this, it's kind of a wash, right?
Autumn
(44,762 posts)Get ready for incoming fire.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
Autumn
(44,762 posts)keep trying.
brentspeak
(18,290 posts)Response to stockholmer (Original post)
Post removed
struggle4progress
(118,041 posts)How about the Thomas Drake case?
The FBI first raided Drake's home in 2007, somewhat before Obama was elected President. The eventual prosecutor came into position earlier that year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Andrews_Drake#2007_FBI_raids
The Secret Sharer
Is Thomas Drake an enemy of the state?
by Jane Mayer May 23, 2011
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/05/23/110523fa_fact_mayer
William Welch, head of Justice Department's anti-corruption unit, to leave post
William M. Welch II has led the public integrity unit since 2007.
By Carrie Johnson
Thursday, October 22, 2009
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/21/AR2009102101899.html
So this is an investigation that began before Obama ever took office.
How about Jeffrey Sterling?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Alexander_Sterling
So there's another investigation that began before Obama ever took office.
It's actually fine with me if Greenwald disagrees with the prosecutions; I might well disagree with some of them myself, especially since I've never been a fan of such Reagan-era innovations as the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. But, as usual, Greenwald's discussion is nauseatingly dishonest and (what is perhaps worse) entirely uninformative: one learns nothing about the dynamics of power from Greenwald and so gains no insights into how we might fight back -- unsurprising, since Greenwald is a libertarian ideologue who does essentially no independent research and hence really cannot be expected to inform us
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)states "prosecution" and specifically prosecution using the Espionage Act.
And one of the tools of fighting back is, you know, knowledge.
struggle4progress
(118,041 posts)Report for the fiscal year 2010) considers over 150K cases each year, involving nearly 200K potential defendants, and (from these) begins to prosecute about one case every two minutes, during every working day through the year
To my view, Greenwald is simply bat-shit crazy if he imagines this to be a centralized process: it is institutionally impossible, based on the numbers, for the process to be centralized. US Attorneys are given wide discretion about what they prosecute
About a million potential defendants have come to the attention of the Department of Justice, for example, since the investigation of Drake began. That Drake's case did not simply sink below the horizon, under the onslaught of newer matters, indicates that someone with discretion regarded the case as worth pursuing. That "someone with discretion" is likely to be a career DoJ employee, and in Drake's case it is probably Welch, who has been there at least since the Bush-II era
Greenwald is a little bullshit noise-maker: his noise doesn't inform us
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)struggle4progress
(118,041 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)under the Espionage Act. Am I wrong?
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Mr.Turnip
(645 posts)I mean O MY GOD The President likes media that portrays him positively WHAT A SHOCK!
And the Administration is sharing facts about events it was involved in with filmmakers looking to make films on said events WHAT AN EVIL ACT!