HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Anyone else watching Lawr...

Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:32 PM

Anyone else watching Lawrence O'Donnell tonight?

I'm no fan of Hillary Clinton, but during his segment on the email flap he sounds more like a Faux News host than an MSNBC one. Is he just trying to keep his job with the change in focus on MSNBC? If so, I can go to bed earlier.

22 replies, 1686 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 22 replies Author Time Post
Reply Anyone else watching Lawrence O'Donnell tonight? (Original post)
mak3cats Mar 2015 OP
jberryhill Mar 2015 #1
mak3cats Mar 2015 #5
Name removed Mar 2015 #2
mak3cats Mar 2015 #3
DURHAM D Mar 2015 #4
awake Mar 2015 #9
DURHAM D Mar 2015 #10
awake Mar 2015 #12
oldandhappy Mar 2015 #6
Spazito Mar 2015 #7
awake Mar 2015 #11
Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #15
awake Mar 2015 #16
Spazito Mar 2015 #18
awake Mar 2015 #21
Spazito Mar 2015 #22
bigwillq Mar 2015 #8
R B Garr Mar 2015 #13
Adrahil Mar 2015 #14
JI7 Mar 2015 #17
bigdarryl Mar 2015 #19
Puglover Mar 2015 #20

Response to mak3cats (Original post)

Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:35 PM

1. Remarkably, Nielsen is reporting one viewer

So, surprisingly, that must be you and no, no one else is watching.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:45 PM

5. Very funny!

I usually turn off the TV after Rachel. I guess I'm late to the party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mak3cats (Original post)


Response to Name removed (Reply #2)

Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:43 PM

3. I'm not attacking the messenger, but his message and the delivery thereof...

...he was parroting some points I heard earlier from more right wing sources, and he has adopted the habit of talking over his guests rather than letting them speak. I did not call him (or Rachel) a liar.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mak3cats (Original post)

Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:43 PM

4. Third night in a row for him.

Last night I started thinking about Operation Mockingbird. Today's NBC/MSNBC, Washington Post and NY Times reporting confirmed it for me.

It has been 6 years since the Spooks have had a useful tool in the WH and they are salivating over the idea of another one of Poppy B's boys or any other total moron with an R after his name.

The last thing they want is someone who knows how their lying trade craft works. They are setting up more scandals as I type.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DURHAM D (Reply #4)

Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:48 PM

9. This "scandal" was self inflicted by HRC

The news media did not make up the fact the the emails were not keep as the 2009 rules said they needed to. HRC did this to her self and has no one else to blame.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awake (Reply #9)

Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:52 PM

10. It is not a scandal.

Its drivel that gives some people an adrenalin rush. Be careful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DURHAM D (Reply #10)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 12:00 AM

12. Scandal was the term you wrote

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mak3cats (Original post)

Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:46 PM

6. Have it on mute

I am tired of the shows all carrying the same three stories. Heads up MSNBC. Books are great!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mak3cats (Original post)

Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:47 PM

7. I was appalled at his rude behavior toward Jennifer Granholm...

his tone was awful. She handled it with more class than I could have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #7)

Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:58 PM

11. Jennifer Granholm was way out in left field

she actually said that it was ok to act as other Heads of the state department acted even when the rules changed in 2009, meaning the HRC could decide to not fallow the new rules because past heads acted under old rules so so could she use outdated rules if she wanted

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awake (Reply #11)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 12:14 AM

15. When did the rules get signed into effect?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #15)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 12:16 AM

16. 2009

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awake (Reply #16)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 10:35 AM

18. The law was changed in 2014, after Hillary Clinton left...

"Late in 2014 - long after Clinton left State - President Barack Obama signed an update to the Federal Records Law to "prohibit the use of private email accounts by government officials unless they copy or forward any such emails into their government account within 20 days," according to the National Archives and Records Administration."

I have found nothing that states she broke either rules or regulations.

What rule are you referencing re 2009?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #18)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 08:42 PM

21. From dailykos.com

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/03/1368342/-Let-us-look-at-the-law-re-Clinton-Emails#

".....The head of each Federal agency shall make and preserve records containing adequate and proper documentation of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, and essential transactions of the agency and designed to furnish the information necessary to protect the legal and financial rights of the Government and of persons directly affected by the agency’s activities

Important Point 1 There has been an argument that HRC maybe did not know about her obligation to store documents. This position is meritless: HRC was the head of a Federal Agency, and she by law had an obligation to preserve records throughout her agency. She by law cannot claim ignorance of her requirements.

44 USC Chapter 31 is implemented through regulations. Those regulations came about in 2009. See 74 FR 51014, October 2, 2009. These were published in the CFR in the 2010 edition of the CFR, and that is what I will be citing. Ms. Clinton was secretary of state at the rime the regulations were adopted and, by law, she was expected to have knowledge of them and implement them per 44 USC Chapter 31......."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awake (Reply #21)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 08:46 PM

22. This did not come into force until 2014...

Your link goes to an opinion by a poster at dkos, it is merely one opinion among many.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mak3cats (Original post)

Wed Mar 4, 2015, 11:47 PM

8. No (nt)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mak3cats (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 12:00 AM

13. Saw it and also thought it uncharacteristic of him.

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that he was raising his concerns in that manner to show that she has to be careful (as any candidate) to not have things like this take over the talking points. I kind of got that when David Axelrod mentioned that point, and O'Donnell seemed to agree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mak3cats (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 12:11 AM

14. He jumped the shark a bit, IMO

 

For example his "disbelief" about how a me policy might not be immediately implemented.

In my federal career, lots of rules weren't immediately implemented by everyone for the simple fact that it simply wasn't practical or effective.

Heck, once policy on electronic communications wasn't fully implemented until 5 years after the policy was issued

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mak3cats (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 12:44 AM

17. O'Donnell is not really a fan of the Clintons

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mak3cats (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 10:59 AM

19. I though I was looking at Fox News I guess this is the new and improved MSNBC

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mak3cats (Original post)

Thu Mar 5, 2015, 11:04 AM

20. Catching up on

"The Walking Dead". Essentially the same thing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread