Thrilla
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2011
- Messages
- 20,295
- Reaction score
- 9,801
- Location
- Texas, Vegas, Colombia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
The goal post is exactly where I left it on page four. How is that email at all a threat? I can feel threatened by a lot of things, and I can claim to feel threatened by a lot more. That doesn't make every loud noise a threat.
So you are saying that Nixon was a good guy who should not have answered for his crimes?
Fill in the details.
I don't even need one. Because I don't think that the email in question was a threat.
Lots of that going around now.
Get help
i'm a lil shocked at the attacks on Woodward in here...
we aren't talking about some shmoe reporter that hasn't made his bones... it's Bob Woodward, arguably the best reporter this country has ever seen.
it's just business as usual... folks love Bob when he's "attacking" their political opponents.. they hate him when he goes after their side.
oh, and Gene Sperling is the guy who yelled at Bob and sent the email ....and the whole White House is miffed at Woodward for having the audacity to tell the truth about sequestration.
Did Woodward finally release the email and the name?
i'm a lil shocked at the attacks on Woodward in here... we aren't talking about some shmoe reporter that hasn't made his bones... it's Bob Woodward, arguably the best reporter this country has ever seen.
Did Woodward finally release the email and the name?
I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today. My bad. I do understand your problems with a couple of our statements in the fall — but feel on the other hand that you focus on a few specific trees that gives a very wrong perception of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here.
But I do truly believe you should rethink your comment about saying saying that Potus asking for revenues is moving the goal post. I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim. The idea that the sequester was to force both sides to go back to try at a big or grand barain with a mix of entitlements and revenues (even if there were serious disagreements on composition) was part of the DNA of the thing from the start.
Gene: You do not ever have to apologize to me. You get wound up because you are making your points and you believe them. This is all part of a serious discussion. I for one welcome a little heat; there should more given the importance. I also welcome your personal advice. I am listening. I know you lived all this. My partial advantage is that I talked extensively with all involved. I am traveling and will try to reach you after 3 pm today. Best, Bob
Did Woodward finally release the email and the name?
Bob Woodward is just another critter who ran his mouth before he turned his brain on.
Not the first time and it won't be the last time.
They hung the last perfect guy on the cross.
I'll bet that a lot of people in the G-nO-P regret running Mitt RMoney last year. If they don't, they should
"Better days are coming." ~ But not for today's out of touch, running out of time, GOP.
I bet when Bob Woodward came down on the Bush White House, you were ready to take his word to the bank. But, now that he's kicking Obama's ass, Woodward is suddenly a liar.
Nice!
I'm sure Nixon believed the same thing about Bob running his mouth before he turned on his brain too.
I don't know if the linked story updated sometime after your posts, but I believe it's in the story
No clue yet on releasing of the email.
Woodward claimed Wednesday night that a White House aide sent him an email saying he would "regret" his comments. The aide was not identified, but an official familiar with the exchange told Fox News it was National Economic Council Director Gene Sperling. That was after Woodward wrote a column this past weekend claiming Obama was trying to re-write history -- regarding not only whose idea the sequester was, but also how it would take effect.
Read more: White House denies staffer threatened Watergate journalist Woodward | Fox News
Keep believing whatever you want to believe.
Wait and see how all this turns out for the G-nO-P.
Check the polls. The GOP is on the losing side of this kerfuffle.
That's all that I need to say on this.
Keep believing whatever you want to believe.
Wait and see how all this turns out for the G-nO-P.
Check the polls. The GOP is on the losing side of this kerfuffle.
That's all that I need to say on this.
1. I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today. My bad. I do understand your problems with a couple of our statements in the fall — 2. but feel on the other hand that you focus on a few specific trees that gives a very wrong perception of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here.
But 3. I do truly believe you should rethink your comment about saying saying that Potus asking for revenues is moving the goal post. I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim. The idea that the sequester was to force both sides to go back to try at a big or grand barain with a mix of entitlements and revenues (even if there were serious disagreements on composition) was part of the DNA of the thing from the start.
So the e-mail comes out and it's not the "threat" Bob Woodward comes out claiming it was:
1. He makes an apology. Good start to a threat I always say.
2. Tells him he's not focusing properly. Again, good lead up to a threat.
3. Big bad threat boiled down: Your opinion is wrong, and you'll be proven wrong eventually.
-------
I was waiting for: We'll ruin your journalism career or you'll never work in this town again!
I guess it was too much to hope for. Once again, much ado about nothing. The fact that Bob Woodward himself replied with the long version of 'it's cool dude', pretty much destroys any credibility the OP and Woodward had on calling the e-mail a threat.
Another unnamed official said it was Gene Sperling, not Bob Woodward.
Looks like Stalin himself would pen. This Whitehouse is a group of tyrants!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?