As awful, awful as Bush was, at least he *asked*

[MannyGoldstein]

Last edited Wed Aug 21, 2013, 01:21 PM - Edit history (2)

Back in 2006, the NY Times came into posession of leaked information which exposed Bush's warrantless wiretapping program. Bush called some folks from the Times to the White House to *ask* them to not publish the info, the Times said "tough nuggies" and printed it anyway. So far as I know, the Bush White House did not threaten the Times staff with arrest for stolen state secrets, threaten their relatives, or any of the other stuff. As awful as the Bush Admin was, they understood some of the basics of a free press.

Things have changed. This White House does not like, nor respect, freedom of the press and will do its best to intimidate the Fifth Estate into "behaving". I wouldn't take Bush back over Obama, but i think the contrast in this area between the two Presidents shows how truly appalling this all is.

Update: as pointed out in JaneyV's reply below, the Bush Admin did make some noises about the NY Times being being a bad actor. But, to my knowledge, there was never the same level of overt intimidation as we see today:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/05/obama_s_justice_department_holder_s_leak_investigations_are_outrageous_and.html

[Rosa Luxemburg]

1. Bush did a lot of things that would make your hair stand on end

tip of the iceberg

[ProSense]

2. Bush

As awful, awful as Bush was, at least he *asked*

Back in 2006, the NY Times came into posession of leaked information which exposed Bush's warrantless wiretapping program. Bush called some folks from the Times to the White House to *ask* them to not publish the info, the Times said "tough nuggies" and printed it anyway. So far as I know, the Bush White House did not threaten the Times staff with arrest for stolen state secrets, threaten their relatives, or any of the other stuff. As awful as the Bush Admin was, they understood some of the basics of a free press.

Things have changed. This White House does not like, nor respect, freedom of the press and will do its best to intimidate the Fifth Estate into "behaving". I wouldn't take Bush back over Obama, but i think the contrast in this area between the two Presidents shows how truly appalling this all is.

...was such a bright spot compared to the British government. "Things have changed."

"I wouldn't take Bush back over Obama, but" he was sure a bright spot compared to Obama?

<...>

US government destructions of inadvertently released and disseminated classified material are rare, but they have occurred.

During a court battle over the frozen assets of a now-defunct Islamic charity, al-Haramain, the government in 2004 accidentally released to al-Haramain's lawyers a document that apparently indicated the NSA had surveilled the charity without a warrant and passed a record of the surveillance to the Treasury Department, apparently contributing to the asset freeze.

A court in Oregon kept the document in a secure facility. Years later, following lengthy litigation in multiple venues, Justice Department officials in California used a table leg and a chair leg in 2007 to destroy a laptop computer containing a court brief that described the document.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/20/us-government-destroy-computers-white-house

http://www.aclu.org/national-security/aclu-ad-president-lied-american-people-and-broke-law

Of course, Bush didn't get a "court order." He bypassed the FISA court and actually eavesdropped on Americans.

What's interesting about the most recent release is that the one incident that wasn't reported to Congress happened during the Bush administration, and it was reported to Congress by the Obama administration.

"As awful, awful as Bush was, at least he *asked*"

Why are you hyping Bush?

[sigmasix]

22. bush did threaten the NYT over this- why lie about it?

Bush also allowed his VP to out Valerie Plame over reports that the Bushies were lying about the facts being uncovered by intelligence personell. Bush tried to have our own people placed in deadly risk because of his unlawful NSA machinations. But you're sure Bush was better than Obama. I think you spilled some tea down the front of your favorite "I hate Obama" T-shirt- why dont you see if you can find another disguise- your Teabagger-approved Bush reconciliation and historical revisionism is giving your true intentions away. We know that Teabaggers believe Bush was a better president than Obama- when you repeat the meme you are identifying yourself as a dishonest stealth supporter of right wing "Libertarian" antiAmericanism. Maybe you could find a way to critisize the president for the color of his dogs next, since this bit of stupidity is one of the newest right wing conspiracy theories about the president; that he is a racist dog owner that refuses to own a white dog and hates white PEOPLE too.
Couldn't you do this with a bit of maturity? Maybe wait to find the truth as opposed to running around with hair on fire? That's what deliberative adults do.

[joeglow3]

32. Now, can you address what our current president is doing?

I for one will not defend Bush. However, this tactic is one used by my children: ignore what they are being disciplined for and, instead, rattle off the unrelated things that their brothers did that were wrong.

[Recursion]

3. Whom has the current administration told not to publish something? (nt)

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Besides saying that Miranda's detention was designed to be a warning...

http://www.care2.com/causes/4-journalists-jailed-for-telling-the-truth.html

[Recursion]

7. Talk to the British Conservatives about their government

Risen isn't in jail, but faces contempt charges for hiding, not revealing, information. Talk to the judge.

Brown faces jail time for having stolen credit card information.

Journalists were among those mass-arrested at Occupy rallies, along with commuters (including me, twice). That's the opposite of targeting journalists.

Shaye was jailed by the Yemeni government.

So, just to recap, as your link points out, the number of journalists the administration has told not to publish something is zero, right?

[MannyGoldstein]

9. And if Risen didn't publish the info, he'd still be prosecuted?

The White House understands that prior restraint is settled law. But bodyslamming members of the press for doing their jobs is not illegal, so they do that instead to encourage docility.

[Hekate]

4. Really, Manny? You expect us to swallow that?

[MannyGoldstein]

6. No. Other than these simple, easily-verified facts

I got nothin'.

[Go Vols]

8. I voted leave.

[MannyGoldstein]

10. I guess I should assume that my fan club alerts on anything I post.

Sigh.

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. Hey we are in the same club

At least they don't follow you around in the great beyond

[kenny blankenship]

11. As I recall it, the NY Times SAT on the story for about one and a half years

and published only after 2004 elections, when the moment of greatest danger to Mr. Bushler was passed. Who's to say how the vorig-führer obtained that "decent interval", allowing for his reelection and the preservation of his Repuke majorities in Congress? There may be more to that story than we have learned, even now.

[Go Vols]

12. results

As awful, awful as Bush was, at least he *asked*
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023502570

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Ugh, fuck Bush.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Aug 20, 2013, 11:37 PM, and the Jury voted 3-3 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: That George Bush was bad but at least he wasn't Democratic President of the United States of America, Barack Obama.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: Inappropriate for a Democratic website. It's all spam to me.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: This is a good post,why alert on the US going to shit? Because Obama is a D?
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Manny is the King of sarcasm.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[MannyGoldstein]

13. Well that's pretty disturbing

I guess simple, verifiable facts can make people uncomfortable enough to want to censor them.

[Demo_Chris]

16. Always. But then you already knew that. nt

[MannyGoldstein]

15. I nearly forgot!

Thanks for defending my post, and for the heads up!

Very much appreciated!

[Go Vols]

17. #5

[MannyGoldstein]

18. Well then my appreciation is even deeper! nt

[MisterP]

14. the only ones asking "why are you defending Bush?" will be the ones DEFENDING BUSH

and his policies in the name of "defending the anti-Bush party"

[Go Vols]

19. He is defending Bush?

Looks like a comparison to me.

[ProSense]

20. "As awful as the Bush Admin was, they understood some of the basics of a free press."

"As awful, awful as Bush was, at least he *asked* "

Well, it's not like Jeff Gannon existed. Rove was a figment of our imagination. Paying journalist, never happened.

[Go Vols]

21. Is this the proper reply?

[Dawgs]

23. Should have just stayed out of this one, ProSense. Your "argument" is pathetic. n/t

[ProSense]

36. I'm trying to help this get 100 recs.

Only 26 is pathetic.



http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/nrcc-opens-we-really-miss-george-w-bush

[HooptieWagon]

30. Jeff Gannon is what you're favoring.

Journalists write stuff some people don't want printed....everone else is a propagandist. In advocating the silencing of journalists, its evident you want the only media voices to be a cadre of Jeff Gannons.

[Oilwellian]

24. LOL...Indeed

The spinning is enough to make one dizzy.

[n2doc]

25. The slippery slope goes one way

I shudder to think about what the next president will do. Unless we get someone who really understands where this is all going and is appalled by it, we are headed for truly dark times.

[Octafish]

26. 2004. Steno Judy's official employers sat on the story until after the eSelection.

Not to be pedantic, cough:

EXCERPT...

In the Fall of 2004, prior to the November 2 presidential election, The New York Times knew about the Bush Administration's new warrantless domestic wiretapping program, thanks to hard investigative work by their crack reporters. Yet the paper's Washington bureau chief and executive editor kept that information to themselves for well over a year -- sitting on the story until December 16, 2005.

SNIP..

Like it or not, this story is now about a media big shot who helped top government officials hide the fact that they had been spying on citizens without judicial oversight. It's also about a powerful media figure or figures who hid a dubious activity by GOP and White House insiders from voters on the eve of a very important and close election -- even while recognizing that their decision would likely change votes. Why did they do that?

CONTINUED...

http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/7135-did-the-nyt-help-bush-win-the-2004-election-by-sitting-on-the-illegal-nsa-wiretapping-story-at-the-request-of-jane-harman

[uponit7771]

27. Obama = Bush = bullshit no matter how you want to spin it and YES .. YES it DOES matter if Obama...

...broke the law; he didn't, Bush did....PERIOD

Now you're going to make up your own damn law for the sake of bashing..

Thou doest complain to much and shit

[Bluenorthwest]

29. If Bush broke the law why was he not held accountable for that? I remember Obama said Bush

did nothing wrong, and he told you to look the other way, I mean 'look forward, not back' and you were told to 'turn the page' and yet here you are, ignoring what Obama asked of you and insisting instead that Bush was guilty of crimes and that Obama knew that and yet let him go anyway.
'He who refuses to punish evil commands it to occur'. Leonardo DaVinci

'turn the page, look forward, not back'. Barack Obama

[HardTimes99]

28. Manny, I generally like and respect your posts a lot but this is one you might want to consider

self-deleting or at least revising.

Your phrase 'as least he *asked*' does many things, but one thing it indisputably does is leave the reader with the impression that you consider Bush better on press freedoms than Obama. Is that really your intent?

Before you respond, please allow me to remind you of the enormous number of journalists who were killed or wounded in the line of duty in Iraq during Bush's administration. Credible reports have suggested that one or more of those journalists may have been deliberately targeted by U.S. forces. Now, as bad as you think Obama is, you cannot point to a single journalist targeted for assassination by this administration.

And, when it comes to demonstration projects, few can equal in their damage to individuals or to the nation the Wilson-Plame affair. As I write, the jury is still out on whether the Obama administration even had a hand in the decision to detain Miranda. I think that detention was and is despicable and an affront to human decency but I'm not going to blame Obama's administration for it until I see clear proof of said involvement.

I'll be upfront: I hold no great affection for Obama any longer, that bloom having faded with his decision not to investigate or prosecute the Bush administration for its alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity. But on press freedoms and respect for freedom of the press, there's no way I'm maintaining that Obama was worse than Bush. Put bluntly, I emphatically disagree with your assessment.

[Capt. Obvious]

31. Yeah, but

did the reporter endanger their mule spouse?

[karynnj]

33. You ignore that the NYT got the story in Fall 2004 --- and they sat on it until December 2005

Not to mention, it is very clear that the Bush administration manipulated and threatened the media after 2001. Not to mention, I don't think the Obama administration has threatened any relatives -- it was the British who stopped Miranda at the airport. Not to mention, where are the indictments for people like Greenwald? I 've seen no mention of them.

[JaneyVee]

34. Woohoo!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/glenn-greenwald/silencing-bush-critics-wi_b_15494.html

[one_voice]

35. LOL.

[ProSense]

37. .

[great white snark]

42. Boom!

[geek tragedy]

39. Dishonest post, the Obama administration didn't threaten

any news outlet in an effort to prevent them from publishing something.

[DCBob]

40. In Manny's defense I think he heard that on RW media and assumed it was factual.

[great white snark]

43. Thinking like that not necessary or encouraged. Just accept Obama=Bush/Hitler/Godzilla.

[heaven05]

41. oh please.

you really do hate Obama. It is obvious. Yeah, I don't agree with the current state of surveillance in amerika. Yet, the PATRIOT ACT opened this whole can of worms, not the Obama Administration. And yes I had hoped for 'bigger' more progressive moves by this administration. Just shows me anyone can be gotten to. Grow up. Things have "not changed." Just continued in a manner not compatible with personal amerikan freedom. We have to keep fighting the corporate and banking interests that run this country.

[Fawke Em]

44. Fourth Estate.

The press is the Fourth Estate (not the Fifth).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Estate

[MannyGoldstein]

45. Clearly, I shouldn't be posting at midnite

Thanks.