Posted on 05/08/2016 11:10:53 AM PDT by jazusamo
The internet was abuzz following a story by David Samuels on the jerk who admitted he manipulated the truth to get the president’s absurd deal with Iran accepted (accepted, that is, by the Democrats in Congress who blocked a Republican resolution to reject it). In case you missed it I’ll provide a quick summary of the salient parts, but that shouldn’t be the end of the story: the press having allowed itself to be flimflammed into being mere White House megaphones needs to redeem itself, should it care to win back even the tiniest shred of credibility. It probably won’t, but I have a suggestion where to begin untangling the web of those in the media and foundation world who were played and, in turn, played their fellow citizens.
A. The David Samuels’ Report.
In the New York Times Sunday Magazine, Samuels details how Ben Rhodes, a script writer, author of the Beloit Journal fiction piece titled “The Goldfish Smiles, You Smile Back,” and brother of CBS president David Rhodes, a man with zero foreign policy experience, shaped and promoted the president’s foreign policy narratives. Samuels observes: “His lack of conventional real-world experience of the kind that normally precedes responsibility for the fate of nations -- like military or diplomatic service, or even a master's degree in international relations, rather than creative writing -- is still startling." (In this respect, of course, he matches the president’s foreign policy background: None.) The article details how these two shaped and spun make-believe about the facts and their policies and with the aid of a supine press and a number of think tanks and social media outlets helped propagate the false narratives these two wove out of their fantasies. If it weren’t so serious, it would make a great Mel Brooks movie plot.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The Chicago Mob has certainly made the term “lame duck President” obsolete, at least for Democrats...
This one can be a lame goat.
Ping!
I can’t understand why this act would not be immediately brought up for annulment. Why is there not a law that states all acts whose promotion was knowingly advanced by intentional deceit or misrepresentation for the purposes of encouraging the act’s passage, are subject to immediate suspension and can only be reactivated upon a majority vote of both houses of Congress. Individuals who knowingly misinform the public or members of Congress for the purpose of encouraging favorable treatment of legislation, departments of the government, people, states, municipalities, businesses, non-profits, or other legal entities are subject to immediate dismissal from government employment not to be eligible for rehire for a period of five years.
Just my suggestion.
Heads should roll over this. In my view it’s a type of treaty and procedures for treaties are spelled, of course bambam and the Rats said it wasn’t a treaty and it seems the GOP went along with the fiasco.
There should be repercussions on this and annulled as you mentioned.
Is it too early or is it to late to start braiding the rope?
If you'd like to be on or off the Clarice Feldman ping list, drop me a FReepmail.
I’d say the time is just about right. Braid away!
Yep, braid away!
At what point will I not be “too new” to use this feature? Getting old waiting. Pun intended!
Is that a roundabout way of asking to added to the Clarice ping list?
How can something that was never ratified or signed by one of the parties be annulled? The Iranians never signed on to the deal we just gave them access to their funds and overturned our embargo’s on Obama’s say so. The whole thing was a scam of epic proportions just like his presidency. You can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube. All of Obama’s major policy pushes are the same, we aren’t able to undo the damage because the set-up was so insidious.
Those are good points and certainly add to the disgust many have with these actions. There must be individuals who instructed others to release funds and take actions that were in conflict with the formal policy embargo on Iran. If there was no treaty or legislation, those individuals were breaking existing law—of course, the administration would not prosecute because the administration was the instigating party. This, in the checks-and-balances system we used to have, would trigger Congressional action against administration personnel.
This, in the checks-and-balances system we used to have, would trigger Congressional action against administration personnel.
Should but doesn’t in the age of Obama. From here on out I’m not sure we will be able to reign in the executive.
Yes
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.