Posts Tagged ‘New York Times’
By Rachel Rose Hartman, Yahoo News
White House spokesman Jay Carney on Monday answered growing questions about whether big donors to President Barack Obama’s nonprofit Organizing for America (OFA) are being promised access to the president.
His answer? Well, kind of.
While Carney had responded “no” when Fox News’ Ed Henry asked if a recent report “suggests that access to the president is being sold,” his explanation sidestepped the issue. He offered instead a string of policy proposals, definitions and a recitation of campaign finance rules.
On Friday, New York Times reporter Nicholas Confessore wrote of an alleged pay-for-access arrangement through OFA: “Giving or raising $500,000 or more puts donors on a national advisory board for Mr. Obama’s group and the privilege of attending quarterly meetings with the president, along with other meetings at the White House.”
On Monday, Carney emphasized that the group, which was born out of the president’s campaign committee, is an “independent organization”; that administration officials follow rules regarding separation between outside groups and the administration; and that the president supports campaign finance transparency.
When pressed again to explain the reports, Carney referred questions to OFA.
- Carney Ducks Questions about Access to President Being Sold (nationalreview.com)
- Jay Carney dodges questions about buying a meeting with Obama (redalertpolitics.com)
- OFA Donors Who Give $500,000 Get Quarterly Meetings with Obama (thelibertybeacon.com)
- Are donors paying for access to Obama? (cbsnews.com)
- Are donors paying for access to Obama? (cbsnews.com)
- Jay Carney Struggles To Deny $500,000 OFA Donation Gets You Access To The President (buzzfeed.com)
- White House defends donor access to Obama (firstread.nbcnews.com)
- Chicago-style “Pay to Play” emerges in DC with OFA (illinoisreview.typepad.com)
Obama May Have Supplied Arms Used in Benghazi Attack
Posted by By GeorgeM at 6 December, at 19 : 35 PM
|by Kris Zane|
Why would the Obama administration spend two weeks parroting a ridiculous story about a “protest turned violent” because of an anti-Muslim YouTube video being the cause of the attack on the Benghazi consulate?
Why would they then spend a month blaming the CIA for bad intel?
Why would they then comb through a former four-star general’s, then CIA-chief Petraeus’ email to “uncover” an adulterous affair that apparently everyone—including Obama—already knew about?
Was this the reason Obama has been turning his administration into a pretzel trying to explain why he blamed a YouTube video for the murder of four Americans?
Was this the reason he refused to send in air or ground support to the dozens of Americans under fire, where Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods begged for help for upwards of seven hours and were eventually slaughtered?
Or was it something more?
What if it was the Fast and Furious debacle all over again, but this time in the Middle East and North Africa?
What if Barack Hussein Obama supplied the weapons to the al-Qaeda-linked group Ansar al-Sharia that murdered the Americans in Benghazi?
And if he would have sent in troops to help the Americans under attack at the Benghazi consulate and CIA safe house, it would have been discovered that the weapons had been supplied by the United States.
According to a New York Times article published yesterday that admits Obama-sanctioned weapons got into the hands of jihadists—and the article appears to be chocked full of leaked information from the White House in order to control the explosion of some new revelation—this in fact may be the case.
The New York Times, like a prim schoolmarm, assures the reader, twice mind you—the first time in the second paragraph—that “no evidence has surfaced that any weapons went to Ansar al-Shariah, an extremist group blamed for the Benghazi attack.”
Why are they so sure of this?
Well, they don’t say.
They do seem to know the name of the American arms dealer—Marc Turi—who brokered the arms deal.
They do seem to know that Obama officials secretly met with Qatar officials who were steeped in supplying Islamic extremists with weapons.
They do seem to know information that could only have come from Barack Obama himself.
Is there anything this President doesn’t have his fingers in?
It’s like Chicago in the Twenties and Thirties all over again!
We should call Obama the Al Capone of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue!
- BenghaziGate: Obama Regime Knew Libyan Terrorists Had US-Provided Weapons (thedaleygator.wordpress.com)
- Obama Was Arming Jihadist, err Al Qaeda, in Libya, It’s A New Day (tarpon.wordpress.com)
- CIA sources: Obama ordered military not to help Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi (examiner.com)
- Obama said ordered US Military not to help Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi (amadeusmusicinstruction.typepad.com)
- NYT: Obama admin approved secret weapons deals that ended up arming Islamists in Libya (hotair.com)
- Was Obama briefed that Benghazi was a terror attack before Rice went on TV? (hotair.com)
- The White House’s Benghazi bungling is proving a disaster (blogs.telegraph.co.uk)
- Obama Administration Oversaw Arms Shipments to Al Qaeda in Libya (counterjihadreport.com)
- Sources: Obama Knew Benghazi Was Terrorism Before Deploying Rice (conservativebyte.com)
- White House Stoked Violence with Benghazi Blame Game (trinityspeaks.wordpress.com)
Olbermann had hosted “Countdown,” which he brought from MSNBC after his exit there, since June. His short tenure began with fanfare, but ended, as many of Olbermann’s previous jobs have, with deep acrimony on both sides.
Spitzer, who had his own short-lived stint as the host of “Parker Spitzer” (later called “In The Arena”) on CNN, began hosting his show, “Viewpoints,” immediately on Friday night. He made no mention of Olbermann or his somewhat unusual arrival to the post at the top of the show.
A source told Politico that Olbermann was fired for breach of contract, saying that he had “sabotaged” the network. Howard Kurtz reported that Olbermann had begun refusing to toss to other peoples’ shows or appear in advertisements with them.
The channel released a statement signed by Al Gore and Joel Hyatt, the founders of the network, on Friday. The statement made plain that Current’s relationship with Olbermann had devolved to an unsustainable point:
To the Viewers of Current:
We created Current to give voice to those Americans who refuse to rely on corporate-controlled media and are seeking an authentic progressive outlet. We are more committed to those goals today than ever before. Current was also founded on the values of respect, openness, collegiality, and loyalty to our viewers. Unfortunately these values are no longer reflected in our relationship with Keith Olbermann and we have ended it.
The statement also called Spitzer “an astute observer of the issues of the day.”
Olbermann also released a statement in 140-character chunks on Twitter, saying that he would be taking legal action:
I’d like to apologize to my viewers and my staff for the failure of Current TV. Editorially, Countdown had never been better. But for more than a year I have been imploring Al Gore and Joel Hyatt to resolve our issues internally, while I’ve been not publicizing my complaints, and keeping the show alive for the sake of its loyal viewers and even more loyal staff. Nevertheless, Mr. Gore and Mr. Hyatt, instead of abiding by their promises and obligations and investing in a quality news program, finally thought it was more economical to try to get out of my contract. It goes almost without saying that the claims against me in Current’s statement are untrue and will be proved so in the legal actions I will be filing against them presently. To understand Mr. Hyatt’s “values of respect, openness, collegiality and loyalty,” I encourage you to read of a previous occasion Mr. Hyatt found himself in court for having unjustly fired an employee. That employee’s name was Clarence B. Cain. In due course, the truth of the ethics of Mr. Gore and Mr. Hyatt will come out. For now, it is important only to again acknowledge that joining them was a sincere and well-intentioned gesture on my part, but in retrospect a foolish one. That lack of judgment is mine and mine alone, and I apologize again for it.
Olbermann’s lawyer, Patricia Glaser, told Deadline he would be suing. “[Current] can expect a bad a result,” she said.
It was also announced Friday that Olbermann will appear on David Letterman’s show on Tuesday to discuss his departure.
Olbermann’s firing leaves what was supposed to be his triumphant return to television in tatters. After his bitter departure from MSNBC, Current sought to make him the centerpiece of its rebranding as a progressive news network. It granted him the title of Chief News Officer, gave him an equity stake in the company, and promised that his uncompromising brand of television would be the cornerstone of its programming. Announcing the beginning of the partnership, Al Gore said that he was “extremely honored and delighted” that Olbermann was joining him, and called it “a great fit in every way.”
It was not long, though, before the tensions between Olbermann and his superiors exploded into the open. In January, his sudden absence from Current’s coverage of the Iowa caucuses led to open warfare between the two sides. Olbermann fired off a statement saying that he was “not given a legitimate opportunity to host under acceptable conditions,” adding, “They know it and we know it. Telling half the story is wrong.”
There were also reports that Olbermann was incensed by repeated technical problems with his show, and miffed that he was not being given a greater say in deciding which shows were going to precede and follow his. (During his time on Current, the network added shows featuring Cenk Uygur at 7 PM and Jennifer Granholm at 9 PM.)
Olbermann, often citing medical issues, also began missing some days of work, something that apparently was used against him in his firing. One of the people who had filled in for him, ironically, was Eliot Spitzer.
As one executive said rather presciently during the height of Olbermann’s conflicts with the network, “Everybody is replaceable.”
- Keith Olbermann Fired by Current Tv Replaced With Eliot Spitzer (binsidetv.net)
- Keith Olbermann vs Al Gore and Joel Hyatt: War with current just getting started (nextlevelofnews.com)
- Current TV Fires Keith Olbermann, Replaces Him With Spitzer Immediately, Olbermann to Sue (thinkprogress.org)
- Olbermann Out (Again) (talkingpointsmemo.com)
- Olbermann Out At Current TV (lezgetreal.com)
- Current TV Fires Keith Olbermann, Replaces Him With Eliot Spitzer (kaystreet.wordpress.com)
- Keith Olbermann Fired From Current TV (inquisitr.com)
- Keith Olbermann Fired From Current TV (perezhilton.com)
- Current TV Fires Keith Olbermann (npr.org)
- Keith Olbemann fired yet again this time by Al Gore and Current TV (bonjupatten.com)