Honest question: did Obama ever suggest taking away FOX news credentials?

Boomboom521

Redshirt
Mar 14, 2014
20,115
6
0
@Boomboom521

Question for you, since you brought media access up. You posted your concern about Trump talking about Press Credentials. Why did you not show the same concern for the MSMs 91% negative coverage of Trump? They’re bastardizing and perverting their journalistic integrity, yet you’re more concerned about his tweeting something I’ve shown you the last asshat did as well and actually followed through with on at least 1 occasion yet this President hasn’t. It’s impossible for me to take your concerns seriously.
That’s fine. I get it. I don’t really see the news the same as you do I guess. I read it, and even on CNN, there are op ed pieces that are positive. It’s not necessarily a bad thing for him to get called out when he’s wrong.

I think the Russian thing, for me, is the real key in this discussion. If it’s a fabricated bs affair, my faith in certain news outlets, the Democratic Party, and of course the DOJ will be a breath away from dead.

If there is however, reason found for the intense concern over potential campaign efforts being coordinated with the Russian Government, I think a lot of the coverage was warranted.

I like negative coverage actually. I was just as concerned when the media seemed to give Obama outs at every turn. That’s never a good thing, when a leader isn’t called out for their mistakes.
 

wvu2007

Senior
Jan 2, 2013
21,220
457
0
@Boomboom521

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...but-didnt-mind-obamas-years-of-stomping-press

Truth is, it was the actions of the Obama administration that should have been viewed as a threat to the First Amendment.

Of course, President Obama was friendly, affable and lined up ideologically with most reporters, so they found it difficult to get too emotional when he stomped on press freedom. There were several egregious examples.
  • The Obama administration's Justice Department spied on Fox News reporter James Rosen. The DOJ, led by Eric Holder, somehow labeled Rosen an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal case, even went so far as to call him a flight risk. He thereby avoided the pesky need to inform him he was under surveillance. Of course, he was guilty of absolutely nothing. Holder would much later acknowledge regret over the Rosen subpoena. Thanks for playing.
  • The same DOJ seized two months of phone records from the Associated Press. Close your eyes for a moment and picture the reaction if Attorney General Jeff Sessions had been found to order the same action against the New York Times. If anything but the apocalypse comes to mind, you're in a small minority.
  • The Obama administration rejected more Freedom of Information Act requests than any administration in history. That was after Obama promised the "most transparent" administration in history.
New York Times reporter James Risen summed it up well when he called the Obama administration "the most anti-press administration since the Nixon administration.”

"Over the past eight years, the administration has prosecuted nine cases involving whistle-blowers and leakers, compared with only three by all previous administrations combined," Risen wrote for The Times in a Dec. 30, 2016 column. "It has repeatedly used the Espionage Act, a relic of World War I-era red-baiting, not to prosecute spies but to go after government officials who talked to journalists."

But for the previous eight years of outright giddiness at the White House Correspondents Dinner, no First Amendment pins were handed out. No speeches were given about threats to press freedom.

Actions always speak louder than words.

Trump's words about the press are highly critical and demeaning. No argument there.

Many in the press take it personally and even conflate rhetoric — Trump's free speech — as somehow endangering the First Amendment. Ah, the irony.

But Obama's actions? They were downright scary.

Too bad almost nobody stood up to say anything about it, even though they had eight chances at eight dinners from 2009-16.

This is very relevant today. Thanks Obama for reminding America how corrupt you are.
 

JWG66

All-Conference
Dec 31, 2013
13,029
1,539
113
@Boomboom521

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...but-didnt-mind-obamas-years-of-stomping-press

Truth is, it was the actions of the Obama administration that should have been viewed as a threat to the First Amendment.

Of course, President Obama was friendly, affable and lined up ideologically with most reporters, so they found it difficult to get too emotional when he stomped on press freedom. There were several egregious examples.
  • The Obama administration's Justice Department spied on Fox News reporter James Rosen. The DOJ, led by Eric Holder, somehow labeled Rosen an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal case, even went so far as to call him a flight risk. He thereby avoided the pesky need to inform him he was under surveillance. Of course, he was guilty of absolutely nothing. Holder would much later acknowledge regret over the Rosen subpoena. Thanks for playing.
  • The same DOJ seized two months of phone records from the Associated Press. Close your eyes for a moment and picture the reaction if Attorney General Jeff Sessions had been found to order the same action against the New York Times. If anything but the apocalypse comes to mind, you're in a small minority.
  • The Obama administration rejected more Freedom of Information Act requests than any administration in history. That was after Obama promised the "most transparent" administration in history.
New York Times reporter James Risen summed it up well when he called the Obama administration "the most anti-press administration since the Nixon administration.”

"Over the past eight years, the administration has prosecuted nine cases involving whistle-blowers and leakers, compared with only three by all previous administrations combined," Risen wrote for The Times in a Dec. 30, 2016 column. "It has repeatedly used the Espionage Act, a relic of World War I-era red-baiting, not to prosecute spies but to go after government officials who talked to journalists."

But for the previous eight years of outright giddiness at the White House Correspondents Dinner, no First Amendment pins were handed out. No speeches were given about threats to press freedom.

Actions always speak louder than words.

Trump's words about the press are highly critical and demeaning. No argument there.

Many in the press take it personally and even conflate rhetoric — Trump's free speech — as somehow endangering the First Amendment. Ah, the irony.

But Obama's actions? They were downright scary.

Too bad almost nobody stood up to say anything about it, even though they had eight chances at eight dinners from 2009-16.

His IRS, FBI & Justice departments were all targeting political opponents. Heard Rosen was under surveillance, Lynch's meeting with Clinton on the tarmac was epic too. Sure were happy times for liberals.
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,209
3,292
113
No they weren’t, liar. You probably think Hillary ran a child sex ring out of the basement of a pizza joint, right?
It’s on record that indeed, all three were targeting conservative groups and or political opponents and or opposing media members.
 

lenny4wvu

Redshirt
May 17, 2009
5,308
38
35
I see Trump floated the idea of stripping creditials from most of the news media, with the only suggested reason being negative coverage btw. This is very unnerving to me. Blasting the coverage as fake and trying to destroy their credibility is concerning to me, but not anti-American. This idea....unless done with specific investigations on story sources and with adequate control and oversight....is the beginning of a much more dangerous potential happening. Russians know.
I think this is where "antl - trust laws come into play.MSM is extremely corrupt and is a CIA asset. MSM get their "talking points" at 4 am. Then it's all just mockingbird media.
 

lenny4wvu

Redshirt
May 17, 2009
5,308
38
35
I have atl on ignore; I have no idea what he ever says and don’t care.

I did a google search for obama denies access to Fox and come up with nada. I also did a search for obama remove press credentials from Fox and get nada.

So, just as I suspected, you can’t provide proof of another claim.
Because you used Google search, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Google hid/deleted it from AMERICAN citizens. SOMEDAY the lightbulb will come on for you... MAYBE...:scream::sunglasses:eek:_O
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,359
5,920
113
This is what's so great about thread revivals. Besides the fact you get to read the past drivel from Leftists, the latest updates show them to be more brain dead wrong than when they first posted! :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye: