Retired ABC News Journalist Ann Compton Discussing Barack Obama: He Launches ‘Profanity-Laced’ Tirades Against Press
Imagine how Barack Obama would have acted and dealt with the press if they were not carrying the water for his administration? It is hard to believe that Obama had an adversarial role with the media when it was basically the MSM and their lack of vetting or asking any sort of investigative questions that got him elected and reelected.
Transcripts below from Newsbusters - C-SPAN, 38:05:
ANN COMPTON: Before I walked out the door on September 10, I was a strong voice for complaining that this particular administration has been more opaque than any I have covered about what the President does in the Oval Office everyday. He is far less accessible on photo-ops with meetings. Even some meetings on the record, meeting in the Roosevelt room with financial leaders from, from Wall Street or on issues with environmental groups, or with issues with environmental groups, with public opinion leaders, I think most presidents have been far more forthcoming than the second Obama term, in terms of what the President is doing every day and we almost never get photo-ops.
LAMB: So, off of that experience, how many other presidents were that aware of what they said to you and how many just did not pay attention at all and you had no personal reaction from them?
COMPTON: I think most presidents realize – had a personal connection. I don’t think they ever — we were ever in a confrontation-type moment where they felt the need to apologize. I have seen in the last year Barack Obama really angry twice. Both were off-the-record times. One, profanity-laced where he thought the press was making too much of scandals that he did not think were scandals. Another where he took us to task for not understanding the limits he has with foreign policy and the way he’s dealing with the Middle East and Iraq, and Afghanistan. And I don’t find him apologetic. But I find him willing to stand up to the press and look them in the eye, even though it was off the record and just give us hell.
LAMB: Does he have a point?
COMPTON: From his point of view, he may. But we cover what we are allowed to cover. And when policy decisions and presidents are inaccessible and don’t take questions from the press on a regular basis, I think they get — they reap what they sow.
Sarah Palin’s Challenge to the WAPO to Engage in the Same Aggressive Investigative Journalism as They Did with Richard Nixon and Watergate
Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin challenges the Washington Post to cover Obama’s proclamation that absolutely no wrongdoing occurred at the IRS, “not even a smidgen,” in the same manner that they did in their tireless and aggressive manner they did President Richard Nixon and the Watergate scandal.
Sorry, I am not sure if MSM, integrity and good journalism can be used in the same sentence anymore.
To reclaim your credibility (and the mainstream media’s, at large), I challenge you to engage in the same aggressive investigative journalism you courageously employed 42 years ago covering President Nixon. The public knows of our current president’s incompetence, denials, and cover-ups, but would be well served if we could count on your resources to dig deep for truth in all matters pertaining to Team Obama.
One example: your reporters kept tracking an obscure break-in story and that led to revealing a grave problem in the White House. The Washington Post’s reputation soared as the model of good journalism. Today, you’ve fallen like a lead balloon. Whereas you once doggedly covered the 18.5 minute gap in Nixon’s White House communications, you’ve virtually ignored the Obama Administration’s 1.2 million minutes of deleted communications by just one of the agencies under Obama’s executive branch. I’m speaking of the Lois Lerner IRS harassment-of-conservatives scandal wherein Lerner “lost” pertinent email communications. You’ve allowed Obama to skate with his proclamation that absolutely no wrongdoing occurred at the IRS, “not even a smidgen.”
The list of Obama abuses and impeachable offenses is long. I challenge you to lift a finger and help protect democracy, allow justice for all, and ensure domestic tranquility by doing your job reporting current corrupt events fairly. If not, you prove yourselves incompetent and in bed with Obama, not caring one iota about media integrity.
Those running the Washington Post’s show now, compared to those during the Nixon era, are too afraid of being uninvited to the permanent political class’ cocktail parties and petty gossip fests, making you all a bunch of wusses. I challenge you to get to work.
- Sarah Palin
CNN Poll Redux: If Rematch of 2012 Presidental Election Were Held Today … Mitt Romney Beats Barack Obama 53% to 44%
AMERICA’S BUYER’S REMORSE …
According to a recent CNN poll, if a 2012 presidential election rematch was held today, Mitt Romney would defeat Barack Obama 53% to 44%. It would appear the the American voters are having buyer’s remorse and if they had the opportunity to redo the 2012 presidential election, they would vote much differently. In 2012 Obama won the popular vote, 51% to 47%; however, after American voters learned of Obama’s lies with regards to Obamacare, the IRS-targeting scandals of conservative non-profit groups, a continued poor economic recovery, one Obama foreign policy disaster after another and an electorate that has grown weary of this scandal ridden, apathetic, golf playing and fund-raising President … Obama now loses to Romney, 44% to 54%.
Suppose that for some reason a presidential election were being held today and you had to choose between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. Who would you be more likely to vote for?
If a rematch of the 2012 presidential election were held today, GOP nominee Mitt Romney would top President Barack Obama in the popular vote, according to a new national survey.
But a CNN/ORC International poll also indicates that if Romney changes his mind and runs again for the White House, Hillary Clinton would best him by double digits in a hypothetical showdown.
According to the poll, if the 2012 election were somehow held again, Romney would capture 53% of the popular vote, with the President at 44%. Obama beat Romney 51%-47% in the popular vote in the 2012 contest. And he won the all-important Electoral College by a wider margin, 332 electoral votes to Romney’s 206.
Last November, an ABC News/Washington Post survey indicated that if the 2012 election were held again, Romney would have had a 49%-45% edge over Obama in the popular vote.
Nice try by CNN to add that Hillary Clinton beats Romney 55% to 42% and make the comparison that it is some how the same as the Obama-Romney redo. Leave it to the liberal media to compare apples to oranges. The Clinton/Romney poll is simply a popularity contest of a hypothetical election that will never take place. However, the Romney/Obama poll numbers are from a knowing public that has seen the Obama promises, political lies and scandals for themselves. There is nothing hypothetical about the facts that Barack Obama is a failed president, who is considered the worst president since WWII and many, if they had the chance would change their vote and never have reelected him.
AG Eric Holder Bashes Sarah Palin on ABC’s ‘This Week’ Says … “She Wasn’t Particularly Good VP Candidate, She’s an Even Worse Judge of Who to Impeach”
Hmm, one might say Eric Holder isn’t a particularly good Attorney General and an even worse judge of what scandals should be prosecuted …
Eric Holder, Barack Obama’s attorney general took to ABC’s ‘This Week’ to bash Sarah Palin stating, “She wasn’t a particularly good vice presidential candidate. She’s an even worse judge of who ought to be impeached and why.” Really? With all the scandals that Holder could be prosecuting and getting to the bottom of, he is bashing Palin? Where is Holder on Benghazi-gate, Fast & Furious and IRS-gate? Where is Eric Holder in enforcing US immigration laws? HOLDER IS AWOL. Holder is the most political, partisan attorney general ever. This political hack will do nothing to investigate an out of control Obama administration because his allegiances lie with Obama, not America and the US Constitution. While we are at it, Eric Holder should be impeached as well. Make it a two-fer.
Administration efforts to pass comprehensive immigration reform, for example, have failed. Asked about calls by Sarah Palin to impeach Obama over the administration’s immigration policies, Holder said: “She wasn’t a particularly good vice presidential candidate. She’s an even worse judge of who ought to be impeached and why.”
Holder similarly dismissed calls for himself to be impeached for declining to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the IRS scandal. Holder insisted that a special prosecutor isn’t necessary, with “career people” and FBI agents “doing a good, professional job” investigating the matter.
As per Breitbart, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and other senior “establishment” Republicans have dismissed Palin’s calls and instead have opted to file a lawsuit against Obama’s executive overreach. Also, House Judiciary Committee chair Rep. Bob Goodlatte, (R-VA), said on “This Week” that he won’t push for the impeachment of President Obama, despite recent calls by some Republicans. Of course the GOP won’t, they are gutless.
“We are not working on or drawing up articles of impeachment,” Goodlatte told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos on “This Week” Sunday. “The Constitution is very clear as to what constitutes grounds for impeachment of the President of the United States. He has not committed the kind of criminal acts that call for that.”
Eric Holder is hardly a credible source to talk about a poor candidate for a job or being able to judge anyone. Holder has been a disaster as AG.
Rep. Gowdy Questions AG Holder About Duty to Faithfully Execute the Law
Rasmussen: 71% of Voters Believe the IRS Deliberately Destroyed E-mails to Hide Guilt of Criminal Activity
According to a recent Rasmussen poll, a remarkably 71% of voters believe that the IRS deliberately and willfully destroyed emails related to IRS-gate and the targeting of Tea Party and other conservative groups to hide evidence of criminal activity. Only 22% believe the IRS did not break the law, while 4% were undecided. It is fair to say that this polling is a resounding condemnation against the IRS that crosses all political parties. How bad is it when a government agency like the IRS is believed to play partisan politics and cannot be trusted?
Think about this, more than 7 in 10 individuals surveyed believe that the IRS committed a criminal activity in destruction of property and obstruction of justice to hide the guilt of their even greater criminal activity as a Democrat party ignores it and Barack Obama calls it a phoney scandal. This should be chilling for all Americans.
Most voters think it’s likely the IRS deliberately destroyed e-mails about its investigations of Tea Party and other conservative groups to hide its criminal behavior. Two-out-of-three now believe IRS employees involved in these investigations should be jailed or fired, and most suspect the agency of targeting other political opponents of the Obama administration.
As we are reminded by Real Clear Politics, a recent Fox News poll found similar results, 76% of voters surveyed believed that ex-IRS official Lois Lerner’s emails were deliberately destroyed. The distrust in the IRS was spread across all parties, including 90% of Republicans, 74% of Independents and 63% of Democrats. Only 12% of respondents believe the emails were accidently destroyed.
It gets better, these are the folks in charge of enforcing Obamacare. How’s that “Hopey-Changey” stuff working out for ya America?