Glenn Beck

I don't know where any of you come down on the Glenn Beck question: self-serving flack or selfless watchdog? Maybe a little bit of both. I cannot help but believe that he is performing a valuable public service while trying to produce "scoops".

Last night he posited that the "gate-crasher" dust-up at the White House recently was a smoke screen to cover the attendance of invited ex-convict, Robert Creamer, to that same state dinner. http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/33941/

Mr. Creamer was head of an ACORN front group, Illinois Public Action, until he was convicted for tax evasion and bank fraud. He served a year and change in prison and house arrest and used his free time to produce a book which was a recipe book for taking over the domestic U.S. economy and returning labor unions and an amalgamation of other corrupt institutions to more or less permanent power.

Beck's assertion was that the hapless boobs, the Salahis, provided cover for Creamer's triumphant return to the center of power that he posited in his book.

I agree that Beck is a little of both. Merry Christmas, by the way.

I do not think the administration has the ability to pull something like this off. They are characterized by their ineptitude as much as anything else. They may be all too happy that the Salahis "crashed," but I can't imagine they orchestrated this to hide Creamer.

ohio county wrote:I don't know where any of you come down on the Glenn Beck question: self-serving flack or selfless watchdog? Maybe a little bit of both. I cannot help but believe that he is performing a valuable public service while trying to produce "scoops".

Last night he posited that the "gate-crasher" dust-up at the White House recently was a smoke screen to cover the attendance of invited ex-convict, Robert Creamer, to that same state dinner. http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/33941/

Mr. Creamer was head of an ACORN front group, Illinois Public Action, until he was convicted for tax evasion and bank fraud. He served a year and change in prison and house arrest and used his free time to produce a book which was a recipe book for taking over the domestic U.S. economy and returning labor unions and an amalgamation of other corrupt institutions to more or less permanent power.

Beck's assertion was that the hapless boobs, the Salahis, provided cover for Creamer's triumphant return to the center of power that he posited in his book.

I don't think that the Salahi was a plot. However, I think that the Obama administration was brilliant in orchestrating the Tiger Woods fiasco to provide cover passage of HealthCare.

I for one not only think that the Obama White House could pull this off but would not be the least bit suprised if they did. For me, it explains why they had the idiot couple on camera for the past two weeks.

I think Beck is a pompous ass. He makes O'Reilly & Limbaugh look like humble geniuses. Is he doing some good by getting the truth out? He may be but whatever good it does is likely counteracted by his whining and crying and in general behaving like the ass he truly is. Sorry, Jim.

Well, you have to admit he was pretty clever in getting Tiger Woods to wreck his Escalade to drum up ratings...

Do you know the difference between a Cadillac Escalade and a golf ball?







Tiger Woods can drive a golf ball over 400 yards!

Personally I think Beck is just a reactionary. I don't believe that there was any 'conspiracy theory' (just posted about that topic) to hide Creamer with the Salahis. If anything the Salahis prove that there is a security issue whether with the White House social office or the Secret Service. I have the highest regard for the Secret Service. They do a terrific job. This was a fiasco that requires their attention. A security breach at the White House is a very serious matter. No one needs Beck acting the fool in what is a matter of national importance.

I have a lot of respect for the Secret Service. Those people are incredible. It seems to me the Obama Administration needs to take some responsibility for the security of the President. What was different? It seems to me the deficiency stems from within his own circle, not the Secret Service, however willing they may be to fall on this sword for the Prez too.

Beck may or may not be a whack job but I think he hit the nail square on the head here. I don't believe for a second that TWO secret service check points would allow a couple to pass and then announce them to the room and have contact with the President. They were either on the list or vouched for and the SS, as Stephanie said, fell on the sword.

I wish I had gotten the woman's name but I didn't when I saw it. Not the woman who works for the Pentagon. There was another woman on television who worked at one time at the White House and she knew the Salahis. What I think is that somehow there was 'influence' to allow them in. It should never have happened of course. I will see if I can locate her name. She was shown talking to the media on a local newscast, but the National news never showed her.

If my understanding is correct one checkpoint did not allow it. Then they parked and walked, using a foot check point, but one did refuse them entry. I personally believe that they are con artists who have done this previously. They threw around names, etc and were let in. The Social Office had also dropped the ball and wasn't there to dispute their claims. As was discovered in a previous administration a supervisor was replaced for not cooperating over an instance of friends. Maybe without the Social Office present the Secret Service made a judgment call that the couple weren't a threat and decided it wasn't worth the hassle, allowing them entry.

No one needs Beck acting the fool in what is a matter of national importance.

The Salahis finagling their fifteen minutes of fame is a matter of national import? Can't see it. Giving them exactly what they want is exactly the wrong move.

Inviting a convicted felon to White House is okay though...?

What if the Salahis had really been terrorists, which Thank God they weren't. Things could have turned out far worse than fifteen minutes of fame.

How often do you believe Ohio County that Oliver North is invited to parties where Republicans gather? Or Chuck Colson? Or Liddy? Shouldn't they all be excluded from any public event where their presence would give the appearance of associating with criminals? I wonder where Mr. "Scooter" Libby will be spending his holiday. In Crawford perhaps? Or Wyoming?

Andrea Cristobal wrote:Or Liddy? Shouldn't they all be excluded from any public event where their presence would give the appearance of associating with criminals? I wonder where Mr. "Scooter" Libby will be spending his holiday. In Crawford perhaps? Or Wyoming?

But Andrea, "Scooter" Libby is only a convicted criminal because of a "railroaded" prosecution demanded by the Democrats.

Geeeze, the Prosecutor knew damn well that Libby was not the guilty person that "outed" Valerie Plame of being a covert CIA agent, which she wasn't.

And the Prosecutor knew it from the get-go, even before Libby was called in front of a Grand Jury or questioned by federl investigators.

Wonderful bunch, the same Justice Department that wrongly investigated and prosecuted Libby sending him to prison for 18 months was the same Justice Department that didn't prosecute Sandy Berger for stealing Classified documents out of the National Archives and destroying them but only gave him a token fine and a few weeks of Community Service.

Wonderful bunch ........ with great respect fot the Rule of Law.


.

Hello Sam Cogar. Love your little emoticon. I am finding what I am seeing today fascinating. With Aaron it is supposed "court packing". With you it seems it is "railroading". Considering where some of the evidence pointed, perhaps Vice President Cheney should have been the one arrested and charged with a crime. Would that have been better? Or a dying Robert Novak who revealed the information publicly. Patrick Fitzgerald is a brilliant prosecutor which a long and prestigious record. There must have been reason Sandy Berger was not prosecuted considering it was a Republican appointed Justice Department at the time. Don't you think they would have if they thought they could get a conviction?

Andrea Cristobal wrote:Considering where some of the evidence pointed, perhaps Vice President Cheney should have been the one arrested and charged with a crime.

Andrea, why did you stop with Chaney? Why didn't you include Bush, the rest of his Cabinet and a few hundred more Republicans. I'm sure they all were party to the "outing" of Valerie P, ........ THEY ALL HATED HER HUSBAND, ya know.

Andrea, how many Republicans do you want to convict for a dastardly criminal deed that Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald knew had been committed by a loyal partisan Democrat?

Andrea Cristobal wrote:There must have been reason Sandy Berger was not prosecuted considering it was a Republican appointed Justice Department at the time. Don't you think they would have if they thought they could get a conviction?

Andrea, there was no "must have been reason" for the prosecution of Libby, or was there?

And of course there was "reason" not to prosecute Burger. It was a "Cover Everyone's Asses" reason he wasn't prosecuted.

Andrea, do you even have a clue as to why Berger was sent into the Archives on that "Mission to Steal and Destroy"? .... HUH?

Well "DUH", the 9-11 Commission was starting their investigation on "who knew what, when and where" and there was sensitive information in Clinton's White House Documents, that if made public, would have caused all hell to erupt and the general populace going bezerk ...... and it was imperative that it "disappear".

And Burger went and did it, and the info disappeared and the public will never learn what it was.

Andrea, I guess you also believe that tripe about "those heros flying that 4th plane into the ground in Pennsylvania", ....... right.




.

SamCogar wrote:

Andrea Cristobal wrote:Considering where some of the evidence pointed, perhaps Vice President Cheney should have been the one arrested and charged with a crime.

Andrea, why did you stop with Chaney? Why didn't you include Bush, the rest of his Cabinet and a few hundred more Republicans. I'm sure they all were party to the "outing" of Valerie P, ........ THEY ALL HATED HER HUSBAND, ya know.

Andrea, how many Republicans do you want to convict for a dastardly criminal deed that Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald knew had been committed by a loyal partisan Democrat?

Andrea Cristobal wrote:There must have been reason Sandy Berger was not prosecuted considering it was a Republican appointed Justice Department at the time. Don't you think they would have if they thought they could get a conviction?

Andrea, there was no "must have been reason" for the prosecution of Libby, or was there?

And of course there was "reason" not to prosecute Burger. It was a "Cover Everyone's Asses" reason he wasn't prosecuted.

Andrea, do you even have a clue as to why Berger was sent into the Archives on that "Mission to Steal and Destroy"? .... HUH?

Well "DUH", the 9-11 Commission was starting their investigation on "who knew what, when and where" and there was sensitive information in Clinton's White House Documents, that if made public, would have caused all hell to erupt and the general populace going bezerk ...... and it was imperative that it "disappear".

And Burger went and did it, and the info disappeared and the public will never learn what it was.

Andrea, I guess you also believe that tripe about "those heros flying that 4th plane into the ground in Pennsylvania", ....... right.

.

First off Sam, I do believe that the passengers of Flight 93 were heroes and shouldn't be disparaged. Secondly, what loyal Democrat revealed Valerie Plame's identity? This is the first time I have heard this particular explanation of events. Thirdly I don't want all Republicans prosecuted. I do however expect that when someone exposes the identity of a CIA agent which is a crime under US law the guilty party should be brought to justice whomever that is, no matter what party they belong to.

As for Sandy Berger, why would Republicans want the issue to disappear when it benefits them? That makes no sense to me. I think there was lots of blame to pass around regarding 9-11 on both sides of the aisle. Going back to Reagan and our excursions there during his presidency we abandoned the country after the Soviets were driven out. We dealt with Bin Laden then as a member of the mujaheeden. We make a deal with the devil. Then Clinton neglected that area of the world and the threat flourished and as threats do came to fruition in 9-11. The Bush people also dropped the ball missing the signs of pilots training at flight schools. As a government separate from party politics we failed miserably. We missed all the signs of resentment, anger, and extremism growing into a threat to western culture. And two thousand people lost their lives because of our inability to look beyond our own ideas to what is happening elsewhere in the world.

Secondly, what loyal Democrat revealed Valerie Plame's identity? This is the first time I have heard this particular explanation of events.

You ask who shot Roger Wabbit (Valerie Plame)? Well “duh”, Richard Armitage did.

in the August 28, 2006, issue of Newsweek. Isikoff reports that then Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage had a central role in the Plame affair.[57]

In their book Hubris Isikoff and Corn reveal — as both Armitage and syndicated columnist Robert Novak acknowledged publicly later — that Armitage was Novak's "initial" and "primary source" for Novak's July 2003 column that revealed Plame's identity as a CIA operative and that after Novak revealed his "primary source" (Novak's phrase) was a "senior administration official" who was "not a partisan gunslinger," Armitage phoned Colin Powell that morning and was "in deep distress." Reportedly, Armitage told Powell: "I'm sure [Novak is] talking about me." In his Newsweek article, Isikoff states:

The next day, a team of FBI agents and Justice prosecutors investigating the leak questioned the deputy secretary. Armitage acknowledged that he had passed along to Novak information contained in a classified State Department memo: that Wilson's wife worked on weapons-of-mass-destruction issues at the CIA... [William Howard Taft IV, the State Department's legal adviser] felt obligated to inform White House counsel Alberto Gonzales. But Powell and his aides feared the White House would then leak that Armitage had been Novak's source — possibly to embarrass State Department officials who had been unenthusiastic about Bush's Iraq policy.

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

First off Sam, I do believe that the passengers of Flight 93 were heroes and shouldn't be disparaged.

Andrea, heroes for doing what? If you make heroes out of them then you have to make heroes out of everyone else that was killed that fateful day.

Andrea, that plane was shot down by a missile fired by a USAF Fighter Jet ….. and that is why it nosedived almost straight into the ground.

Andrea, there ain't no one that I have ever known or have ever heard of (except a terrorist) that would willfully and intentionally commit suicide just to be committing suicide. If a few of those passengers had gained control of that airplane from those on-board terrorist, ........ why in hell would they then steer it directly into the ground nose first? DUH, would you do that?

As for Sandy Berger, why would Republicans want the issue to disappear when it benefits them? That makes no sense to me.

Andrea, do you really think that 150 to 200 million irately pissed off American citizens would have really given a rat’s ass about who was a Democrat or a Republican? I DON’T THINK SO.



.

SamCogar wrote:

First off Sam, I do believe that the passengers of Flight 93 were heroes and shouldn't be disparaged.

Andrea, heroes for doing what? If you make heroes out of them then you have to make heroes out of everyone else that was killed that fateful day.

Andrea, that plane was shot down by a missile fired by a USAF Fighter Jet ….. and that is why it nosedived almost straight into the ground.

Andrea, there ain't no one that I have ever known or have ever heard of (except a terrorist) that would willfully and intentionally commit suicide just to be committing suicide. If a few of those passengers had gained control of that airplane from those on-board terrorist, ........ why in hell would they then steer it directly into the ground nose first? DUH, would you do that?

As for Sandy Berger, why would Republicans want the issue to disappear when it benefits them? That makes no sense to me.

Andrea, do you really think that 150 to 200 million irately pissed off American citizens would have really given a rat’s ass about who was a Democrat or a Republican? I DON’T THINK SO.

.

Sam you don't truly believe that Flight 93 was shot down by a missile do you? Did you forget your corn flakes this morning? I believe that what has been decided is that they were not able to gain control of the plane though they tried. It would be the terrorists in the cockpit who flew the plane nose first into the ground. That is my understanding of events. But because they failed does not mean that they are not heroes for trying. If they hadn't tried, perhaps the terrorists would have continued on their way into a new target. But the opposition made that not possible. I quote the following.

Beamer

Regardless of who was in control of the plane when it crashed, the fact remains their uprising changed the course of history.

I didn't see any mention of fighter jet involvement not here nor in any other source I have looked at.

Sam you don't truly believe that Flight 93 was shot down by a missile do you?

I wouldn’t have stated so if I didn’t.

I believe that what has been decided is that they were not able to gain control of the plane though they tried.

Well “SURPRISE, …. SURPRISE”, …. and do I hafta ask who it was that decided that?

It would be the terrorists in the cockpit who flew the plane nose first into the ground.

Oh “WOWEE”, …… now that makes sense. After months n’ months of preparing n’ training those terrorists just fly er rite into du brush and weeds. They were pretty nice dudes after all.

I didn't see any mention of fighter jet involvement not here nor in any other source I have looked at.

WOW, that is absolutely AMAZING. Now I wonder why the White House Press Secretary didn’t tell all the News Media about that. Musta been the Press Secretary was on “coffee break”, do ya pose?

Andrea, I gotta go for now, but you keep posting, I'll read them later.

A Question for Stephanie and Andrea. What is your issue with Glen Beck? Why I ask is that his general stance on Government is closely aligned to a libertarian point of view. He from what I see of the man he seem to teach using the absurd to make points, which sometimes I find distracting, however, I can find little fault with with vies of the problems governmetn creates and what the solution is.

Cato

Cato wrote:A Question for Stephanie and Andrea. What is your issue with Glen Beck? Why I ask is that his general stance on Government is closely aligned to a libertarian point of view. He from what I see of the man he seem to teach using the absurd to make points, which sometimes I find distracting, however, I can find little fault with with vies of the problems governmetn creates and what the solution is.

Cato

Hi Cato first of all. I have an aversion to the extremes on both sides of politics. I believe that Beck deliberately sets out to be antagonistic as do others on both sides. There is nothing productive about any of it. It creates a rancor that makes it impossible to conduct the business of the country.

SamCogar wrote:

Sam you don't truly believe that Flight 93 was shot down by a missile do you?

I wouldn’t have stated so if I didn’t.

I believe that what has been decided is that they were not able to gain control of the plane though they tried.

Well “SURPRISE, …. SURPRISE”, …. and do I hafta ask who it was that decided that?

It would be the terrorists in the cockpit who flew the plane nose first into the ground.

Oh “WOWEE”, …… now that makes sense. After months n’ months of preparing n’ training those terrorists just fly er rite into du brush and weeds. They were pretty nice dudes after all.

I didn't see any mention of fighter jet involvement not here nor in any other source I have looked at.

WOW, that is absolutely AMAZING. Now I wonder why the White House Press Secretary didn’t tell all the News Media about that. Musta been the Press Secretary was on “coffee break”, do ya pose?

Andrea, I gotta go for now, but you keep posting, I'll read them later.

Wow Sam, I am amazed that you really believe that, but to each their own. The information is from an FBI report. The obvious intent as in the case of the other three planes was to fly it into a target. From the cockpit voice recorder noises it was determined that the passengers were about to break in. (At that time reinforced hatches had not yet been added.) The terrorists did not want the plane being re-taken (or so it is believed) so they crashed it.

Do you really think that if a fighter jet had been involved that there wouldn't have been a leak by now, clarifying it? The drip...drip...of information coming from government sources could fill the Dead Sea.

FBI

SamCogar wrote:

Andrea Cristobal wrote:Considering where some of the evidence pointed, perhaps Vice President Cheney should have been the one arrested and charged with a crime.

Andrea, why did you stop with Chaney? Why didn't you include Bush, the rest of his Cabinet and a few hundred more Republicans. I'm sure they all were party to the "outing" of Valerie P, ........ THEY ALL HATED HER HUSBAND, ya know.

Andrea, how many Republicans do you want to convict for a dastardly criminal deed that Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald knew had been committed by a loyal partisan Democrat?

Andrea Cristobal wrote:There must have been reason Sandy Berger was not prosecuted considering it was a Republican appointed Justice Department at the time. Don't you think they would have if they thought they could get a conviction?

Andrea, there was no "must have been reason" for the prosecution of Libby, or was there?

And of course there was "reason" not to prosecute Burger. It was a "Cover Everyone's Asses" reason he wasn't prosecuted.

Andrea, do you even have a clue as to why Berger was sent into the Archives on that "Mission to Steal and Destroy"? .... HUH?

Well "DUH", the 9-11 Commission was starting their investigation on "who knew what, when and where" and there was sensitive information in Clinton's White House Documents, that if made public, would have caused all hell to erupt and the general populace going bezerk ...... and it was imperative that it "disappear".

And Burger went and did it, and the info disappeared and the public will never learn what it was.

Andrea, I guess you also believe that tripe about "those heros flying that 4th plane into the ground in Pennsylvania", ....... right.

.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Armitage_(politician) Richard Armitage is a Republican not a Democrat.

Andrea Cristobal wrote:Hi Cato first of all. I have an aversion to the extremes on both sides of politics. I believe that Beck deliberately sets out to be antagonistic as do others on both sides. There is nothing productive about any of it. It creates a rancor that makes it impossible to conduct the business of the country.

Part of the problem is politicians trying to do this nations business through the media. Perhaps they should stick to running this nation, stop trying to control WHAT is in the media and leave that to editors, producers and news directors.