Accuracy in Media

Senator John McCain, who lost to Obama in 2008 in part because he did not want to challenge Obama’s personal character or loyalty to the U.S., is now upset over what he calls “…a disturbing stream of articles” that cite “leaked classified or highly-sensitive information…” in an “effort to paint a portrait of President Obama as a strong leader on national security issues…”

McCain’s statements, like his 2008 presidential campaign, are careful not to personally accuse Obama himself of any wrongdoing. McCain’s statements refer repeatedly to the “Obama Administration” or just the “administration,” rather than the President himself. At best, he says that Obama is ultimately “responsible” for the leaks. Obama denies the White House leaked anything and finds the charge that anyone did so “offensive.”

The senator went on to say, “The fact that this Administration would aggressively pursue leaks perpetrated by a 22-year old Army private in the ‘WikiLeaks’ matter and former CIA employees in other leaks cases but apparently sanction leaks made by senior Administration officials for political purposes is simply unacceptable. It also calls for the need for a special counsel to investigate what happened here.”

Here, the senator makes two questionable assumptions: that the administration is determined to aggressively pursue the WikiLeaks matter, and that “senior Administration officials” are behind the recent leaks, not Obama himself.

In the first place, government prosecutors have ruled out the death penalty in the case of Army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning, the source of the classified WikiLeaks material. This is strange because the leaks constitute the largest release of classified information in history. The trial of Manning, regarded as a hero by the radical left, has been repeatedly delayed and now won’t occur until November. Then, after the election, it wouldn’t be surprising to see the government dropping some of the charges against him.

Second, Attorney General Eric Holder has not brought charges against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who allegedly received the stolen documents from Manning and was therefore part of a conspiracy to commit espionage. Like Manning, Assange is a hero to much of Obama’s political “progressive” base.

McCain’s decision to accuse administration officials, rather than Obama himself, of the leaks to The New York Times, is an assumption that enables the senator to avoid questioning Obama’s personal patriotism. McCain fought for his country in wartime but politically he wants to “play nice.”

Nobody doubts that McCain, who was tortured by the communists when he was a POW during the Vietnam War, believes in his country. But his decision to give Obama the benefit of the doubt makes no sense, especially because the Obama campaign has been caught lying about such relatively minor matters as Obama’s membership in the New Party, a vehicle designed for a Trojan Horse takeover of the Democratic Party in Chicago. Obama’s ally in this effort was Rep. Danny Davis, who recently accepted an award from the Communist Party USA. This followed the campaign’s claim that Obama’s childhood mentor, Communist Party operative Frank Marshall Davis, was just a civil rights activist. Obama called him just “Frank” in Dreams from My Father, leaving it to anti-communist investigators—not the FBI—to discover his true identity.

McCain requested a special counsel independent of the Justice Department to investigate the leaks. Holder outflanked McCain, appointing U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Ronald C. Machen Jr. and U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein to conduct the inquiry and “follow all appropriate investigative leads within the Executive and Legislative branches of government.” Since not even McCain has suggested the President personally did the leaking, it cannot possibly be appropriate to investigate Obama himself. As a result, Obama is, once again, off the hook. Congress will hold hearings but they will go nowhere because the administration will claim an investigation is already underway.

McCain never learns—or doesn’t want to learn. When HBO’s “Game Change” came out, conservatives attacked the film for its distorted portrayal of McCain running mate and GOP 2008 vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin. That was legitimate criticism, and McCain defended his former running mate and attacked the film. But the film was accurate, as far as we can determine, in depicting McCain as a candidate who did not want to take the gloves off when attacking Obama. “This is not the campaign I wanted to run,” McCain says, when some of his supporters in a crowd scene label Obama a socialist or a Muslim and cry out that “He hangs out with people who hate our country!” It was Palin, not McCain, who took the fight to Obama over his “palling around with terrorists” such as Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

Before the 2008 election, we wrote a column titled “Who Vetted Obama?” that asked two simple questions: When did the FBI investigate Obama? And who vetted him? The FBI did not investigate Obama, and the media did not “vet” him, something that angered the late Andrew Breitbart and made him want to pick up where the news media failed to tread.

We noted, “Obama has a 30-year history of associating with unsavory characters, beginning with communist Frank Marshall Davis and continuing with Jeremiah Wright and communist terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, which should disqualify him from getting a security clearance in the government that he wants to run.”

Four years later, we find McCain and many Republicans making the same mistake they made then—assuming that Obama is above the fray and should be shielded from any personal charges. Mitt Romney seems to be following in McCain’s footsteps, refusing to label Obama a socialist. On the other hand, the Obama campaign does not shy away from calling Romney a “capitalist,” as if that is a dirty word.

The media, who receive the leaks that make Obama look good, have a vested interest in not investigating their source. In the strange-but-true department, American national security suffers but Obama comes across looking like someone committed to the security of America and its allies. According to the latest Fox News poll, Obama beats Romney by 11 points on handling of foreign policy and 13 points on dealing with terrorism. The leaks have served their purpose.

The fact is that the FBI does not vet presidential candidates for national security purposes. There was no FBI investigation into Obama’s own background, associations, loyalty, and overall fitness for office. The FBI only probes those being considered for some federal positions under the president. It is not clear, however, if Van Jones was ever investigated. If so, he got the job anyway, and then-Fox News personality Glenn Beck and blogger Trevor Loudon discovered the truth, not the FBI.

Former FBI agent Max Noel told me that the Bureau used to investigate candidates for federal employment by analyzing Character, Associates, Reputation, and Loyalty to the United States. The first letters in those words make up the acronym CARL. By the standard of “A” alone—Associates—Obama flunks.

Obama was never investigated by the FBI, however. He captured the presidency and, with the help of the media, continues to outflank his Republican opponents, McCain then and Romney now.




Comments

  • Startimpeachment

    Sure would like to get hold of that cell phone he carries.  I’m sure there are numbers and names in there that would curl the average citizen’s toes. 

  • Fred Hernandez

    McCain has been a real disappointment not only because he run a toothless campaign for President, he continues to be toothless. Romney is behaving in much the same way. They need to get tough on theri opponent who consistently hits below the belt and the “refferee does not even acknowledge the fouls.

  • Yephora

    ‘Republicans Outmaneuvered’
    Sadly, yes. But then aren’t they always?
    They’re not called “The Stupid Party” for nothing.

  • Alan202

    I haven’t the proverbial clue as tro what might be the problems thast trouble Senator McCain in particular or Republicans in general.

    That having been said, regarding Operation Fast & Furious, among other things, exactly whom might it be that “engineered” that criminal fiasco, and whom might it be that still pulls the strrings involved?

  • ItsJo

    McLame is acting tough again, but as written, he is hedging his bets, as McLame WoN’T COME OUT WITH IT BEING OBAMA.   Is he just dumb, afraid or just the Rino, we know him to be?   He’d have to know as many of us do, that Obama and Holder ARE joined at the hip, and they do these ‘behind the door maneuvers, together’.   Holder should have been “Removed from his position, as the Leftists would have already had it done, if this was a Republican”.   McAmnesty, is ‘always a day late, and a dollar short’ when it comes to being an honest senator of the people.  He was afraid to get into a REAL vetting of Obama, EVEN though HIS eligibilty was under a microscope.  No guts, no making waves and keeping his ‘poltical career of over 38 yrs.going, is the ONLY objective the Rino McLame is interested in.  He never kept his Az.borders safe for it’s citizens, UNTIL Gov.Brewer brought the problems into the spotlight, then McLame ACTED tough and interested.   No More Career Politicos  or RINO’s, that
    ” Feed off the Public Taxpayers Trough”.

  • Jerseyprophet

    When the contest is between those who will resort to lawlessness and those who hew to the law, guess who wins? The Democrat Marxists — true believers in the dictum, “The end justifies the means” will resort to lies, stonewalling, thuggery, threats, intimidation and evasions, while the Republicans, ever honorable and lawful, expect their enemies on the Left to operate under the same standards. Remember, obama once said, “They will come with knives. We will bring guns.”

    Well, here is a typical example of the outcome of that one-sided battle.

  • Here’re some interesting points. I realize they’ve no relevance to enablers of Mr. Obama.

    Mr. Obama said he found it offensive people thought HIS White House would leak classified information. But perhaps the information leaked wasn’t classified. 

    Please remember, the president has the ultimate classifying authority, therefore he can declassify anything. So if he “declassified” the information and authorized it to be “leaked” then he was “technically” correct. Of course he’d never be that disingenuous, would he? He’d never ask what is the definition of is.

    The article is correct, the FBI doesn’t run EBI or SBI clearance investigations of elected officials. “Vetting” of presidential candidates are done by the party leaders in the House. For candidate Sen. Obama that was Speaker Pelosi. Also, not all appointees are given FBI investigations as in the Clinton administration for fear that some top level advisors wouldn’t pass a drug screen test or drug use investigation.

    Maybe we need a Constitutional Amendment requiring formal vetting by the FBI of all elected and appointed officials before they can assume office. As for Mr. Obama, the only recourse we’d have now if it’s shown he declassified and “leaked” the information would be to impeach him. Of course we know the Democrats in the Senate would never vote to convict.

  • While Operation Fast & Furious and Project Runrunner were started under the Bush administration, they rapidly went awry under Obama and Holder. Then there’s the little talked about money laundering for the Cartels by the DEA which has been going on since the 70s. But what would be the motivations for such misuse of these programs?

    Could they be meant to destabilize the legitimate government of Mexico so as to set up a scheme to start the bringing about of the North American Union? So just who is Mr. Obama’s financial backer who dabbles in collapsing governments and economies and favors doing away with borders? 

    It couldn’t be Gyorgy Schwartz, a Hungarian born Jew who collaborated with the Nazis when they sent his fellow Jews to their deaths during the Holocaust and who has said he has no regrets about having done so, could it? By the way, doesn’t he now go by the name of George Soros?

    As for Sen. McCain, perhaps his POW experience could have made him reluctant to rock a boat unless he had concrete proof. In addition, military training makes one reluctant to challenge higher authority except in dire circumstances. However, I believe there was more than enough evidence in Mr. Obama’s past starting with his parents to show that he’s at the very least a Fabian socialist and that the circumstances we face are indeed dire to the point the very survival of a democratic Republic under the rule of constitutional law is in doubt.

    Major, USAF Retired
    A politically incorrect conservative curmudgeon

  • Good points. Both Romney and McCain, along with much of the so-called conservative Republican establishment, are fearful of alienating the independent and conservative Democrat voters. They thus prefer straddling the fence. It may be that a viable third party such as a Tea Party is needed. Sadly, the Conservative, Libertarian, and Constitution Parties haven’t been able to get going to any large degree.

    Remember, the GOP started as a third party to end slavery. The Democrat Party was the party of slavery, plantations, the KKK, segregation, Jim Crow laws, and anti-voting rights. The modern Democrat Party is the party of a socialist/fascist plantation.

    By the way, the referees are the people, and they don’t see strong constitutional leaders with a vision.

  • Wheelerdude

    I don’t believe Republicans were out maneuvered.  With their history of silence and inaction when it comes to defending and protecting our Constitution, I can only conclude Republicans are just as complicit.

    It would be a mistake if Republicans think conservatives are voting FOR republicans over domocrats.  The awakening base of conservative Americans will vote to save our Constitution and way of life – we will remove anyone who is against the Constitution – republican or democrat!!

    Remember In November!

  • JEANNIEMAC2

    The only thing protecting Obama from being impeached and prosecuted is the color of his skin. Congress is afraid of “riots in the streets”.
    It was the color of his skin that got Obama elected as millions of white useful idiots thought they would make amends for slavery by electing the first black president. They didn’t even vet him, and would not listen to anyone questioning his background associations with communists and criminals.