White House Insider: "They were in shock at the president’s behavior."

Capitalist

Jeffersonian Liberal
May 22, 2010
835
210
78
Author’s Note: This interview took place for nearly two hours over the weekend at the office of the White House Insider. We wish to extend our gratitude for their making time to meet with us despite an extremely demanding schedule. The information contained in this interview is among the most in depth and fascinating to date, and due to the extent of information, will come in two installments. Here is installment one:




I don’t know… (shakes head) The word is out there – President Obama is in real trouble. They may not have the specifics, but the story of a big scandal coming is circulating now within the party – both parties. So why put your own political career on the line supporting a president who is facing such a fiasco? Simple – they won’t. And so you are seeing the separation happening. The party itself is starting to separate itself from the president. You ever watch those nature programs where the herd doesn’t hang out with the sick one? You got that poor sick antelope or whatever standing all by itself and when it tries to join back with the herd they run away from it? They’ll even attack it themselves if they have to. That’s what happens in politics. If you are in real trouble, the others separate from you. That is what is happening to the president right now.
[...]
Ok, I’ll just come out and say what is already underway, and to hell with the possible consequences to me. I will not support Barack Obama in 2012. That possibility has left the table for me. Based on what I know, what I have been told, what I have seen in recent weeks…no, I cannot support the President for a second term. My concern for the party, for the country…my conscience does not allow me that option any longer. Obama is not fit to be president. He simply does not possess the inclinations necessary to lead the country. And I don’t like saying that. I helped the man get elected. I was in the trenches day after day from city to city helping things get done in 2008…I take no pleasure in saying I was a part of that. And I take no pleasure in saying Obama should not be re-elected in 2012.
Here is a terrible but telling anecdote:
That is a very strong statement – anything recent that causes you to now say you will not support Obama in 2012? (Long pause – question is repeated) There is much I have been told, some I know, some more that will probably develop in the coming weeks and months. But you want specifics, right? I understand that…I’ll give you an example of why President Obama is not right for America. He sure as hell has not been right for the party. Not long ago, the president took a meeting. He’s late, which apparently is becoming more and more common with him. The meeting was almost canceled. In strolls the president, joking with an aide. He plops down on a sofa, leans over and claps another guy on the back asking how he’s been. Apologizes for being late, says he was “held up”. He laughs some more. The meeting begins. After just ten minutes, during which time the president appears to almost totally withdraw into himself, an aide walks in and whispers something to the president, who then nods and quickly stands up, shakes a few hands and tells another aide to update him later on the rest of the meeting. As the president is walking out he is laughing at something yet again. He asked no questions of those at the meeting – not one. He left after just ten minutes, coming in laughing and leaving laughing. His behavior during that brief time he was there was described as “borderline manic”.
From Part I:
"Now I sincerely fear for my country"
Ok, you have already stated previously that the president doesn’t show much interest in the day to day business of being president – why is this example so bad, or different? Care to know what that particular meeting was about on that day?
Certainly. Afghanistan. That meeting was an update on Afghanistan, and the President of the United States, the Commander in Chief, could give a -expletive-.
Were you actually there to witness this? No, I was long gone from the White House by then. It was told to me though by someone who was. They were there. First hand. They were also left to apologize to the ones left in the room after the president left. Some of these were military. They were not happy. No…that is not accurate. They were pissed. They didn’t say much at the time, but word got back. They were in shock at the president’s behavior. The country had just lost a number of soldiers the week prior, the public opinion on the war was falling…and the president didn’t seem to care. He arrives late, leaves early, appears to emotionally shut down during the actual discussion, and to then start laughing once again as he is leaving…how does someone reconcile with that kind of behavior? I can’t. It turns my stomach. I didn’t want to believe what I was being told, but I had seen similar kinds of behavior from the president myself, and I can’t dispute the credibility of the source. They have no reason to lie.
So is that one example the real tipping point for you in no longer being willing to support Obama in 2012? Or do you have any others you wish to share? Oh, I have others, though I cannot share all of them at this point because they involve some still in range of potential White House retribution. Then again, I suppose I am still in range of such retribution myself.
Read more here
 
Newsflavor. It ain't a legitimate site. There is no way of knowing whether the article is accurate or not. They have no standards or code of ethics - anyone can write for them. And, it appears, anyone does. Only a fool would take this with more than a pinch of salt.

*Pun intended.
 
Hmmm...who knows.
Hard to comment without knowing accuracy of story, is as likely it is complete fabrication as it is true.

If it is a fabrication as some will claim. They have many components correct.

Constantly late, unusual demeanor, Can not be bothered with the little folks if there is no political point to win. I would have to lean that it is probably true given the accuracy of some of the elements.
 
The part that we can observe is POTUS playing golf every time a large problem arises and the Dem candidates scattering like cockroaches when POTUS wants to campaign with them.
 
The only requirement of Newsflavor is that you register. Then, according to them, you are a 'journalist'. That's like saying if you can stick bread in a toaster, you're a chef.

Other than that, where are the credentials of the 'author'?

Apart from those two.... an intelligent question would be.... If I were a 'White House Insider' where would I take this information? There are a few non-biased publications that would, IF it was legitimate, run the story. It would reach a far wider audience and do far more damage to the POTUS. Why the hell would any 'insider' give it to Newsflavor.

Nope, it just doesn't work for me.
 
The part that we can observe is POTUS playing golf every time a large problem arises and the Dem candidates scattering like cockroaches when POTUS wants to campaign with them.

Please tell me you're not basing your trust in the article by THAT!
 
The part that we can observe is POTUS playing golf every time a large problem arises and the Dem candidates scattering like cockroaches when POTUS wants to campaign with them.

Please tell me you're not basing your trust in the article by THAT!
No.
But I do think that POTUS is acting detached and thats not a good thing for us.

He's a crap POTUS. But, sourcing shit from outlets with absolutely no journalist standards provides morons like truthmatters with fuel for her 'you all hate Obama' crap. She is not capable of differentiating between individuals and your junk will now be 'the view of the right'.

Newsflavor are actually LESS legitimate than the HuffPuff.... They're THAT bad.
 
Please tell me you're not basing your trust in the article by THAT!
No.
But I do think that POTUS is acting detached and thats not a good thing for us.

He's a crap POTUS. But, sourcing shit from outlets with absolutely no journalist standards provides morons like truthmatters with fuel for her 'you all hate Obama' crap. She is not capable of differentiating between individuals and your junk will now be 'the view of the right'.

Newsflavor are actually LESS legitimate than the HuffPuff.... They're THAT bad.

Well you may be right about Newsflavor.
But when I read stories like the following, the story seems to have an element of truth. I see something very bad coming our way:


ShoreBank did fail in August, with the FDIC taking over $2.16 billion in faulty assets, including risky investments in urban real estate, from the bank. But the Wall Street money raised during the summer wasn’t returned. Instead, it used by ShoreBank’s management with the approval of the FDIC to form a new bank that will take over some of the bank’s better-performing assets and its deposits under a new name, the Urban Partnership Bank.
Officials on Wall Street have told the FOX Business Network that they felt political pressure from the Obama administration to contribute a total of about $150 million to recapitalize ShoreBank and the new institution. Valerie Jarrett, the president’s senior economic adviser has close ties to the bank, and the president himself has singled out the bank for praise for its community lending and for financing environmentally friendly green jobs. Jarrett has adamantly denied any involvement in the matter.
But now the FDIC’s IG is looking at what, if any, improper political pressure was put on Wall Street executives in trying to bail out ShoreBank, and in funding the Urban Partnership Bank, which could mean big trouble not just for senior administration officials but also for Bair, since she was on the front line in trying to convince top banking executives to cough up the money for the bailout during summer.
FDIC Probes Further into ShoreBank - FoxBusiness.com
 
The only requirement of Newsflavor is that you register. Then, according to them, you are a 'journalist'. That's like saying if you can stick bread in a toaster, you're a chef.

Other than that, where are the credentials of the 'author'?

Apart from those two.... an intelligent question would be.... If I were a 'White House Insider' where would I take this information? There are a few non-biased publications that would, IF it was legitimate, run the story. It would reach a far wider audience and do far more damage to the POTUS. Why the hell would any 'insider' give it to Newsflavor.

Nope, it just doesn't work for me.

If it could be verified just about any major media outlet would run the story - or non-story, since there are no real specifics here and a lot of "rumor has it" generalities and junk. A true expose of this magnitude equals money and lots of it, which transcends ideology.

Any time major "stories" break in blogs of shitty repute I yawn.
 
Last edited:
What do the real Liberal news sites like The Daily Show or the Colbert Report say about this?
 
The only requirement of Newsflavor is that you register. Then, according to them, you are a 'journalist'. That's like saying if you can stick bread in a toaster, you're a chef.

Other than that, where are the credentials of the 'author'?

Apart from those two.... an intelligent question would be.... If I were a 'White House Insider' where would I take this information? There are a few non-biased publications that would, IF it was legitimate, run the story. It would reach a far wider audience and do far more damage to the POTUS. Why the hell would any 'insider' give it to Newsflavor.

Nope, it just doesn't work for me.

If it could be verified just about any major media outlet would run the story - or non-story, since there are no real specifics here and a lot of "rumor has it" generalities and junk. A true expose of this magnitude equals money and lots of it, which transcends ideology.

Any time major "stories" break in blogs of shitty repute I yawn.

That about sums it up. IF it was legit, the 'insider' would have taken it to one of the majors and made a serious amount of money from it.
 
What do the real Liberal news sites like The Daily Show or the Colbert Report say about this?

I wouldn't take any media outlet let alone satirist to task over not mentioning a nonexistent story in a well-known garbage hack blog, that combines a few unrelated verifiable facts with a bunch of supposed rumors, generalities, suppositions and speculation from a supposed anonymous "Insider" who hates Obama so much and thinks he's such a threat to the nation that he's still working for him. D'oh! :cuckoo:

C'mon Frank, even you're brighter than that. Next you'll be trumpeting WND as the gospel too.
 
It is the same kind of silliness as the TANG letters from 2004. Guy types up a fantasy based on what he believes in, and expects everyone to swallow it .

Because it is like your fantasy, you expect the world to believe it. I have no respect for the man, and given his general behavior, it is sort of what I expect. But I am not there, and the person telling the story has zero credibility (How many former white house insiders would write for an opposition hit site?)
 

Forum List

Back
Top