RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting....

RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Musicmystery -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/3/2012 9:25:26 AM)
quote: Never admit you are wrong just deflect and deny is how libs operate...... It's a bi-partisan strategy.

thishereboi -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/3/2012 11:41:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: Never admit you are wrong just deflect and deny is how libs operate...... It's a bi-partisan strategy. Some people don't get bi-partisan, so I am responding in a way they can relate to.

Politesub53 -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/3/2012 11:48:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: Never admit you are wrong just deflect and deny is how libs operate...... It's a bi-partisan strategy. Some people don't get bi-partisan, so I am responding in a way they can relate to. Surely the bi-partisan way would be to say this is how both sides operate. [;)]

thishereboi -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/3/2012 11:50:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: Never admit you are wrong just deflect and deny is how libs operate...... It's a bi-partisan strategy. Some people don't get bi-partisan, so I am responding in a way they can relate to. Surely the bi-partisan way would be to say this is how both sides operate. [;)] Why, 59 had already covered the right side. Funny how no one ever mentioned that though.

Lucylastic -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/3/2012 12:04:10 PM)
we knew you would be along to fix that RIGHT up

thishereboi -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/3/2012 3:55:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic we knew you would be along to fix that RIGHT up In that case, I am glad I didn't disappoint ya [:)]

SternSkipper -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/3/2012 8:57:53 PM)
quote: So Baroccoli O'Fuckup is a "bully-boy"... got it. Thanks!!! Ya know Owner ... this is a funny place... You can't create a straw user for the purpose of injecting a little election year humor. But somebody can practically turn themselves into a person of interest for the US Secret Service in addition to trying to alienate anybody they can get to read their text. Gotta say though... I smell a fortune in pharmaceutical savings going on here

SternSkipper -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/3/2012 9:21:33 PM)
quote: Trespassing, for one. Na ah ... once you're welcomed in to the Capitol building itself, I am told that it is not at all frequent that charges are even filed or sited as reasons for detention. The rare exception I am told is when some exhibit of violent behavior or some contraband is found. In my weekly call with my brother, he said the guy is on the GOPs shitlist after the success of Gasland. PERIOD

MrRodgers -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/3/2012 10:03:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: "At approximately 10:30 a.m. today, United States Capitol Police arrested Joshua Fox of Milanville, Pa. in room 2318 of the Rayburn House office building. He is charged with unlawful entry, and he is currently being processed at United States Capitol Police headquarters." UPDATE: 2:27 p.m. -- Fox apparently had applied for credentialing the day before the hearing but had been unable to obtain official permission to film. He had asked a credentialed film crew to tape the proceedings on his behalf but was informed that this was not permitted. You kinda forgot to mention the law breaking...[8\|] I would be more inclined to believe that having a member of the press removed from a meeting of public officials is "Law Breaking". Seriously, what law did he break? Just because a public official says "Get him out of here" doesn't mean that he is within the law to say so. Trespassing, for one. Just as in demonstrating, even if you just keep walking, they will eventually bust you up. The govt. can call it a parade and require a 'parade permit.' So 'trespassing' on public property is specious at best.

SternSkipper -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/3/2012 10:34:04 PM)
quote: Just as in demonstrating, even if you just keep walking, they will eventually bust you up. The govt. can call it a parade and require a 'parade permit.' So 'trespassing' on public property is specious at best. And if you "yell", on the west coast, they have a new one, they'll charge you with "felony conspiracy". One person I now know, thanks to the Movement shouted "look out" several times as she made her way down the street towards Ogawa with the OPD behind her firing flashbangs. That was what she got charged with.

SternSkipper -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/21/2012 8:53:47 PM)
quote: From what I read the crew, as others did, must apply for permission to film which they did not, or at least was not filed in time… They could have been present without their cameras and taken all the notes and reported as they pleased….But they showed up with cameras and refused to leave…so they were arrested. What is so wrong about this story? The camera laws apply through all offices of government and should be followed. I will agree that the denial may have been politically motivated and wrong but certainly not against the Constitution. Sorry to bring this up and amend your perception so late, but I was on the phone earlier tonight with a friend in Nashville who's pretty familiar with Josh Fox's experience. He told me the following things occurred prior to this hearing. 1)The witnesses were called very late in comparison to other proceedings of this kind. Giving minority members poor notice to call rebuttal witnesses. 2)Yes, as you say, the press is SUPPOSED to get a special credential to be let into hearings for the purpose of filming/photographing. That said, during the democratic majority, this was routinely waived and anyone with legitimate purpose was allowed enter and shoot. 3)Since the republicans took the house they have routinely cherry-picked any persons allowed to video tape of film committee proceedings. And not surprisingly, anyone deemed even vaguely 'liberal' has been kept out. The large networks have carte blanche but they have been rather lazy about poking into these events since well back into the bush administration. 4)Josh Fox was literally following up on the matters he'd covered in his film Gasland for the sequel Gasland 2. .... WTF? The Previous Majority in the House had to grin and bear it for the cameras in the interest of the truth. What exempts the GOP. 5) I Was told the purpose of this hearing was to reach a final conclusion for reporting purposes and that they had kicked all the scientists off the witness list and it was just Gas Company execs putting on a dog and pony show in order to bury the issue entirely. I have only looked at a little video, but this one has Josh Fox on the Ed Show (relax, Ed doesn't say much) ... But Josh Clears A LOT OF WHAT HAPPENED UP.... and it's not something congress should be proud of or even defend. http://youtu.be/5vVzFsW8DFE And if you think this shit is off in east texas of somewhere there's "lots of trailers" Guess again... Ever hear of the Delaware? http://youtu.be/Zo1bDnH3vCY

subrob1967 -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/22/2012 2:10:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SternSkipper quote: Trespassing, for one. Na ah ... once you're welcomed in to the Capitol building itself, I am told that it is not at all frequent that charges are even filed or sited as reasons for detention. The rare exception I am told is when some exhibit of violent behavior or some contraband is found. In my weekly call with my brother, he said the guy is on the GOPs shitlist after the success of Gasland. PERIOD Try walking onto the grounds at 1600 Penn ave, or the CIA campus at Langley... You say the "press" is supposed to get passes, what makes Fox "the press"? Just because he filmed a biased documentary? If that's all you need, ANYONE could claim to be the "press" and demand access to whatever hearings/meetings/negotiations they want, for whatever reason they want.

farglebargle -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/22/2012 5:34:47 AM)
quote: If that's all you need, ANYONE could claim to be the "press" I don't see any requirements spelled out in the first amendment as to what 'press' is, so it would be any journalist. Filming documentaries is a part of journalism. So what would be the Constitutional authority for limiting the freedom of the press? If they're not doing anything wrong, why are they afraid of cameras?

DarkSteven -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/22/2012 5:43:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: "At approximately 10:30 a.m. today, United States Capitol Police arrested Joshua Fox of Milanville, Pa. in room 2318 of the Rayburn House office building. He is charged with unlawful entry, and he is currently being processed at United States Capitol Police headquarters." UPDATE: 2:27 p.m. -- Fox apparently had applied for credentialing the day before the hearing but had been unable to obtain official permission to film. He had asked a credentialed film crew to tape the proceedings on his behalf but was informed that this was not permitted. You kinda forgot to mention the law breaking...[8\|] No law breaking whatsoever. A verbal statement of something being prohibited means nothing in view of the long established precedent of permitting filming. The fact that C-Span was filming at the same time and doing the exact same activity, and was not considered to be breaking the law, also speaks to this being permitted. The bigger issue, is who owns rights to the building? We the people pay for it - shouldn't we have the right to be there within reason?

farglebargle -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/22/2012 5:45:54 AM)
The bigger question is, if there's a rule broken, why make a federal case out of it and not just you know... Correct the problem? I see this as, "The guy who made the call to arrest the journalist is a sissy, and just didn't have the balls to make the right call. He's more interested in CYA than doing the right thing" And you know, I just really pity those people. They're shit, and they know it, but they just don't have the guts to stop being shit.

subrob1967 -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/22/2012 9:20:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: "At approximately 10:30 a.m. today, United States Capitol Police arrested Joshua Fox of Milanville, Pa. in room 2318 of the Rayburn House office building. He is charged with unlawful entry, and he is currently being processed at United States Capitol Police headquarters." UPDATE: 2:27 p.m. -- Fox apparently had applied for credentialing the day before the hearing but had been unable to obtain official permission to film. He had asked a credentialed film crew to tape the proceedings on his behalf but was informed that this was not permitted. You kinda forgot to mention the law breaking...[8\|] No law breaking whatsoever. A verbal statement of something being prohibited means nothing in view of the long established precedent of permitting filming. The fact that C-Span was filming at the same time and doing the exact same activity, and was not considered to be breaking the law, also speaks to this being permitted. The bigger issue, is who owns rights to the building? We the people pay for it - shouldn't we have the right to be there within reason? We own the White House, and CIA HQ too, so we should just let anyone who claims to be the press just walk around?

Yachtie -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/22/2012 9:28:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven The bigger issue, is who owns rights to the building? We the people pay for it - shouldn't we have the right to be there within reason? In Lincoln's time people could walk on the WH grounds. It was not unheard that someone might knock and ask to see the President.

thompsonx -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/22/2012 11:40:01 AM)
quote: Try walking onto the grounds at 1600 Penn ave, or the CIA campus at Langley... He said the capitol building. Is the white house or the cia campus part of the capitol building? You say the "press" is supposed to get passes, what makes Fox "the press"? Those who make documentaries are part of the press...now you know. Just because he filmed a biased documentary? Do you have any validation of this moronic statement? If that's all you need, ANYONE could claim to be the "press" and demand access to whatever hearings/meetings/negotiations they want, for whatever reason they want. That would be the nature of a free society, which you (who allege to be a leo) are required by your oath to defend.

slvemike4u -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/22/2012 12:42:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic we knew you would be along to fix that RIGHT up In that case, I am glad I didn't disappoint ya [:)] Boi,you never do.....disappoint me that is [:)] You always get on the RIGHT side of any argument. Usually RIGHT to the heart of all this partisan bickering. As a matter of fact you are unerringly on the RIGHT side of any given discussion [:)]

thompsonx -> RE: House cons order arrest of reporter covering their secret meeting.... (2/22/2012 2:19:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic we knew you would be along to fix that RIGHT up In that case, I am glad I didn't disappoint ya [:)] Boi,you never do.....disappoint me that is [:)] You always get on the RIGHT side of any argument. Usually RIGHT to the heart of all this partisan bickering. As a matter of fact you are unerringly on the RIGHT side of any given discussion [:)] Must you always be RIGHT?

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875