Categories
Archives
HELP US KEEP YOU BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE TRICKS OF THE RADICAL PROGRESSIVE REVOLUTION PLEASE DONATE ANY AMOUNT YOU CAN
target="_top">

Posts Tagged ‘Robert Gibbs’

Gibbs blasts Romney for using ‘right-wing nut jobs’ like Trump

Trump Fires Back at Obama Campaign Smear

Obama Staffer Stephanie Cutter Busted Lying About Priorities USA Ad

A controversial ad from Priorities USA, a Bill Burton Super PAC supporting President Obama, shows the story of Joe Soptic, a former worker from GST Steel.

GST Steel was a company that closed after being bought by Bain Capital, the investment firm that Mitt Romney helped build. In the ad, Soptic talks about how Mitt Romney and Bain closed GST Steel, causing him and his wife to lose his health care. The ad then states that shortly after that, it was discovered that his wife had stage four cancer, and died 22 days later.

The ad makes Romney look like Satan. Unfortunately, there are a few problems with it.

First of all, Romney left Bain in 1999 to take over the Salt Lake City Olympics. As noted by the Washington Post this week, GST filed for bankruptcy in 2001. Romney was not involved in the decision to close the plant.

Joe Soptic’s wife, Ranae Soptic, had health insurance through her own employer, a fact left out of the Priorities USA ad. She died in 2006, years after the plant was closed.

When asked about this ad, Stephanie Cutter, the deputy campaign manager for President Obama’s reelection campaign, said on CNN “I don’t know the facts about when Mr. Soptic’s wife got sick or the facts about his health insurance.”

Another Obama campaign advisor, Robert Gibbs, later echoed these statements on MSNBC Wednesday morning, saying that he did not “know the specifics.” Jen Psaki, Deputy White House Communications Director told reporters on Air Force One that “we don’t have any knowledge of the story of the family.”

White House Spokesperson Jay Carney was even less helpful.

Apparently they’ve all forgotten about the OFA conference call that Joe Soptic was on with Stephanie Cutter on May 4, 2012.

THIS JOE COPTIC AD IS SO SINISTER THAT THE LIARS ARE COING TO THE TOP

ROBERT GIBBS LIES

JAY CARNEY LIES

JOE SOPTIC LIES

BILL BURTON LIES

STEPHANIE CUTTER LIES MORE THAN TWICE

THIS IS TURNING FROM SOPTIC TO SEPTIC – THE WHOLE THING STINKS
THIS IS TYPICAL OF THE LYING, FALSE, OBAMALONEY OF THE OBAMA GOVERNMENT

ROBERT GIBBS KISSES UP AGAIN

Former White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs expressed “regret” Monday for insulting First Lady Michelle Obama during a contentious White House staff meeting where he also scorned Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett. The incident came to light in a new book“The Obamas,” by New York Times reporter Jodi Kantor. Jarrett, however, claims the two have “worked through disagreements.”

According to Kantor, the exchange occurred on Sept. 16, 2010, right after after Gibbs had allegedly diffused a potentially explosive report that claimed Mrs. Obama told French First Lady Carla Bruni-Sarkozy that she “can’t stand“ life in the White House and that it was ”hell.”

Jarrett alleged Mrs. Obama was “dissatisfied” with Gibbs’ handling of the incident and that the former press secretary launched into Jarrett for interfering in the matter.

According to the book, Gibbs used a series of expletives, including the “F” word, which was allegedly directed at the First Lady.

Since the embarrassing set of events surfaced, Gibbs issued the following statement on Monday:

“In any high-pressure work environment there are occasional arguments and disagreements and that is certainly true of the White House. I regret speaking in anger and regret that this disagreement became so public. But those moments pale in comparison to the important issues facing our country and will not overshadow the vital work Valerie and I will do together as part of a team in 2012.”

Jarrett, in a subsequent statement, wrote:

“Since 2004, Robert Gibbs and I have worked together on campaigns and in the government, and he has been a valued advisor and Press Secretary to this President and a key member of the Obama team. Like any colleagues, we‘ve shared some laughs and we’ve shared some words over the years. But we have always worked through any disagreements out of mutual respect and in our shared commitment now and in the future to President Obama.”

Irrespective of the mini-controversy generated by the book, the White House has dismissed “The Obamas” as over-sensationalized.

“Books like these generally over-sensationalize things,” current White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters on Monday.

“These are high-pressure jobs. There’s always a lot at stake. And the commitment the people show to the president, to the first lady, and to the causes that brought them here is fierce. And sometimes that intensity leads people to raise their voices or have sharp exchanges.”

“But the overall picture is one of remarkable collegiality and a genuine focus.”

He maintained that the White House is “a remarkably harmonious place,“ despite ”everything that’s at stake and the enormity of the issues that are discussed and debated here every day.”

Obama, Warren and The Imperial Presidency

The Wall Street journal
OPINION
SEPTEMBER 22, 2010
The Senate should vote on all senior appointments within 60 days. But the president should give it a chance to vote.


By BRUCE ACKERMAN
President Obama’s appointment of Elizabeth Warren late last week is another milestone down the path toward an imperial presidency. During America’s first 150 years, Ms. Warren’s appointment as a special adviser to the White House would have been unthinkable. Today, it’s par for the course.
Only in 1939 did Franklin Roosevelt win the right to appoint six “special assistants.” To gain congressional approval, he pledged that his assistants would act strictly as advisers. Thus they did not require Senate confirmation.
Since Roosevelt’s initiative, presidents of both parties have consistently expanded the size and power of the White House establishment. There are now more than 500 super-loyalists intervening in the affairs of Cabinet departments. But until now, presidents have maintained the legal fiction that they were merely advisers without decision-making powers.
No longer. As White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs explained, Ms. Warren has been appointed “to lead” a team of “about 30 or 40 people at the Department of Treasury working” in “standing up” the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

This burst of candor punctures the legal fiction that has exempted White House appointees from the Constitution’s requirement of “advice and consent” from the Senate. Since Ms. Warren will be a key executive in Treasury, earning the salary of an undersecretary, shouldn’t she be treated as an undersecretary and be required to run the gauntlet of Senate approval?
To deflect this question, the president’s lawyers have cobbled together yet another legal fiction. The trick is to give her a second appointment. In addition to serving as President Obama’s special assistant, she will also serve as a special adviser to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. This allows her to pretend she is Mr. Geithner’s humble consultant when she and her staff come up with an action plan for the new agency.
This legalistic gambit serves as a fig leaf for a very different reality: Mr. Geithner will never reject any of Ms. Warren’s “advice.” The simple truth is that the Treasury secretary is being transformed into a rubber stamp for a White House staffer.
In his great book on 19th-century British government, “The English Constitution,” Walter Bagehot emphasized the importance of distinguishing the “efficient” from the “dignified” aspects of the constitution. Britain’s “dignified” constitution then focused on the Queen, diverting attention from the “efficient” power wielded by the Cabinet.
A similar but opposite transformation is happening in today’s America. The dignified Constitution emphasizes Senate confirmation of cabinet officers, but effective power is increasingly exercised by presidential assistants. Despite Mr. Obama’s campaign against the excesses of the Bush White House, he is now making his own contribution to the ongoing construction of an imperial presidency.
Maybe so, say the president’s defenders, but the Senate has only itself to blame. John Kennedy had to wait two months for the Senate to confirm his initial round of nominees. It took six months for Ronald Reagan, and nine for George W. Bush, and even longer for Mr. Obama. Given the Senate’s increasing intransigence, the president has no choice but to engage in legal fictions that will allow him to govern effectively. Although Republicans are condemning Mr. Obama for creating another White House czar, they will change their tune if their party regains control of the presidency and confronts a Democratic roadblock in the Senate.
Americans can break through this impasse if both sides negotiate a “grand bargain.” Here is the deal: The Senate should change its rules to require an up-or-down vote on all executive branch appointments within 60 days. In exchange, the president should sign legislation to require Senate approval of all senior White House appointments. By reaching this agreement, the president regains the powers to govern effectively and the Senate regains its authority to approve all major appointments—regardless of their location in the executive branch.
This grand bargain requires both sides to give up the petty privileges of the existing system. Senators will lose their power to hold up nominations to blackmail the administration into approving their pet projects. Presidents will lose their ability to appoint super-loyalists who can’t convince 51 senators that they merit powerful White House positions. But the rest of us will profit greatly from the reinvigoration of the founding principle of checks-and-balances for a new century.
Mr. Ackerman is a professor at Yale and the author of “The Decline and Fall of the American Republic,” forthcoming from Harvard University Press.

Florida Rep. Alan Grayson shows that he is the 'Bozo,' Not Robert Gibbs

Grayson shows his Socialistic – Communistic- Progressive Doctrine

Alan Grayson (D-Fla.), a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, characterized Gibbs as “Bozo the spokesman” and said he ought to be fired for doing “a miserable job.”

Robert Gibbs, the press secretary complained that the “professional left” would not be happy with President Obama unless the U.S. had “Canadian health care and we’ve eliminated the Pentagon.”

Then Alan Grayson – (some say the leader of the Professional left) countered that he’d prefer “to see Gibbs show some frustration over 15 million unemployed Americans. I’d like to see him show some frustration over 40 million people who can’t see a doctor when they need to. (UN TRUE) I’d like to see him show some frustration over the Republicans, who have blocked the president’s plans and his programs.” (UNTRUE)
Grayson didn’t stop there, saying: “I don’t think he should resign, I think he should be fired. He’s done a miserable job.”

At his press briefing on Wednesday, Gibbs told the White House press corps that he has no plans to leave his job.

Grayson continues to spread his obscured lies and untruths trying to be flamboyant so that someone will pay attention to him.

HELP US KEEP YOU BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE TRICKS OF THE RADICAL PROGRESSIVE REVOLUTION PLEASE DONATE ANY AMOUNT YOU CAN
SEO Powered By SEOPressor