If I Had Subpoena Power: Five Questions for Obama

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: sageoyogi @ 12/21/2008 2:40:00 PM

    and what would you ask Cheney regarding his recent admission of calling for water boarding and other torture? Where is your bravery when Darth Vader and George W. Bush are making you cower with not-so-subtle threats of ruining your career. Give me a break. Spare me the indignation and wind your career back a few years and ask the question: "the questions I would have asked the Bush administration, had I been brave enough."

    Half of the press, I now view with an appropriately skeptical eye ...

  • Posted By: jesseventura @ 12/21/2008 2:39:43 PM

    That is why real professionals like Fitzgerald has subpoena powers and not jokers like you. As far as #4, talk to the professional reporters at the Chicago Tribune instead of some fantasy image of yourself. Sometimes I am amazed at how you guys even a job with this kind of intelligence.

  • Posted By: barnsey @ 12/21/2008 10:25:49 AM

    Your absolutely right Anabel. Who is this Isikoff character anyhow? We are mired in some of the moist critical crises, economic and environmental, that the world has ever seen, and the best thing he can come up with is to launch a partisan smear campaign against the leader we have overwhelmingly chosen to try and set things straight. We stand on the brink of a global disaster and, without evidence, point a finger at our newly elected leader, before he has even taken office. I personally think that Obama was our best choice, given all the options. Whether you agree or not, this is the wrong time to play politics. We are all in, and doubled-down with Obama. Now we need to pull together as a team.

    • Posted By: Saybah @ 12/21/2008 2:38:26 PM

      My point exactly. At a time when we face massive problems, compared to something we've never seen in our generation, all these guys can think about is try to discuss an issue that means nothing to a person like me, who recently lost my job. I could almost give this reporter and some of the others from cable TV, who have been breathlessly hyperventilating about this issue, some credit, if Mr. Obama was in any way connected to this scandal. But they are intellectually dishonest, because they are fully aware that there is no "there, there." Yet, they chose to disregard those facts and engage in this effort to tar Barack Obama.

      Everyday, Obama for the last month, has stepped out to do the people's business, especially as it relates to the horrible economy. And instead of these guys getting off their soap box to try to explain what this will all mean to the American people, they focus on an issue that is not connected to the president-elect, although they would like it to be so. As much as I am an avid supporter of Barack Obama, I want to know how he is going to pay for his plan. I want to know what he is going to do about health care. When he held his press conference about a week ago, I was watching ABC. After the press conference, the first three questions were all about the Illinois Governor scandal. On the one question about health care, Charles Gibson cut away before Obama could answer. I thought, wow. Simply wow. He had come on salivating only for the Blago affair. Health care be damned. But what could he care anyway. He's got his fat contract, excellent health care for his family, so to hell with the rest of us.

      Same thing with the Iraq war. The newsmen and reporters were too busy cheerleading to ask the tough questions. And we know how much that has caused us. This is the shame that some reporters and many newsmen face, and so today, they struggle for relevancy. But I think in their efforts, they chose the wrong issue. And so, what's new? These are the same people that told us that Obama never stood a chance of winning the presidency. After all, working class white people were not going to vot for him. Even blacks in the beginning were not going to vote for him. In fact the race was in the end going to be between Hillary and Rudy.

      Go figure!

  • Posted By: thejoshuablog @ 12/21/2008 2:38:09 PM

    Are you high?

  • Posted By: quentin00 @ 12/21/2008 2:36:59 PM

    Why is this disingenous and sensationalist garbage in Newsweek?

  • Posted By: YOLAMAR @ 12/21/2008 2:31:16 PM

    I am curious... were you this curious when Bush bamboozled us into Iraq?

  • Posted By: suzyku @ 12/21/2008 2:24:33 PM

    This is dribble, stupid, idiotic nonsensical garbage! Go to work for the nearest disreputable tabloid hack you can find because that's where you belong a--hole!

  • Posted By: suzyku @ 12/21/2008 2:23:07 PM

    This is completely stupid! What a waste of space, this Isikoff should be drummed out of the press, should be working for tabloid National Enquirer! Same class as the idiot, moron sara palin!

  • Posted By: rbduval @ 12/21/2008 2:12:38 PM

    Wow! It's like Isikoff and all those intellectually lazy reporters suddenly discovered the meaning of a free press in a democratic society. And he's not alone. That moron called Mark Whitaker from NBC said a couple of days ago:'' we have to be tougher on President elect Obama and ask tough questions". But what he meant by that it's not in-depth policy related questions that will help the common man understand how the new health care system is going to be designed or after the short-term loan to the big 3 automakers, how the government will help them to be more competitive and sustainable. NO! IT'S ALL ABOUT GOSSIPS, MEANINGLESS DETAILS AND MORONIC ASSUMPTIONS. No wonder Newsweek, WAPO, NY times circulations, are going down the drain.

    This is the end of those imbeciles from the MSM. With a fail business model that is based on tabloid-like news instead real information and culture, one day the Financial Time of London or Le Monde of France will just rise in this country the same way foreign cars did especially with the reform in our education system.

    All the Dana Milibank, Campbell Brown, Isikoff, Withtaker are going to have to find another jobs. Because just five minutes of Thom Hartman, Signoreli or Mark Thompson worth 5 months of readings of those garbage.

  • Posted By: Dalgton @ 12/21/2008 2:07:38 PM

    Based on everything we've heard and read...what exactly is the point of this drivel?

  • Posted By: Dalgton @ 12/21/2008 2:06:29 PM

    Aides to President-elect Barack Obama will release a report this week exonerating incoming chief of staff Rahm Emanuel of any wrongdoing in the controversy surrounding Gov. Rod Blagojevich, ABC's George Stephanopoulos reports.

    According to the report, Emanuel had only one "pro-forma" courtesy call with the embattled Illinois governor. Also, Emanuel is on tape telling Blagojevich's chief of staff that Obama would not offer any favors to induce the governor to choose Obama's favored candidate.

    More from Stephanopoulos:

    Sources also confirm that Emanuel made the case for picking Obama confidante Valerie Jarrett during at least one of the conversations [with Blagojevich's chief of staff John Harris]. In the course of that conversation, Harris asked if in return for picking Jarrett, "all we get is appreciation, right?" "Right," Emanuel responded.

  • Posted By: Dalgton @ 12/21/2008 2:06:14 PM

    Aides to President-elect Barack Obama will release a report this week exonerating incoming chief of staff Rahm Emanuel of any wrongdoing in the controversy surrounding Gov. Rod Blagojevich, ABC's George Stephanopoulos reports.

    According to the report, Emanuel had only one "pro-forma" courtesy call with the embattled Illinois governor. Also, Emanuel is on tape telling Blagojevich's chief of staff that Obama would not offer any favors to induce the governor to choose Obama's favored candidate.

    More from Stephanopoulos:

    Sources also confirm that Emanuel made the case for picking Obama confidante Valerie Jarrett during at least one of the conversations [with Blagojevich's chief of staff John Harris]. In the course of that conversation, Harris asked if in return for picking Jarrett, "all we get is appreciation, right?" "Right," Emanuel responded.

  • Posted By: Saybah @ 12/21/2008 2:05:15 PM

    For eight years, we watched reporters like Mr. Isakoff kiss George Bush and Dick Cheney's behind. You cowered and never had the gumption to ask the serious questions that has left this country in a total mess. Yet, today you pump your chests, with your over-sized ego and contracts drawn up by your agents, and try to seem relevant. You guys lost all creditility with me long ago. So, today, you little silly efforts to try to tar one of the persons, who's at least trying to bring some transparency to politics is intellectually dishonest and disingenuous.

    So, Mr. Isakoff if I had subpoena powers, these are the questions I would ask you and your editors at Newsweek:


    1. What balls did you have to ask George Bush to produce concrete evidence that it was OK to go to war?

    2. What did you as a gatekeeper do to scream to the American people that this war was being sold on a false premise?

    3. What investigation did you do to shed light on the Downing Street Memos? No, that was the real investigative reporter: Josh Marshall or Talking Points Memo, a blogger, and his small team. What did you do to help Mr. Marshall push this through to the public?

    4. What did you, Mr. Isakoff do to force Mr. Cheney to open up the records on his meetings with his energy team or rather big oil friends?

    5. What did you Mr. Isakoff do to shed light on the Attorney General Scandal?

    You so-called journalists who pulled your tails between your legs while George Bush took this country into a war that has killed up more than 4,000 Americans and thousands of Iraqis, and displaced millions of them, should shut your mouths. You lack credibility and I for one do not what to hear anything you or Mr. Meacham has to say.

    Thank you very much.

  • Posted By: OscarM @ 12/21/2008 2:02:04 PM

    I generally appreciate Isikoff's work, I thought he did okay on the Sarah Palin influence peddling troopergate affair in Alaska and other work, but this one, Michael, smells. I see other opiners too, as you, getting rather revisionist in your quest for transparency...i.e. GWBush burned all your asses because you weren't investigative enough, now Obama gets the make-up call? There's nothing in this story and you know it. Instead of devil's advocate unloosed, how about fair and accurate digging? Thank you.

  • Posted By: hart2hart @ 12/21/2008 1:42:41 PM

    So, where was this guy for the last eight years. And why now does he have a conscience? or should it be where did all the self-righteous behavior come from. Guys like this are just plain s#%@t disturbers. As far as I am concerned he is a first class jerk. Let's all attack the BLACK guy and leave the Whitey's alone. Go crawl in a hole.
    I am a white woman 59 years old and I think you are a JERK.

  • Posted By: PatrickJKiger @ 12/21/2008 1:40:20 PM

    I usually like Isikoff, but this is pretty lame.
    1. Obama already has said that he doesnt' do pay for play, so the reasonable inference is that any discussions of doing that would be inappropriate.
    2. As ABC News is now reporting, Rahm did float the idea of Jarrett to Harris, but explicitly stated to him that there would be quid pro quo.
    3. There's nothing in the released content of the the wiretaps that even suggests that Obama was aware of Blago's pipe dream about a foundation job. If there was something like that on the tapes, you can bet Fitzgerald would have put it int the criminal complaint, since it would have significantly strengthened his case. Additionally, Rahm's answer to Harris ruled out such an arrangement.
    4. There's never been any credible accusation that Obama actually did anything as a legislator to benefit Rezko. Obama already has said that it was an error in judgment to buy that small portion of Rezko's lot from him.
    5. So far, Obama has done nothing except cooperate with Fitzgerald, and Fitzgerald has not made any accusations of wrongdoing by Obama or anyone working for him, so I'm not sure why you're raising this question. But since you are, why should Obama give up his Presidential authority to pick U.S. attorneys or confer powers upon Fitzgerald beyond what his position normally has? Bush certainly didn't do any of that.

  • Posted By: ms8596 @ 12/21/2008 1:26:29 PM

    Wow, if only once in the last eight years a "writer" such as this had ever posed any questions remotely like this to Bush, Cheney, Rove, et al, we might not have the trail of across the board disasters - diplomatic, economic, and every other facet of this country's matters. We may have had one day out of eight years where the current administration didn't flagrantly thumb their noses, not give the one fingered hand wave to all areas of the government, the Constitution, the people, the environment, etc.

    But no, all of a sudden, we're going to ask for the most minute details about something an INDEPENDENT Fed AG came right out and said the Obama Trans Team is not involved with. Good going Newsweek!!! ...how's that circulation dropping like the stock market? Americans are finally waking up to the manipulated "stalwarts" of media that have been doing us a disservice since at least the Reagan days.

  • Posted By: lshahs @ 12/21/2008 1:25:04 PM

    Do I detect a bias? Where were the tough questions for the current administration not just on war but domestic policies like Chaney's Energy Panel, The crony appointments i.e Ameriquest founder for ambassador to Netherlands just before admission of predatory lending practices? Where were the tough questions on cherry picking of intelligence of the surveillance of Americans by NSA? Where were the tough questions on the rebuild post Katrina and the disaster of the management of relief? Where were the tough questions on .... oh... a 100 other issues that have led us to where we are today. Please.... you want to get all righteous now? If I were running a news organization I think I would fire the editor first followed by you for dereliction of duty over the past 8 years. Throw in an MIA charge along with it.

  • Posted By: patwal @ 12/21/2008 1:23:56 PM

    Isikoff is to journalism what Bush's cronies were to the advancement of science. Nuff said

  • Posted By: Metome @ 12/21/2008 1:16:57 PM

    Shame on you Mr. Isikoff.. Where have you been as Bush/Cheney contnue to commit crimes daily against the American people and the world? You have been silent and you let them get away with it. You are an embarrasement to what real jouirnalists should be.

    By the way.Rahm Emanuel has been cleared of any involvement in this case http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/21/obama-report-on-blagojevi_n_152664.html

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse