Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Purveyor

(29,876 posts)
Fri Mar 7, 2014, 07:48 PM Mar 2014

Julian Assange: Is President Obama Wearing Pants?

By TAL KOPAN | 3/7/14 5:40 PM EST

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange Friday questioned whether President Barack Obama is in control of the nation’s intelligence operation, saying based on the response to the leaks from Edward Snowden, it doesn’t look that way.

“There is a real question about who is wearing the pants,” Assange said on MSNBC’s “Now With Alex Wagner” when asked about reforms to the National Security Agency announced by Obama in response to revelations brought forward by Snowden.

--clip
“It has been six months now since the Edward Snowden revelations started to occur,” Assange said. “In that time, have we seen the commencement of a criminal investigation against [Director of National Intelligence James] Clapper for lying to Congress, or anyone in the National Security Agency for violating the law, the U.S. Constitution? No. Have we seen the firing of a single person associated with those breaches of the rights of American citizens and arguably others as well? The answer is no.”

Assange said the lack of response raises questions about who is in control.

“So who really calls the shots in the executive? Is it Barack Obama? Is it Clapper? Is it [NSA Director Gen. Keith] Alexander? Is it the intelligence complex as a whole?” Assange said. “We know when the government takes something seriously. It starts a formal investigation, it fires people, it reduces its budgets. We haven’t seen that. So the question is, does the civilian leadership have effective control of the 16 agency intelligence group under Clapper, under the DNI?”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/03/julian-assange-edward-snowden-barack-obama-104435.html#ixzz2vK8u1Gkj

69 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Julian Assange: Is President Obama Wearing Pants? (Original Post) Purveyor Mar 2014 OP
Shorter Assange: Please don't forget about me. I still matter! nt geek tragedy Mar 2014 #1
... MADem Mar 2014 #27
So many foreigners worried about American citizens' constitutional and privacy rights. TwilightGardener Mar 2014 #2
Guess we're even bigwillq Mar 2014 #12
...^ that 840high Mar 2014 #53
There are a few of us Americans who are worried about the same thing. former9thward Mar 2014 #39
Yep. nt Mojorabbit Mar 2014 #57
Not only that, he can keep them on, too, Jules BeyondGeography Mar 2014 #3
Boom! babylonsister Mar 2014 #4
... tammywammy Mar 2014 #13
LOL Cali_Democrat Mar 2014 #15
Ahahaha! BenzoDia Mar 2014 #20
LOL FSogol Mar 2014 #21
And with that, you win the thread... SidDithers Mar 2014 #22
Unlike several of our Democratic presidents. And Assange was single... Luminous Animal Mar 2014 #24
Hmm...why the swipe at Democrats unrelated to this thread? nt msanthrope Mar 2014 #37
Interesting, ain't it? Cali_Democrat Mar 2014 #50
How quickly a poster gets to the Clenis is usually an indicator for me. I mean, I get msanthrope Mar 2014 #59
Boom, indeed, goes that dyn-o-mite! Full marks! nt MADem Mar 2014 #28
Well DUH! No Dem Pres gets control of every intel operation since BFEE took it over in the early70s. blm Mar 2014 #5
Still a predator I see Politicalboi Mar 2014 #6
We also know when the American people take something seriously. randome Mar 2014 #7
Obama's pants must be with his comfortable walking shoes and peace prize. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2014 #8
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Blue_Tires Mar 2014 #9
Totally agree treestar Mar 2014 #17
Well, Congress makes law...and all approprpriations start in the House. MADem Mar 2014 #29
We know Assange's had trouble keeping his own pants on. pnwmom Mar 2014 #10
Going to address the topic at hand? 1000words Mar 2014 #16
I don't think I'd touch that pnwmom Mar 2014 #18
This RW asshole surfaces every time the RW assholes in this country start talking shit. ProSense Mar 2014 #11
Yes, he's wearing "mom pants" according to Sarah Palin and her echo chamber. CJCRANE Mar 2014 #14
Interesting Interview...once one gets past Subject Line (Not your Fault) KoKo Mar 2014 #19
Ah! The long-awaited 627th Epistle of St Julian to the Peanut Gallery! struggle4progress Mar 2014 #23
Interesting how many replies attack Assange rather than address the issue. Scuba Mar 2014 #25
The 'issue' is that Obama isn't wearing any pants? randome Mar 2014 #26
And another. Scuba Mar 2014 #34
The point is pretty obvious. I'm not surprised that you don't want to address it. /nt Marr Mar 2014 #42
What issue? Obama's trousers? Assange's petulant boredom? MADem Mar 2014 #30
Look, still another. Scuba Mar 2014 #32
You'd think, when there's "still another," that perhaps you're on the wrong side of the argument...? MADem Mar 2014 #35
I'm not backing Assange, I'm criticizing those who try to deflect his revelations by smearing him. Scuba Mar 2014 #36
What "smear" -- pray tell? Did he not use a lame, sexist reference to try and "smear" Obama? MADem Mar 2014 #38
You keep missing the point. I have not defended Assange. Scuba Mar 2014 #41
No, I'm afraid YOU keep missing the point, and I'm not the only one pointing it out. MADem Mar 2014 #45
Has Clapper been prosecuted yet? Did I miss that? Scuba Mar 2014 #46
And what does Clapper have to do with "Waaah, waaah, Obama has no Paaaaaaants!!!" MADem Mar 2014 #47
Why would Clapper be prosecuted? No a single congressperson has initiated the action msanthrope Mar 2014 #60
What's it tell me? That the NSA has dirt on all of them. Scuba Mar 2014 #61
Or, maybe, the elements of perjury cannot be proved. nt msanthrope Mar 2014 #62
Doesn't matter, he confessed. Scuba Mar 2014 #64
Um, yeah...it does matter. You can lie, without committing perjury. nt msanthrope Mar 2014 #65
because he cloaked his message in horrible sexist dogshit terms cali Mar 2014 #33
He's saying the same BS Palin was treestar Mar 2014 #40
Exactly right. As always, the pattern speaks volumes. woo me with science Mar 2014 #67
I saw this. grrrr. sexist dogshit. as if leadership means you have to a have a penis. cali Mar 2014 #31
This is the guy who called Sweden "the Saudi Arabia of feminism." msanthrope Mar 2014 #43
it's not more excusable for me cali Mar 2014 #48
And due credit to you for the consistency cali mcar Mar 2014 #54
Perhaps those defending this swipe might want to consider... OilemFirchen Mar 2014 #55
With the allegations of the CIA spying on that Congressional oversight committee... Marr Mar 2014 #44
many really seem not to care G_j Mar 2014 #58
That's rich, coming from a guy who hangs out in his bathrobe in the Ecuadorian embassy, Nye Bevan Mar 2014 #49
The stone in the shoe.... msanthrope Mar 2014 #68
I have no love for him, but he is completely correct. nt 1awake Mar 2014 #51
It doesn't matter who wears the pants. As long as there is no transparency and oversight Autumn Mar 2014 #52
Then why isn't he talking about that? randome Mar 2014 #66
A better question is why isn't the President talking about these issues. Autumn Mar 2014 #69
The better point is that no one has the pants. DirkGently Mar 2014 #56
No One has the Pants...Surveillance State is it's OWN COUNTRY... KoKo Mar 2014 #63

MADem

(135,425 posts)
27. ...
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 10:21 AM
Mar 2014


Watch my show on RT!!!! Oh wait...that got cancelled!!!

Vote for me in my bid for a seat in the Australian Senate!!!! Please-please-please!!!!! Oooops....that didn't work out.....

Don't notice how I've never "wikileaked" anything of consequence from Russia!!!!

Pay no attention that I used Ecuadoran assets to funnel Snowden to Moscow!!!!! AND sent along one of my old girlfriends to "look after" him....

But hey, I'm BORED.....

Look at meeeeeee!!! Look at MEEEEEEE!!!!!!!

TwilightGardener

(46,416 posts)
2. So many foreigners worried about American citizens' constitutional and privacy rights.
Fri Mar 7, 2014, 07:51 PM
Mar 2014

I'm touched by the concern!

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
24. Unlike several of our Democratic presidents. And Assange was single...
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 02:06 AM
Mar 2014

why the expectation that he keep his pants on?

 

Cali_Democrat

(30,439 posts)
50. Interesting, ain't it?
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 12:34 PM
Mar 2014

....the need for some self-proclaimed liberals to immediately attack Dems.

Makes you go hmmmm.....

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
59. How quickly a poster gets to the Clenis is usually an indicator for me. I mean, I get
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 02:35 PM
Mar 2014

that nearly 20 years on, it has a mythical power to amaze and fascinate, but really?

blm

(113,063 posts)
5. Well DUH! No Dem Pres gets control of every intel operation since BFEE took it over in the early70s.
Fri Mar 7, 2014, 07:53 PM
Mar 2014

Geez - you want to know how many favors Clinton had to do for Poppy Bush to get anywhere near that stuff?

Obama hasn't been as solicitous, so, no full briefings for him.

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
7. We also know when the American people take something seriously.
Fri Mar 7, 2014, 07:54 PM
Mar 2014

They protest. They organize. The man on the street doesn't care enough about pathetic spy games. I suppose under Assange's criteria, none of us are wearing pants, either.

Go back to Australia. Lecture your fellow citizens instead of us.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

Blue_Tires

(55,445 posts)
9. Correct me if I'm wrong, but
Fri Mar 7, 2014, 07:56 PM
Mar 2014

I'm pretty sure Congress can slash the NSA operating budget with a few pen strokes, if, you know, they actually gave a shit about doing something other than grandstanding...

The funny part is if a DUer said that, the board would have a meltdown discussing the sexist ramifications of traditional masculinity, and the roles of authority, intelligence and control being associated with pants...

MADem

(135,425 posts)
29. Well, Congress makes law...and all approprpriations start in the House.
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 10:24 AM
Mar 2014

So you aren't wrong.

It's "OK" to make sexist "girly pantless Obama" references if you're Assange, I guess....??

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
11. This RW asshole surfaces every time the RW assholes in this country start talking shit.
Fri Mar 7, 2014, 07:58 PM
Mar 2014

You're hiding in a fucking embassy and declaring the fucking nut with the squirrel on his head your hero, shithead.



KoKo

(84,711 posts)
19. Interesting Interview...once one gets past Subject Line (Not your Fault)
Fri Mar 7, 2014, 10:17 PM
Mar 2014

and reads the rest of the post and link...

At first I thought it was Sarah Palin's comments about "Mom Jeans" but then I saw your name...and new it was Okay to click.

Thanks for this post...Important!

struggle4progress

(118,290 posts)
23. Ah! The long-awaited 627th Epistle of St Julian to the Peanut Gallery!
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 01:50 AM
Mar 2014

in which St Julian impugns the masculinity of Mr Obama, in the hope that Mr Obama will jump up and down with rage and threaten to send drones to Knightsbridge

It seems, however, most unlikely that Mr Obama will respond in any manner to St Julian's taunts, as Mr Obama is married to a beautiful and talented woman, the happy couple being kept somewhat busy by their various mutual interests, such as the raising of their two beautiful and talented daughters in the White House

It would, of course, be unnecessarily unkind of anyone to point out that St Julian's own ideas, regarding healthy adult male sexuality, might not be the best model for other men to imitate, since St Julian has spent almost two years hiding inside a small flat, afraid to go outside after jumping bail to avoid extradition on rape charges

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
26. The 'issue' is that Obama isn't wearing any pants?
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 10:07 AM
Mar 2014

Face it, Assange is a fugitive from both Sweden and now the U.K. He doesn't like it, I get that, but he has no one to blame but himself.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)
[/center][/font][hr]

MADem

(135,425 posts)
30. What issue? Obama's trousers? Assange's petulant boredom?
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 10:26 AM
Mar 2014

Please--most people have seen that assclown for just what he is.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
35. You'd think, when there's "still another," that perhaps you're on the wrong side of the argument...?
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 11:31 AM
Mar 2014

You're backing an asshole rapist who is in bed with Putin--eventually, you'll figure it out.

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
36. I'm not backing Assange, I'm criticizing those who try to deflect his revelations by smearing him.
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 11:35 AM
Mar 2014

MADem

(135,425 posts)
38. What "smear" -- pray tell? Did he not use a lame, sexist reference to try and "smear" Obama?
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 11:42 AM
Mar 2014

You're saying he didn't say those stupid, blowhardy, sounds-like-Putin-wrote-it, words?

Seems like the one missing the trick, here, is YOU.

The man is trapped in an embassy because he refuses to answer charges of rape.

He cost his erstwhile "friends" (that he screwed, too--funny how much screwing this guy does!) tens of thousands of pounds in lost bail money because he did a bunk. You think they're still pleased with him?

He sits in a small room in Knightsbridge desperate for the spotlight--and his desperation comes through when he makes boneheaded, stupid comments that only point out that he does NOT have respect for women.

His comments strengthen the Swedes' case against him frankly.

But hey--defend the idiot at all costs, do go on...don't let the facts get in your way!

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
41. You keep missing the point. I have not defended Assange.
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 11:46 AM
Mar 2014

He may be all the awful things people say about him. I don't know, and don't care much.

But his revelations should be a wake up call to all of us. To dismiss those because he may be a scumbucket is disengenious.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
45. No, I'm afraid YOU keep missing the point, and I'm not the only one pointing it out.
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 11:59 AM
Mar 2014

He's getting on the horn and using sexist language to express his disapproval and his pure OPINION--not "revelations," an OPINION--about Obama.

Would you like it if I did the same sort of thing to indicate my disapprobation with your comments? Of course you wouldn't. You'd be angry. You'd hit that alert button and give me a bit of what-for.

That jerky name-calling foolishness isn't what mature, thoughtful adults discussing differences in intelligence policy do, after all.

Should Obama get up and say something shirty to Putin, like, "Say Pootie, you need a brassiere for those MOOOOOOOBS!!!" You wouldn't think much of that sort of thing, now, would you?

So why is "Julian" special? Let's hope it's not the dreamy eyes, or the way he tosses his freakishly colored hair?


It's called "attention seeking behavior," and poor little Julian just hasn't outgrown that toddler's device. It reflects poorly on him, and it dilutes whatever "message" he's trying to convey.

In sum--he comes off like an ass, and people are noticing.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
47. And what does Clapper have to do with "Waaah, waaah, Obama has no Paaaaaaants!!!"
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 12:24 PM
Mar 2014

You aren't making your case. Just as Assange didn't make his with that absurdly childish insult.

Pssst--here's a clue for you....the people who need to "charge" Clapper with misconduct are in CONGRESS. You might want to direct your inquiry to them, rather than screeching at Obama. Here's some background:

The US Congress, by right of a 1938 law has the right to require people to appear before either body (House or Senate). This is issued in the form of a subpoena in most cases. When a person fails to appear or fails to testify, Congress is empowered by the same law to find the person in contempt of congress. More loosely, any person who impedes a congressional investigation may be cited as being in contempt. Acts impeding an investigation include failing to appear when summoned, failing to produce requested documents, or lying to congress in an attempt to obstruct an investigation.

Contempt of congress is very much like being held in contempt by a judge or a federal or state court. If you fail to answer a subpoena in a regular court can earn you a contempt citation. Similarly refusing to answer questions if you do appear and are doing things like hiding evidence pertaining to an investigation, you can be charged with contempt.

Another similarity in contempt of congress is your rights if you receive a subpoena. Under most circumstances, you can claim 5th Amendment rights if testimony you give would be self-incriminating. If the House or Senate is investigating some scandal that directly concerns the person subpoenaed, the person need not incriminate himself by giving testimony. Still, failure to answer the subpoena and appear as appointed may have repercussions. It is in fact breaking a law.

Under current US law, a person found in contempt of congress has committed a misdemeanor, may serve up to 12 months in prison and may be fined. It is up to the house conducting the investigation to determine whether such fines or a prison sentence are appropriate. Sometimes Congress does not act even on cases where a person is in longstanding contempt. The hope may be that simply declaring someone in contempt of congress may result in his or her appearance, though this is not always the case.....




Now...what does that have to do with "Obama's pants," hmmmmm?
 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
60. Why would Clapper be prosecuted? No a single congressperson has initiated the action
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 02:37 PM
Mar 2014

required to do so.

Not even Darrell Issa has called a hearing.

And Wyden is keeping his trap shut.

What does that tell you?????

treestar

(82,383 posts)
40. He's saying the same BS Palin was
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 11:45 AM
Mar 2014

His defenders should at least call him out on this. The old masculinity means you are the one who bosses everyone around nonsense. Because you are big and mean and tough. That is BS. Even his defenders should think he's an idiot for this. It has nothing to do with his alleged "revelations." He merely took a right wing type pot shot at the President.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
67. Exactly right. As always, the pattern speaks volumes.
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 08:13 PM
Mar 2014

The words were poorly chosen, but there's an important message in there nevertheless. Who really is holding power in this government, when it is flaunting the Constitution and the law as routinely as it is now?

History tells us clearly that the swarm of smear here would not be any less intense had Assange chosen his words more carefully.

The intensity and relentlessness of the swarm of the messenger is directly proportional to the perceived threat of the message.

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
43. This is the guy who called Sweden "the Saudi Arabia of feminism."
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 11:48 AM
Mar 2014

It's pretty much par for the course.

Of course, sexism in a "leftist" hero is so much more excusable than sexism from a Republican.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
48. it's not more excusable for me
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 12:26 PM
Mar 2014

and you consider me far to the left.

It's important to me to be consistent about this stuff.

OilemFirchen

(7,143 posts)
55. Perhaps those defending this swipe might want to consider...
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 02:14 PM
Mar 2014

what colorful metaphor he might apply should Hillary Clinton become president.

"Is President Clinton Wearing (___)?" Skirt? Bra? Stockings?

Let's all weigh in, shall we?

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
44. With the allegations of the CIA spying on that Congressional oversight committee...
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 11:50 AM
Mar 2014

this point seems hugely relevant. If those allegations are true, then whether Obama knew about or not, it's very damning either way.

G_j

(40,367 posts)
58. many really seem not to care
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 02:28 PM
Mar 2014

but they do know a few messengers that they don't like. The rest of it? eh..

Nye Bevan

(25,406 posts)
49. That's rich, coming from a guy who hangs out in his bathrobe in the Ecuadorian embassy,
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 12:30 PM
Mar 2014

unwashed and unshaven, and making the embassy staff's lives miserable by stealing their food from the refrigerator and not shutting up about the evils of the US, President Obama, the UK, and Sweden.

Autumn

(45,096 posts)
52. It doesn't matter who wears the pants. As long as there is no transparency and oversight
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 12:36 PM
Mar 2014

our "national security" groups are in charge and they decide what is constitutional, when you have someone like Crapper lying under oath and and an idiot like Alexander playing Star Trek and no one , not even the President seems to give a damn "Who's" wearing the pants is the least of our fucking problems.

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
66. Then why isn't he talking about that?
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 08:11 PM
Mar 2014

Why this absurd whining about the President instead of talking about the issues?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

Autumn

(45,096 posts)
69. A better question is why isn't the President talking about these issues.
Sun Mar 9, 2014, 12:14 AM
Mar 2014

It sound like Assange is talking about these issues. Maybe you missed these parts?

"a criminal investigation against Clapper for lying to Congress, or anyone in the National Security Agency for violating the law, the U.S. Constitution? No. Have we seen the firing of a single person associated with those breaches of the rights of American citizens and arguably others as well? The answer is no.”

"We know when the government takes something seriously. It starts a formal investigation, it fires people, it reduces its budgets. We haven’t seen that. So the question is, does the civilian leadership have effective control of the 16 agency intelligence group under Clapper, under the DNI?”

I find none of those questions to be absurd and I don't see any of what he said as whining about Obama.

DirkGently

(12,151 posts)
56. The better point is that no one has the pants.
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 02:21 PM
Mar 2014

The surveillance state is its own country, with its own funding, leaders, and rules at this point. Obama is clearly not in control of it, Congress is not in control of it, and the people are not in control of it.

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
63. No One has the Pants...Surveillance State is it's OWN COUNTRY...
Sat Mar 8, 2014, 07:56 PM
Mar 2014

Why is James Clapper who has Lied to Congress Still there?

To see Udall and Wyden trying to expose the NSA and getting little support from their own fellow elected Critters is a Marker for how corrupted our system has become.

Thank you for your post DG.... You call more attention to what the few of our Elected Officials are Up Against these days.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Julian Assange: Is Presid...