One of the liberals favorite reporters has really rattled the cage this time…and all of this controversy seems to be gathering steam as we speak. Seems Woodward has caused some blood being in the water drawn directly from the O-Machine itself! You have to wonder if, in the end, it will really matter in the long run after all is said and done. Time will tell.

I’ve had reports saved since yesterday morning and they keep piling up today, so…it’s time to get some of them out here. – You can find two of them here and here.

To start with you should take a quick glance of this, it has great links inside the story regarding this issue. – BOB WOODWARD: A ‘Very Senior’ White House Person Warned Me I’d ‘Regret‘ What I’m Doing

Here’s the first report, this is what started the ball rolling:

Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward’s ongoing war of words with President Barack Obama’s White House escalated on Wednesday when Woodward took to the set of MSNBC’s Morning Joe to slam the president’s handling of the sequester fight. Woodward said that the president has displayed a “kind of madness” in his decision to make those cuts as painful and deleterious to the nation’s war fighting capability as possible.

Host Joe Scarborough began the interview by asking for a recap of the fight between Woodward and the administration regarding who proposed the sequester first. Woodward informed Scarborough that the White House has conceded that he was originally right and that the idea for sequester came from the Obama administration.

He then turned to the sequester: “I think peoples’ heads are about to explode about all of this, you know, what the hell is going on here,” Woodward said. “I’m not sure the White House understands exactly what happened in all of these negotiations at the end of 2011 with the sequester and the super committee, because they were really on the sidelines.”

Woodward slammed Obama’s decision to announce that sequester cuts would force an American aircraft carrier to not deploy to the Persian Gulf.

“Can you imagine Ronald Reagan sitting there and saying ‘Oh, by the way, I can’t do this because of some budget document’?” Woodward asked incredulously. “Or George W. Bush saying, ‘You know, I’m not going to invade Iraq because I can’t get the aircraft carriers I need.’ Or even Bill Clinton saying, ‘You know, I’m not going to attack Saddam Hussein’s intelligence headquarters,’ as he did when Clinton was president because of some budget document?”

“Under the Constitution, the president is commander-in-chief and employs the force. And so we now have the president going out because of this piece of paper and this agreement, I can’t do what I need to do to protect the country,” Woodward concluded. “That’s a kind of madness that I haven’t seen in a long time.”

Here’s what happened later in the day:

Bob Woodward has been heralded by conservatives over his insistence that in spite of the White House trying to blame the impending sequester on the Republican-led House, the whole thing was their idea to begin with. On CNN today, Woodward said that the White House is obviously not happy with his reporting, revealing that he received one e-mail from a senior White House official warning him, “you’re going to regret this.”

Kate Bolduan asked Woodward about the response from the White House to his reporting. Woodward said the White House mainly appears to be confused, claiming that one of their rebuttals was to cite a proposal from Republican House leadership that wasn’t actually the sequester. Blitzer said CNN attempted to get someone from the Obama administration on to debate Woodward, but no one wanted to come on.

Woodward made it clear he’s not accusing the White House of any criminal activity, just reporting the facts as he collected them. Blitzer asked Woodward to weigh in on the allegations being thrown in his direction by the White House. Woodward said the administration isn’t happy, revealing that he actually received one e-mail that amounted to a threat.

“It was said very clearly ‘You will regret doing this’… It makes me very uncomfortable to have the White House telling reporters, you’re going to regret doing something you believe in, even though we don’t look at it that way, you do look at it that way.”

He marveled at how “Mickey Mouse” the whole thing was, while expressing some hope that the White House drops its “irrationality” and actually gets to work preventing the sequester.

Watch the video below, courtesy of CNN:

Now check out what happened this morning concerning this issue:

Lanny Davis, formerly special counsel to President Bill Clinton, announced in a radio interview with WMAL this morning, that his critical articles led to a warning that was eerily similar to the one given to Woodward. This is particularly surprising, because Davis is apparently a supporter of President Barack Obama.

According to the former Clinton administration official, a column he wrote for The Washington Times attracted the administration’s attention and led to a threatening phone call with his former editor, John Solomon.

“The words, ‘You’re going to regret are threatening,’” he explained, in reference to Woodward’s story.

But it is what he said next that will likely shock some political observers.

“That exact thing happened to me — and I haven’t spoken of this before,” Davis continued. “When I had my column ‘Purple Nation’ originally in the Washington Times with the editor John Solomon…he received a phone call from a senior Obama White House official who didn’t like some of my columns.”

Davis recounted receiving a phone call from Solomon explaining the threat. It was apparently a strongly-worded rebuke, alleging that the Times’ credentials could be taken away if the columns were continued.

The former Clinton official declined to share the individual’s name who issued the purported threat and said that he didn’t know if it’s the same individual who e-mailed Woodward. But, he said that the language used was similar.

“The editor called me and said that there was an implication that if you don’t stop running Davis’ column, we’re not going to treat you so well — and the implication was we’ll even take away your credentials,” Davis explained.

Last but not least is this one. You can check it out for more video that goes with this report: ‘Will the White House Make Bob Woodward ‘Regret’ Reporting Obama’s Sequester ‘Lies’?’

POLITICO’s “Behind the Curtain” column last night quoted Bob Woodward as saying that a senior White House official has told him in an email he would “regret” questioning White House statements on the origins of sequestration. The official in question is Gene Sperling, economic adviser to the president. The White House has since pushed back, saying the exchange was far more innocuous than Woodward claims.

We have obtained, exclusively, the exchange. Here it is:

From Gene Sperling to Bob Woodward on Feb. 22, 2013


I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today. My bad. I do understand your problems with a couple of our statements in the fall — but feel on the other hand that you focus on a few specific trees that gives a very wrong perception of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here.

But I do truly believe you should rethink your comment about saying saying that Potus asking for revenues is moving the goal post. I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim. The idea that the sequester was to force both sides to go back to try at a big or grand barain with a mix of entitlements and revenues (even if there were serious disagreements on composition) was part of the DNA of the thing from the start. It was an accepted part of the understanding — from the start. Really. It was assumed by the Rs on the Supercommittee that came right after: it was assumed in the November-December 2012 negotiations. There may have been big disagreements over rates and ratios — but that it was supposed to be replaced by entitlements and revenues of some form is not controversial. (Indeed, the discretionary savings amount from the Boehner-Obama negotiations were locked in in BCA: the sequester was just designed to force all back to table on entitlements and revenues.)

I agree there are more than one side to our first disagreement, but again think this latter issue is diffferent. Not out to argue and argue on this latter point. Just my sincere advice. Your call obviously.

My apologies again for raising my voice on the call with you. Feel bad about that and truly apologize.


Do any of you think more and more leftist, so-called reporters will start speaking out and stand with Woodward…or do you think the majority of them will continue to circle Dear Leader’s wagon and protect their messiah? OR do you think all of this is much ado about nothing?

Fire Away – Inquiring Minds Want to Know!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *



  1. Check this out. Go the bottom of the page and see who else is speaking out about threats. The AP no less!

    Here’s a much better link about this man speaking out. Found it via Drudge.

  2. bigtimer
    Maybe some of the older generation of lib reporters will speak out but the younger ones could care less about even their own ist amendment.

    • ga steve…

      When you have a guy like Ron Fournier come out and say he’s been threatened too…that’s not a little thing either. (Not to us polilitcal junkies, that is)

      Then here’s a little from others on the Morning Joke this may be telling for what may come.

      ‘While Woodward can laugh it off, Mark Halperin chimed in, not all reporters would be able to: Woodward won’t be intimidated, but others can be, which is the worry. “It’s just not good for the country.”

      What’s fascinating this time around, he said, is that it’s Woodward we’re dealing with. Willie Geist agreed that a young reporter would be more affected by such a response from the White House, perhaps worrying about their career and future access to the White House. In this case, Geist didn’t read the statement as a threat, but noted that “they picked the wrong guy” to mess with.

      “The bottom line,” Andrea Mitchell asserted, “is the White House has to be able to take criticism and not be so aggressive in pushing back because, in fact, frankly there isn’t enough tough reporting in Washington these days.”

      Just thought I’d throw that out there for something to chew on as well.

  3. Seems they tried a little intimidation on Dr. Carson as well.

  4. The man-child will get you and your little dog too.



  6. Hey gang… just heard Woodward was found dead in a dumpster… thats right, dead as a doornail.

    What I really think… reporters definitely carry water for the left, but when they are compared to worthless teats on a wild boar, their buckets start to leak.

    Btw… how the tune has changed by Obummer. Now he informs America that we may not even notice the results of the Sequester. My conclusion… the prez is a piece of shit liar. I know, you’ve heard me say that a thousand times… I’ll work on coming up with something new.

    • Your old line works for fine for me…it’s a perfect description for Dear Leader.

      As to Woodward being found dead in a dumpster…I think that’s another reason he’s started exposing some of this intimidation from the WH. Of course Dear Leader will say he knows nothing…as usual. But, things are coming unraveled at the seams, when you have the likes of Cry-Baby Davis, Andrea Mitchell, Ron Fournier all speaking out one way or the other…things ain’t lookin’ so good for the O-Team…at the moment.

      Btw…I heard O talk down the big cliff he’s been saying this country is going to go off of if ‘sequestration’ doesn’t go thru…something he created himself, with Jack Lew.

      Methinks some people are starting to wake up…for how long, who knows?

      • BT,

        We all know the media covers for Obummer, but when the lies are so blatant and obvious, there comes a time where everyone will elect to cover their own ass. I think the snowball just fell over the cliff and the media has reached a point where they can no longer protect this pathological liar.

        • I’m sure hoping your conclusion is right Paul, so far..I’ve been somewhat surprised by some that have spoken out today…against this O-Team.

          Btw…you can be sure the Clintoons are enjoying every single second of this. 😉

  7. View from across the pond about the Obama “thugocracy”

    • Excellent, excellent piece from Gardiner. He hit the nail on the head in every way. His conclusions are also spot-on as well.

      Btw…thanks so much for this article. Nile is and has been one of my favorites, haven’t seen anything from him in quite awhile. – Much appreciated.

  8. Friends…I read this piece yesterday. This is as good a place as any to insert it.

    • Excellent article pointing out how we are being taken over by the left. More people should read it. Its so simple as to how it works on a dumbed down society, which we are.

  9. Well BT, it is nice to see at least a couple of msm guys speak up, but too little-
    too late. Potus got a second term and the damage to this country may be irreversible. After all if a bogus birth certificate, fuzzy social security card, sealed records, associations with radicals, etc., did not bring any consternation then a little hissy fit between msm and potus while entertaining, will not yield much in the results column.

    BTW, is the Congressional Black Caucus the worst collection of scum (no disrespect to scum intended) ever assembled in one place?

    • You’re right about it being too little, too late. – Then again, better late than never.

      As to the end result about all of this, I fear this too will eventually be swept under the carpet just as everything this administration has gotten away…blood on their hands and all.

      As to the CBC…it’s a pathetic joke.

    • CBC is exactly to White folks what the KKK was to Black folks except they haven’t burn any crosses on lawns. They are allied with The New Black Panthers and American Socialist Party. One has spoken to and been paid a fee for services speaking to CPUSA.

  10. It’s no fun to get kicked out of the club, is it Bobby?

  11. Here’s Levin on with Cavuto today…he minced no words, as usual. But he had a lot to say about what kind of a creature Dear Leader is as well.

    And here’s this one too.

    He’s such a liar…and he doesn’t even do that well!

  12. Woodward said the tirade was followed by a page-long email from the aide, one of the four or five administration officials most closely involved in the fiscal negotiations with the Hill. “I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today,” the official typed. “You’re focusing on a few specific trees that give a very wrong impression of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here. … I think you will regret staking out that claim.”

    Woodward repeated the last sentence, making clear he saw it as a veiled threat. “‘You’ll regret.’ Come on,” he said. “I think if Obama himself saw the way they’re dealing with some of this, he would say, ‘Whoa, we don’t tell any reporter ‘you’re going to regret challenging us.’”

    This says a lot about how the Obama thugs plays hardball with everyone. Even Richard Nixon didn’t threaten Bob Woodward. (And don’t think for a minute that Obama didn’t sign off on this.)

    “They have to be willing to live in the world where they’re challenged,” Woodward continued in his calm, instantly recognizable voice…

    Why? When have the Obama people ever been challenged before in the last five or six years?

    A White House official said: “Of course no threat was intended. As Mr. Woodward noted, the email from the aide was sent to apologize for voices being raised in their previous conversation. The note suggested that Mr. Woodward would regret the observation.”

    As is always the case, Mr. Woodward was just too dumb to understand the administration’s ‘nuance.’

    Woodward — first in “The Price of Politics,” his bestseller on the failed quest for a grand budget bargain, and later with his opinion piece in The Post — makes plain that sequestration was an idea crafted by the White House. Obama personally approved the plan and later signed it into law. Woodward was right, several congressional officials involved in the talks told us.

    And never mind that the Politico has soft-pedaled this fact, if they have reported it at all. After all, they might lose their precious ‘access’ to the ‘puppet master’ Obama.

    February 28, 2013 at 10:02 am

    Woodward has forgotten to have amnesia.

    Instead of ignoring inconvenient facts, and swallowing and regurgitating verbatim the usual spin and fear-mongering issued by Nerobama and his minions in the regime, Woodward has let the cat out of the bag –– giving all of us a rare glimpse inside the real workings of the-most-transparent-administration-in-history.

    Bob has forgotten the first rule of modern journalism: that the proper role of the media is to coverup and double-down on Nerobama’s lies, to hide the facts, bury the truth, confuse and misdirect the people, and to praise Nerobama, to advance his agenda, to protect him at every turn, secure his election, reelection, and re-reelection, and to crack down hard on anybody who dares to point out a single instance of his treachery, madness, malfeasance, misfeasance, and abuses of power.

    So now Bob’s just another washed-up has-been. No doubt it’s a matter of creeping dementia. Time to put him out to pasture.

    Move along folks; nothing to see here. (Sigh.)

    • Excellent all the way ’round Snake. – Certainly and appreciated the comment at the bottom. That sums it up to a tee as well. ~

  13. Check this out…a couple more names to add to the list. ~

  14. Here’s one more…and this is the worst yet! The language used towards this woman is outrageous…where is the msm?