You think George, bringing Amal at the White House, he has behaved properly or may have embarrassed Obama?

I think that bringing Amal at the White House was not the smartest move for George, do not forget that Amal is the lawyer of Julian Assange, the man accused of publishing wikileaks is 251,000 ducumenti U.S. diplomats, many of whom secrets !

@ Lela, there is much about this relationship that is not smart....

I suspect, PR are in for a busy time they will find hard to control.

On the other hand maybe this was just a HOLIDAY ROMANCE, a type of fling, could all be over before Como. Como will tell.

I don't believe it was a holiday romance. Pics show that they've been together for months on several occasions.
Bringing Amal to White House is a major date. Since George has been hiding the relationship for a long time, he must have good reason to make it public now.

Julian Assange's case is against Sweden not US. I don't think Obama has to worry about him now.
If that screening was just fine, then this holiday travel must have been planned early enough and went pretty well so far.

I think George has enough sense not to do anything to embarrass anybody !

He knows what he's doing....we don't !

He behaved properly by bringing as his date the woman he is seeing. I mean this as no disrespect to her, but Amal is not important enough to cause a problem.

You see it's all about control.... She could not have invited herself?

Same as you control publicity....She can't contol that, George's PR, under George's command control that .... Don't they?

For example photo below left side "Pap controlled photo".  Photo on the right (same pap pose) funnily Amal, by coincidence strikes the same pap pose, (like the rest of the room totally unaware of a camera) a camera pointing at her, in a room full of Big Stars.

This Gal wouldn't, couldn't be doing her own PR home runs.... Just a thought.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]" />


White House would not suffer any embarrassment, (if any), without the pics. It was private, nobody should have known....Ssh.


Blah, I'm probably over thinking.....

Well said, Jo! Was about to post the same response.

In those circumstances he would know exactly what was appropriate and what wasn't and conversations would have been had.

Sweden were seeking Assange's extradition, not the US, for possible rape charges, and is now seeking refuge in the Ecuador embassy in London

What is interesting is the drones case Amal is working on for the UN.......

Multi-faceted stuff. Fascinating

Jo, you just hit 1000th Clooney-liciousness!More than anybody? Congrats!
Maybe I was the final vote out of 1000?

Isn't the camera ALWAYS aimed at George in these situations ??

That's what the paps and people always want IMO.

Oh yes.....thank you all for my 1000 Greenies   

I want to thank my writer, my director, my dog etc etc

  

Now you've got 1001, just like 1001 Arabian Nights!!! Oh, isn't that a porn flick???

I agree with Jo too, George does know what HE is doing....

He may not be aware what someone has planned, it was meant to be private.... JMO




@ Jo,

Applause X 1000..... You know it makes sense, to make sense....Congrates JO !!!!! 

melbert wrote:Now you've got 1001, just like 1001 Arabian Nights!!!  Oh, isn't that a porn flick???  

I wouldn't know Mel.....I've lived a sheltered life !   

Joanna wrote:Oh yes.....thank you all for my 1000 Greenies   

I want to thank my writer, my director, my dog etc etc

  

LOL, for once a short speech!

No one can be embarrassed… come on. I think we have to wait till she or her family is somehow mysteriously linked to flood, locust infestation and drought…or events this magnitude. Other than that, all is good.   

Sevens wrote:Julian Assange's case is against Sweden not US. I don't think Obama has to worry about him now.
If that screening was just fine, then this holiday travel must have been planned early enough and went pretty well so far.

Not what you're saying is correct, Sweden has requested the extradition of Assange to put him on trial on charges of rape against two women activists Wikileaks ,in America he is accused of treason and espionage for making public confidential documents.

You're right I think Lela, but specifically Geoffrey Robertson QC and Amal Alamuddin were the lawyers involved in 2010 in the Swedish case and won in the High Court

No idea where the US have got to with their case, or who or if any QC has been retained, given that he has been given asylum by Ecuador, and is holed up in their London Embassy...........

You all are forgetting one very important thing NOBODY gets near the President without a thorough background check. I'm sure they were quite aware of her views and the views of her family. So if the Secret Service and even more likely the NSA put up NO objections then what any of us think is a moot point. JMO as an American who know how our government agencies work.

I asked the question only after I well informed about Assange and still think that Obama does jumping for joy after the press from around the world wrote that Assange's lawyer as well as Clooney's girlfriend was present at a private screening the White House. It was probably a piece of news that should not be public but Lysa Grant on twitter published photos and everything became public domain and it is for this reason that the next day the same Lysa has deleted all but by then the damage was done. for those interested in the Assange case / America public extract of an article that I clarified the ideas.

The WikiLeaks founder has been accused of being a terrorist hi-tech from U.S. Vice President , Joe Biden. That the former Republican candidate , Sarah Palin, has publicly stated that Assange " should be hunted as an operative of al- Qaeda ." That commentators like Bob Beckel on Fox have asked to " illegally shoot the bastard son of a bitch ." That in February 2011 a plan emerged publicly anti- WikiLeaks , who bore the mark of one of the most fearsome high-tech companies in business with the Pentagon : the Palantir Technologies of Palo Alto, financially supported by the In-Q -Tel the CIA.

There is not a single evidence to say so established that the rape allegations against Assange are just a hype . And ' interesting, though, to read what he thinks , for example, the American private intelligence agency , Stratfor , in its internal emails , and therefore confidential , which have become public ( and also published by L'Espresso ) just because the collective Anonymous hackers attacked servers of Stratfor business , taking away 5.3 million posts . "The charges of sexual violence are rarely operated through an Interpol red notice as in this case ," writes Stratfor referring to the arrest warrant issued by Interpol November 30, 2010 , which made Assange a wanted man in the world . "And so there is no doubt," the agency continues , "that the thing has as its goal to prevent the spread of government documents by WikiLeaks ." It ' a judgment is particularly interesting because above all suspicion . Stratfor does not harbor any sympathy for WikiLeaks , to the point that , in the secrecy of their internal correspondence , the agency's analysts write: " the founder should be subject to waterboarding ." And also: "I am in favor of the use made ​​of any accusation invented for this character to disappear from circulation and its server. And consegnerei that dickhead soldier [ Bradley Manning, the alleged source of WikiLeaks , ed] the first pack of wild dogs or perhaps simply make the Iranians would do anything to our sources in Iran . "

For Riotta , Julian Assange uses " the genius of public relations that the soul" to superimpose the case of Stockholm to Washington, manipulating the situation to his advantage. No space to concerns that Assange's extradition to Sweden may be only a prelude to that in the United States .

The fury with which the detractors of WikiLeaks dismiss this fear affects . It is not clear where they come from their certainties . He insists that there is no evidence that the U.S. wants to extradite him : what claims these people? A text message from Obama? The whole story of the escape of the secret files of the Pentagon and the State Department released by WikiLeaks is a matter of national security and as such is shrouded in secrecy.

There are various reasons people connected to WikiLeaks who have been called to testify before the grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia, in the investigation of the output file. In June 2011 , the Express has met one in the United States : former researcher at MIT in Boston, David House .

" If the investigation of the grand jury is no longer in progress and has now been closed , because the United States did not declare unequivocally , as the diplomatic row erupted around Assange ? ," He told the Express Michael Ratner of the ' Center for Constitutional Rights ' in New York , assisting WikiLeaks and Bradley Manning. Neither sounds strange to anyone that England has come to threaten to violate the Embassy of Ecuador and that, according to estimates published in the English press , the police siege of the embassy of Ecuador would cost up to 50 thousand pounds a day .

It ' never happened before so many resources and energies have been spent simply to interrogate a man suspected of rape? The day on which Ecuador has granted asylum to Assange , the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan , Craig Murray , has revealed the following background information on its website : " I ​​am back in England today and I have learned with dismay from my source within the Foreign Office that the British government has really decided - after immense pressure from the Obama administration - to enter the embassy of Ecuador and to arrest Assange . " Murray has been for over 20 years a member of the diplomatic staff of Her Majesty. Sources in the Foreign Office does not give a miss for sure.

LornaDoone wrote:You all are forgetting one very important thing NOBODY gets near the President without a thorough background check.  I'm sure they were quite aware of her views and the views of her family.  So if the Secret Service and even more likely the NSA put up NO objections then what any of us think is a moot point.  JMO as an American who know how our government agencies work.

AMEN!

The question is a moot point.  You asked if George bringing Amal was an embarrassment to President Obama.  He was quite aware who she is and what she believes.  So no, it was not an embarrassment because he and our Secret Service probably know more about her than she even realized.

They probably know more about her than her own parents...

Agree this is a non-issue. The White House hosts people of all sorts of viewpoints--even republicans!

Lighterside wrote:They probably know more about her than her own parents...

snort!

I don't know exactly what to think about it, Lela.

I found it odd that he take her to the White House because the news reached me, was that Julian Assange is now considered an enemy of the Usa
But I think he would not do anything that could challenge the president, with what intention?
I have a strong intuition that George will enter politics one day

This is the same situation as the neocons in this country trying to hold up an Obama civil rights appointee because when he was a defense attorney, he represented a murderer.  Suddenly now, attorneys are being held responsible for the crimes committed by their clients and painted with the same broad brush!

The Senate Decides Being A Lawyer Disqualifies You From Holding A Legal Post

I don't think for one minute that His Nibs will enter politics. Why on earth would he want to do that?

He is in a much better place where he is now. He has his own life, enough knowledge, the ear of all sorts of people from the President down, influence and celebrity and all the publicity to go with it.

He can develop his own projects and passions and very successfully make a difference in the world which is all he wants to do

And that is why he spends several hours every day on it

I´m sure there are ultra feminist screaming to jail Julian Assange, but the fact is, as a first timer (if he was convicted) he would not be send to prison. In scandinavia you do not get a prison sentence from a rape (as first timer, unless spreding AIDS, or being pedophile), it is called "villkorlig frigivning" so they do not go to jail at all necessarily (if they behave during the time of Villkorlig frigivning). Second time they might end up doing some time, months prob.

"He can develop his own projects and passions and very successfully make a difference in the world which is all he wants to do

And that is why he spends several hours every day on it"
Good way to put it party.

How many times does he have to say it? He's not interested in getting into politics. Period.

As far as bringing her to the White House - I'd be more concerned with her involvement in the Middle East than with Julian Assange. That's an area of politics that has much more immediate importance.

Wait. Did I read that right? In Scandinavian countries, there's such a thing as 'first rape is free?' (!)

I've never seen that in any of the tourist brochures.

I asked the question only after I well informed about Assange and still think that Obama does jumping for joy after the press from around the world wrote that Assange's lawyer as well as Clooney's girlfriend was present at a private screening the White House. It was probably a piece of news that should not be public but Lysa Grant on twitter published photos and everything became public domain and it is for this reason that the next day the same Lysa has deleted all but by then the damage was done. for those interested in the Assange case / America public extract of an article that I clarified the ideas.

I don't think damage was done and especially not to Obama. I think why this should not have made public and Lysa deleted the pictures was just because George has made a deal with people magazine that's why they were hiding the story. And now after people magazine had they story every newspaper mentioned they were there together and these picture get now published anyway but nobody really cares about her being at the white house more her being with GEORGE     

And as Lorna said. The secret service knows probably everything about yourself before your enter the white house. They didn't have a problem with it so why should we be concerned?????

I spoke only of "embarrassment" to Obama not to issue to U.S. national security, hey, is not the same thing!

Lela - You're right. It's not the same thing, and she wouldn't have gotten past the front gate if they thought she was a security threat.

To be honest, I don't think the media here care about her politics. They're more interested in her being George's new gf. This forum is the only place I've seen it mentioned that her presence at the White House might be inappropriate or embarrassing to the President.

No, because if she was an embarrassment to Obama, she wouldn't have been allowed to come.

Or does anyone here really think that she just turned up unannounced and they were all too polite to send her home????

No, the White House knew who was coming and approved entry. Therefore: not an embarrassment except to those who want to make problems.

absolutely agree with you if no one knew but draws ...... not so '. Lysa Grant docet

Totally agree Katie.........

Whether she's back in her office(s) today or not, she's likely to be keeping an eye on this evolving news, this from the BBC News website, about the latest from the Egyptian courts.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

So much for the Arab spring.

Well, let's not give up hope just yet. I gather that death sentences are regularly commuted in Egypt, but presumably each case based on what the defendent actually did (one would hope!).

But it must be incredibly frustrating to see this, when you've worked very hard on recommendations for the legal framework, including judges, to be separate from those in government.

But it could change and since that report was only finalised and as the film shows announced in the middle of February, there's a long way to go yet..........

It's a start

Thought I read somewhere that she wasn't actually on the guest list.  If true, the only reason she was cleared so quickly was because George threw that fundraiser at his home, and I think he did a fundraiser in Switzerland as well.  In any case, if it's true, yeah, our boy overstepped his bounds   .  One day he's going to be told he's not that important and to get back in line like everyone else.

LizzyNY wrote:How many times does he have to say it? He's not interested in getting into politics. Period.

As far as bringing her to the White House - I'd be more concerned with her involvement in the Middle East than with Julian Assange. That's an area of politics that has much more immediate importance.

And how many times he said one thing and did another? It's my opinion, I learned to respect the opinions of others. We try to be cool in this forum, but it's hard, anything is reason to stress, other forums I frequent are quite different.

George comments about him going into politics from a Newsweek article posted online 2/20/11:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

But despite occasional overtures from the California Democratic ...Clooney has rejected the constraints of conventional politics.

“I didn’t live my life in the right way for politics, you know,” he said, sitting outside the Central Pub in Juba, scarfing down pizza. “I f--ked too many chicks and did too many drugs, and that’s the truth.”

A smart campaigner, he believes, “would start from the beginning by saying, ‘I did it all. I drank the bong water. Now let’s talk about issues.’ That’s gonna be my campaign slogan: ‘I drank the bong water.’?”

marysunshine wrote:Thought I read somewhere that she wasn't actually on the guest list.  If true, the only reason she was cleared so quickly was because George threw that fundraiser at his home, and I think he did a fundraiser in Switzerland as well.  In any case, if it's true, yeah, our boy overstepped his bounds   .  One day he's going to be told he's not that important and to get back in line like everyone else.

Perhaps you thought you read that.  Maybe in a newspaper in your mind?

Someone going to the White House gets vetted and she would have to be on the guest list.  

Had she NOT been on the list and correctly vetted she would NOT have gotten that close to the President.  So please unless you've got a link to that info let's not start shit here as it's obvious from your comments you are NOT a fan and must have your own agenda for making a comment like that.

I don't see any embarrassment on the part of the George whatsoever. I mean if George is going to have President Obama at his home and post for photos with Stacy, why on earth would he then be embarrassed to take Amal to the Whitehouse - somehow I don't think George embarrasses easily...

She wasn't on the publicized guest list, but neither were other wifes/girlfriends either.

I say it again, nobody can go into the White House and meet president Obama without prior approval and permission. If they didn't want her there, she wouldn't have got in (or rather, George would have been asked not to bring her).

Way2Old4Dis wrote:Wait. Did I read that right?  In Scandinavian countries, there's such a thing as 'first rape is free?' (!)

I've never seen that in any of the tourist brochures.

LOL, you funny way2old4dis.   
You have been in the wrong offices and reading wrong brochures… at the immigration office they give you updated info…

Nicky, and everyone, what I meant was that as a matter of fact: Sweden has the highest incidence of reported rapes in EU, but the lowest conviction rate, huge disparity between those two (a recent study commissioned by the European Union and UN). So it is more likely for a person (visiting or living) in Sweden to be sexually assaulted than robbed.

The severity of the rape crime do not reflect in the law. Which kind of made it odd Assange´s lawyers (she was not mentioned) were so scared for him to be procecuted in the first place, as rapists ‘enjoy impunity’ there.

But he was a co-founder of Wikileaks and that´s a whole different story, he has many, many lawyers, one london barrister (not her, again) suggested a book deal for him to cover massive attorney bills.

I can´t think a one single reason either these two cases could be any embarresment to WH.

(For those going to Sweden bec it isn´t what it used to be: Best spots Ystad (summer), Stockholm and areas there like Gamla stan, Östermalm, Djurgården. Definately avoid Tensta. Gotland (summer), awesome, just awesome. Åre (winter).   

WOW!

Sweden is off my list of countries to visit FOREVER.

Any country that gives tacit approval to rape by being lenient to rapists is on my Fuck Off list forever.

I'll not go there with you.

Fuck Off, Sweden.

LornaDoone...Didn't mean to rattle you, just expressing my own opinion. It wasn't a news paper.. but a radio talk show. Anyway. I do enjoy everyone's thoughts and comments, but think I'll sit back and be a reader, and not comment for a while.

Re fuck off Sweden:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]