Main > Everything Else
"Propagannon" confirmed : Fake reporter in WH press conferences.
ChadTower:
--- Quote from: mr.Curmudgeon on February 15, 2005, 03:40:59 pm ---Is he still renting himself out? If so, how much for a weekend? I could use a hand building my cab...
--- End quote ---
...oose.
mr.Curmudgeon:
--- Quote from: fredster on February 13, 2005, 11:53:17 pm ---Like Gannon said "people detached from reality". It hit a nerve with the dems and forced them to wake up a minute.
--- End quote ---
Just wanted to clear this up, Guckert's "divorced from reality quote", as horrible a partisan comment it was, was not the thing that got the left up in arms. That the Right claims to have a monopoly on reality, while eschewing it for "faith", is nothing shocking. What finally drove Guckert out into the light was this, (from the Washington Post):
"Pretty much every day, Gannon got cleared into the White House briefing room by a press office that knew his real name. Press Secretary Scott McClellan frequently called on him during the mid-day briefings, using his fake name. McClellan was consistently rewarded with questions that -- in stark contrast from most of what passes for questions in that room -- were more expressions of conservative dogma than actual attempts to elicit information. Members of the press corps individually confronted Gannon and told him that he didn't belong there. But nothing more serious than that happened -- until Bush called on him at his televised Jan. 26 news conference and he asked a loaded, inaccurate question partly derived from a Rush Limbaugh joke.
In the ensuing days, liberal Web sites and an army of bloggers determined his real name, called attention to his lack of journalistic credentials, found a link to gay porn Web sites, pointed out how that ran afoul of his "family values" positions, and apparently hounded him into resigning."
Mr. Guckert was caught plagiarizing one of Rush's lame jokes, trying to pass it off as fact...too bad he chose to do so by disparaging new minority leader Harry Reid (D), a Dem with some newfound backbone. He stood up for himself, the left took up the cause of defending him as well. The research into "Gannon" ensued and his shadowy life was flushed out into the open. Don't let Guckert play the victim here, he's an ass, and he's getting what he deserves.
mrC
ChadTower:
I have to admit, when so much of your post (and it usually is) is someone else's work, I don't read it.
mr.Curmudgeon:
--- Quote from: ChadTower on February 15, 2005, 04:27:02 pm ---I have to admit, when so much of your post (and it usually is) is someone else's work, I don't read it.
--- End quote ---
Boo hoo.
It's called supporting evidence, and you don't use any because you never have it. I always give credit for the quote, and I link when necessary.
And here's some more for you, from a press "gaggle" shortly after Guckert came to light. Proof that McClellan was complicit in hiding "Gannon's" true name:
" Q Jeff Gannon. How did he get a White House pass, or what kind of credentials did he have?
MR. McCLELLAN: Just like anyone else who comes to the White House.
Q Hard pass?
MR. McCLELLAN: No, he had never applied for a hard pass. He had a daily pass. I think he's been coming for --
Q Was he coming for --
MR. McCLELLAN: Hang on. I think he's been coming for more than two years now.
Q Under what name?
MR. McCLELLAN: Sorry?
Q Under what name?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, you have to get cleared. You have to -- just like anybody else that comes to the White House, you have to have your full name, your Social Security number and your birth date. So you have to be cleared just like anybody else.
Q So he was being cleared under James Guckert, or whatever his name is?
MR. McCLELLAN: My understanding, yes...
Q But did you know during all this time that he really wasn't Jeff Gannon?
MR. McCLELLAN: I heard at some point, yes -- previously."
mrC
ChadTower:
--- Quote from: mr.Curmudgeon on February 15, 2005, 04:36:34 pm ---It's called supporting evidence, and you don't use any because you never have it.
--- End quote ---
The sources you use are not the type of sources I go to for evidence. Evidence is a fact, cold and hard. Places like the Washington Post wouldn't know what to do with a fact if it were cold and hard and shoved up their behind. I don't quote sources because the things I post are my own opinion, formed by critical thought after reading several items on the subject from both sides of the fence.