Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Has The White House and Texas Republican Party Lied About Ties To Jeff Gannon And Why

host · 03-08-2005, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

Probably for the same reason I thought Barney Frank's "roommate" running a gay escort service out of the basement of Frank's DC home was immaterial.

So what you're saying is that Congress shall pass a law regulating who is classified as a reporter or not? I can think of 1 minor Constitutional obstacle...

A free press means exactly that. It must be FREE. Even if that means that what YOU view as a "non-reputable" news service exists, or if they send somebody that YOU don't think of as being a "reporter" to cover a story. I'm pretty sure that a presidential press conference is "news", wouldn't you say?

Ah, we're going with the "impartial" New York Times...yup, they have NO history of employing journalistic WHORES there, do they... >COUGH< Jayson Blair >COUGH<

Absolutely. It also exposes your anti-prostitute bias. BTW, you DO realize that you're accusing him of committing a criminal act (prostitution), right? When and where was he convicted of this crime? Ever hear of "innocent until proven guilty"? And it certainly SEEMS like your apparently unsubstantiated accusation is not only not made with an absence of malice, it seems downright deliberately malicious. But if that issue came up, it would be for a jury to decide...

Prolly the same way the rest of the press whores got their day passes....they requested a daypass.

You DO know that they generally allow all kinds of people into the White House, right? Even non-reporters can take the tour...

So a reporter asking inane questions is now a criminal act??? So when do those reporters go to prison who ask questions like "Your entire family just got eaten and killed by a Tornado. How do you feel?"

You don't think EVERY President knows who the tough and who the easy reporters in the room are? Is this somehow criminal?

Ummm...maybe because he ACTUALLY IS A REPORTER??? I know you seem to have trouble getting past the whole "gay prostitutes cannot be reporters" thing, but TRY.

Having recently been through a background check myself (not for the White House, but for a job in the State Judicial Branch), I know that it can take practically forever. Getting my fingerprint cards "run" took over a month. So why would a background check be required? Isn't running them through metal detectors enough? And how do you know that a cursory background check (akin to a NICS check) wasn't run?

Damn, I never thought of that...who would EVER have thought that the President of the United States ( >COUGH< "I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky" fingerjab fingerjab >COUGH COUGH< ) would ever try to influence the media???

/obvious sarcasm tag

daswig, News reports of Guckert's gay male escort activities are well documented and include screen shots from his websites and about the
rates that he was charging his clients.

It has also been reported that President Bush, a man who ignored a member
of the press who is considered a White House press corp institution, covering the administrations of nine U.S. presidents, by refusing to call on her to ask a question during any of his news conferences in the last several years, yet
called on "Gannon/Guckert" by his fake first name during a January news conference, made these curious comments to an aid of Canadian PM Paul Martin:

Quote:

<a href="http://paulmartintime.ca/mediacoverage/000149.html">http://paulmartintime.ca/mediacoverage/000149.html</a>
Bush prefers Martin spokesman to his own
posted: January 16, 2004
by Jane Taber, Globe and Mail

Ottawa — This is the tale of the two Scotts — one American, the other Canadian. One is dark-haired, the other blond. Both are 35 and both work for the most powerful men in their respective countries.

Scott McClellan is the press secretary to U.S. President George W. Bush; Scott Reid is the senior strategist to Prime Minister Paul Martin.

But, according to Mr. Bush, Mr. Martin has the prettier Scott.

Indeed. Welcome to a new era of “pretty face” Canada-U.S. relations.

This is what happened:

Mr. Bush met Mr. Reid earlier this week at the summit in Monterrey, Mexico, just after the President's breakfast with Mr. Martin.

Mr. Reid was not initially in the hotel room where the two leaders and their closest advisers met, but was called in to brief the Prime Minister at the end as the group waited for the media.

Mr. Bush wandered over during Mr. Reid's chat with the Prime Minister. Mr. Reid introduced himself and shook hands with Mr. Bush.

“Well, what do you do for this guy?” the President asked as he pointed to the Prime Minister.

“Well, you know, sir, I can't really say,” Mr. Reid said. “It's not that I don't want to. It's just that, you know, I don't really know from day to day.”

This is true. Mr. Reid handles a number of files and performs a number of different duties, depending on the issue and the day.
<b>
The President chuckled. “Well, you got a pretty face,” he told the surprised Mr. Reid. He wasn't done. “You got a pretty face,” he said again. “You're a good-looking guy. Better looking than my Scott anyway.”</b>

This is true. His Scott has a receding hairline and is on the chubby side, while Mr. Martin's Scott has a full head of hair and is quite fit.

For the first time in his life, Mr. Reid had no reply. “I didn't know what to say,” said Mr. Reid, noting later that he wished that Mr. Bush had referred to him as a “rugged-looking young man or something.

“But I'll take what I can, I guess,” he joked. “When a Texas Republican says you've got a pretty face, then I guess there is just no way around it

daswig, the hypocrisy of this administration is what the Gannon/Guckert story is about. Belittle it, taunt those of us who post about it, but it isn't going away.

The SD Argus Leader, up until March 6, had remained silent about Gannon. That is no longer the case. The nine year old Clinton/Lewisnky matter that you cite is an example of what can happen when the press goes on a frenzy about a story. The fact that you still bring it up with such enthusiasm should impress on you the implications that this story holds, especially if it gets the in depth reporting that it deserves. I think that you reveal your concern through the chiding volume of your protests.