Daily Kos

View Story | 74 comments

  •  No, I'm with ari (4.00 / 4)

    To call this diary "What probably happened" is a disservice to all the responsible researchers here at dKos. You pulled this out of your ass.

    There's no evidence that anybody at the White House even knew about Guckert's escort business, since he kept that separate from his "Jim Gannon" identity. So to speculate that he was buggering someone in the White House with no evidence whatsoever is beyond lame to flat-out irresponsible.

    by hamletta on Wed Feb 16, 2005 at 09:04:23 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  So (none / 1)

      space, you can help clarify your diary by calling it 'What MIGHT've Happened' or something along those lines.

      Frankly, space, I have no way of course of knowing whether your hypothetical scenario is true or false.  However, it has a logic to it.

      Get your Democracy Bond and help build a 50-state Democratic Party!

      by RobertInWisconsin on Wed Feb 16, 2005 at 09:10:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Your opinion (4.00 / 5)

      I fully admit that this is speculation.  No question.

      But to say that it is a disservice to researchers is just asinine. This is my opinion based on the research that has been done, not in spite of it.

      You say that there is "no evidence that anybody even knew about Guckert's escort business".  You are absolutely correct.

      But given that Guckert was a male escort with no experience in journalism, I find it more likely than not that Guckert was not placed in the White House for his reporting skills.  So why would a hooker be in the White House?  I find hooking to be an excellent possibility.  your mileage may vary.

      by space on Wed Feb 16, 2005 at 09:19:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's the only thing that (none / 1)

        easily explains all the facts collected to date.  Every other hypothesis breaks down too easily.

        Now what was the real story behind the pretzel choking bs one they fed to us?  (And when was that?)

        Jeffgannon.com was born 6/02; I would date this story begins shortly before then.

        What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away.

        by Marie on Wed Feb 16, 2005 at 10:41:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Whoa ... (none / 0)

          If the undeniable injuries on Bush's face came from an overly-aggressive fuck-spree with a tough former-military "top" on a White House rug ... it sure would explain why the support team thought that the "pretzel" angle, for all its laughability and late-night comedian potential, was a vastly preferable story.

          Now wouldn't it?

          There's really only one conversation in life. It just covers a lot of ground. -- Chris Blask

          by soundacious on Thu Feb 17, 2005 at 12:59:49 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Lay off (none / 1)

      Space. He's just presenting a hypothesis. What's wrong with that?  He backs it up too, not with facts, but it opens up a what-if, that could point some reporter in the right direction.

      by Rhett on Wed Feb 16, 2005 at 09:30:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Backs up what? (none / 1)

        It's 99% speculation, 1% fact. We know Guckert was involved in escort services, but there's no proven link yet to that and his tenure as a White House "correspondent."

        Look: I'll admit I'm conservative on these matters, because these flights of fancy tend to take on a life of their own, and can discredit the strong, proven stuff. I was arguing against connecting him to actual prostitution before Americablog came up with proof.

        But I don't think you'll ever find proof of anything this elaborate, even if it did happen.

        by hamletta on Wed Feb 16, 2005 at 10:12:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  This sort of speculation can't hurt. Here's why (4.00 / 3)

      I made this comment in another thread.
      Btw, I suggested exactly the same thing in diary two days ago, and rebutted this criticism then.
      The problem with the freeper backlash is that we know Guckert is a prostitute. So what are they going to say? "Those VILE Kossacks are saying that the White House brought this gay prostitute into the White House to have sex with someone there. Why, that's just .. ridiculous.. isn't it? Isn't it?"
      No, in this particular case, I think it doesn't hurt to speculate about White House clients for
      USMCPT Jeff.

      by BoringDem on Wed Feb 16, 2005 at 10:04:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Agreed (4.00 / 2)

      If we had any evidence at all for this, that would be one thing. But there's nothing. He apparently is/was a whore, he's in the WH, voila, Bush is the one fucking him. I just don't buy it.

      The only way anybody figured the Lewinsky thing out was because Lewinsky was dumb as a post and Tripp was taping their conversations without telling her. If the most powerful man in the free world wants some ass, he's got the entire Secret Service to help him cover things up, plus whomever or whatever Rove has up his sleeve. (Besides, since he's the guy with his finger on the button I think maybe he should get as much action of whatever variety that he feels he requires....)

      Seriously though, I do think this line of thinking is irresponsible until we get more solid evidence. Just my $.02.

      disincorporated
      music, politics, &c

      by nota bene on Thu Feb 17, 2005 at 12:03:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  We have lots of evidence -- (4.00 / 2)

        not the sort of iron clad case one can make in a court of law - but the evidence for this hypothesis is compelling.

        What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away.

        by Marie on Thu Feb 17, 2005 at 12:34:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  What evidence is that? (4.00 / 2)

          I'm not completely discounting the possibility, but it strikes me personally as farfetched. You describe the evidence as "compelling" but I don't see any, let alone compelling. space's deductive reasoning (re: why Guckert and not somebody else) is pretty sound but the gap in space's argument is the assumption that somebody in the WH was having an affair with Guckert.

          The reason I say "affair" is because I find it hard to believe anyone would go to such lengths because they liked a particular hooker that much. I mean, weeks, months, maybe, but years? I just don't find that credible.

          The other problem I have with space's hypothesis is the assumption that the john is Bush. I think McClellan seems like a much more likely candidate. (space, not trying to get down on you, you've clearly been doing some thinking on this.)

          [Come to think of it, we do have some weird circumstantial evidence about Bush possibly having some sort of baldness fetish, and some bizarre quotes about the attractiveness of some random men. I don't see what that demonstrates.]

          Anyway, I'm not saying this is completely out of the question but I think there are plenty of puzzle pieces we don't have still. If others feel this is a legit hypothesis let's run it down but I'm skeptical this is going to pan out.

          disincorporated
          music, politics, &c

          by nota bene on Thu Feb 17, 2005 at 01:21:57 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Problem with McClellan (none / 0)

            I admit those are possibilities, but here is where I think they fail.

            First, Guckert was in the press corps, with Talon cover before Scottie took over.  I doubt he'd have the ability to pull this off before Ari left (even then, I question whether a press secretary could and would do it unsolicited).

            Second, if it was Ari, why would Guckert be there after he left.

            Third, if it isn't those two, who in the WH would have the pull to get Scottie to go along?

            Just asking.

            by space on Thu Feb 17, 2005 at 04:59:35 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  That's pretty much (4.00 / 2)

              the same thought process I went through in trying when I considered all of the possible Johns in light of the facts that we know.

              The only "dots" that I think you fail to incorporate is that Guckert did go to college (I think someone confirmed that he graduated but I'm not positive of that at the moment), was in a fraternity and had or attempted to have a court reporting business.  The latter was likely some sort of scam because DEL passed some legislation to crack down on scam court reporting operations in the state.  That suggests that Guckert is a bit of a con man.  The educations suggests that he's of average intelligence -- not bright but not dull either.  That along with the fraternity membership suggests a high need to be somebody.  His recent interaction with the fraternity had him posing as a man of mystery perhaps an undercover CIA operative -- attention and adulation from young men. (The picture of him attending the WH Correspondent's Dinner was not of someone forced to go to it but of someone who was enjoying the status of attending it.)

              That all leads me to conclude that getting him into the WH may not have been the sole reason for the reporter ruse -- it was also to keep him happy by letting him be a somebody, and that somebody was also happy to do whatever was asked of him to keep his john happy.  It worked beautifully for two years and then Guckert overplayed his hand by embellishing the question he got to ask GWB -- although even there it would have escaped attention if not for bloggers.  

              What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away.

              by Marie on Thu Feb 17, 2005 at 07:08:04 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I think you might be right (none / 0)

                about that that "keeping him happy by letting him be a somebody". Otherwise, if the sole purpose of having him there was only to get him into the WH for sexual services, there would have been no reason for him to try to ask questions, and succeed in getting called on, so often. He could have simply attentively participated. He did seem to need some ego stroking.

                Also, you've mentioned his interaction with his old frat buddies. This is something I've both wanted and been reluctant to bring up. In addition to the group's meeting minutes where they mentioned that Guckert was "not in the CIA, NSA, or any other crazy super duper secret government agency. He is a reporter..." (May 1, 2004), there's another meeting with a comment that I find quite unsettling. It's from the August 24, 2003 meeting:

                The Board of Advisors met on the 17th of July at Scott Uhl's House.
                (...)
                Jody Yozviak was absent but sent a report and JD Guckert was busy entertaining the Prime Minister of Great Britain (not a joke).

                It's that added comment "not a joke" that set off my radar. So I did just a tiny check, and found that, as a matter of fact, Tony Blair was in the U.S. at that time, and on exactly that day, July 17, he and Bush held a joint press conference. There's also an icky sugary picture of Bush and Blair together, that looks almost as if they're holding hands and gazing into each other's eyes. Does anyone know if there might be a video clip of that press conference, just to see, out of curiosity if nothing else, if Gannon/Guckert attended it?

                Someone has already expressed suspicion over some sort of "relationship" between Bush & Blair, even mentioning the possibility of blackmail.

                Maybe the "truth" (always a relative thing in the Bush WH) is even more contorted?

                I don't know what to think. I really don't like the idea of going down this road, but it might be another possibility: GWB sharing dear JG with his best friends. (Yich)

                P.S. Luckily we have designer tin foil hats over here - Armani, Versace, etc. Look quite nice, really.

                "Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it." - Mark Twain

                by Donna in Rome on Thu Feb 17, 2005 at 12:02:25 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Problem with con-artists (none / 0)

                  and pathological narcissists is that they weave together fact and fiction so frequently that it's hard to know which is which in anything they say.

                  My guess is that the WH would have kept Jeffie out of the sight of cameras in public appearances by GWB.  Who knows about Blair.  GWB's emotional development seems to have stopped somewhere during his prep school days.  And I can imagine that anyone who has attended prep school would have a natural affinity for someone else who did as well.  No need to bring in a sexual component for that.

                  Jeffie could not have bragged about entertaining GWB -- but anyone involved with an important person has a difficult time not bragging about it.  So, my take on this is that he just used Blair as a substitute for what he couldn't say and it still made him look important.  

                  What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away.

                  by Marie on Thu Feb 17, 2005 at 01:39:02 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  JD Guckert graduated from WCU in 1980, a TKE bro (none / 0)

                According to Wikipedia, he graduated from West Chester University in Pennsylvania, so I did some research in the West Chester University Alumni Online Community, and found a JD Guckert graduated in 1980.

                According to Jim Jones, a history professor there, who happens to be running for mayor and is the faculty advisor to the College Democrats:

                "Regarding Gannon, by now you probably know that his real name is J. D. Guckert.  I cehcked (sic) the relevant yearbook and found that he graduated from WCU in 1980, was involved in TKE fraterity, was a resident assistant for two years, played soccer one year and was the sports editor of the Quad.  He's from Conneaut Lake PA, wherever that is." (personal email to me, 3/2/05, 6:48 PM)

                For more, check out my thread about it on DU.

                Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate. - JFK

                by Kire on Thu Mar 03, 2005 at 07:06:15 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Who is in charge... (none / 0)

              of determining which reporters get in? Is it the Press Secretary? Or is it the Assistant Press Secretary?

              Who has the final say? And would it be relevant if the Press Secretary was handed a list of people and picked out the 'No' people based on name recognition re: bad press?

              I know Dowd didn't get in until after Scott took over. Guckert/Gannon might have passed simply because he wasn't on a refusal list...

              Mariachi Mama Candidate Bickering Moratorium! Signatory to the Carnacki Petition

              by kredwyn on Thu Feb 17, 2005 at 12:24:09 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

View Story | 74 comments