Skip to main content

Another shocker:
A news producer for a major network just told me that Gannon told the producer the US was going to attack Iraq four hours before President Bush announced it to the nation.

According to the producer, Gannon specifically told them that in four hours the president was going to be making a speech to the nation announcing that the US was bombing Iraq. The producer told me they were surprised that Gannon, working with such a small news outfit, could have access to such information, but "what did you know, he was right," the producer said today. The producer went on to say that Gannon often had correct scoops on major stories, including information about Mary Mapes and the Dan Rather BUSH/AWOL scandal that this news outlet got from Gannon before any had the information publicly.

John has that story and more. Very, very curious.

Meanwhile, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune makes a good point:

So the question becomes, just how did this character get White House press credentials, despite supposed post-Sept. 11 security requirements? Bruce Bartlett, a conservative columnist who worked in the Reagan and first Bush administrations, says that "if Gannon was using an alias, the White House staff had to be involved in maintaining his cover." In other words, the White House wanted him at those briefings and wanted him to ask his softball questions, most likely to divert attention when legitimate reporters were getting too pushy.
John does a news roundup of the story.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 08:59 AM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  This is already (3.77)
    a recommended diary
    •  I was... (3.33)
      I was just thinking the same thing.  Wouldn't it have made more sense to promote the diary?

      http://kydem.blogspot.com
      Bloggers?  Like the GOP knows anything about bloggers!

      Evan Bayh 2008
      Miller for KY Governor 2007
      http://kydem.blogspot.com

      by dsolzman on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:07:56 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  2 rating (4.00)
      I don't know why someone gave you a 2 for your comment, so have a 4 on me.

      Let me chime in here as well. Yesterday, the same thing happened with a recommended diary about Fleischer and Guckert. Since the formatting of that diary was almost identical to that which kos later posted, I don't understand why it wasn't promoted.

      My beef about this happening is that it divides the discussion between two diaries. It would be nice if we could keep the conversation in one place.

      Just my 2 cents.

      "I have lived with several Zen masters -- all of them cats." - Eckhart Tolle

      by catnip on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:14:58 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  i agree (4.00)
        this is something that's been bothering me for a few days.

        the diaries seem delicate things, so many fall off before they get their due. add to this a good diary's truncation of an already lively discussion and siphoning off participation--well, does the right hand know what the left hand is doing?

        •  I check the diaries and the front page daily (none)
          and I've noticed quite a few times that a front page story would appear that would seemingly duplicate an existing diary. I just figured that Kos had developed and posted information independently, although I did feel bad for the diarist not getting front paged.
      •  Kos is the BLOGGER here (none)
        He isn't a diary writer. He's the blogger/site owner of Daily Kos. If the blogger who owns the site writes his own post on a subject, that should naturally take precedence over what a diary contributor writes. After all, the title of the site IS Daily Kos, is it not?

        It makes perfect sense to me. Is there some other rationale for suggesting that Kos should not post on certain topics? Perhaps my view is informed by the fact that I own and operate a website where others post on the forums, and thus I have a view about the relationship of site owner/administrators to posters that others here do not share.

        •  front page posts (none)
          This isn't about what kos should or should not write about. It is his blog and he can obviously write about anything he likes.

          The tradition of promoting existing diaries to the front page is what we're discussing. When a diary is promoted, front pagers can and do add their comments to the diary. Then, we don't end up with duplicate diaries containing the split discussion phenomenon I described. That's all this is about.

          "I have lived with several Zen masters -- all of them cats." - Eckhart Tolle

          by catnip on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 11:39:11 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Gannon Knew about Rather Bush/AWOL (4.00)
      If Gannon had scope here how did he get it? Is this the link that traces the fake documents back to Rove. Remember it was the documents being fake that was the story and not the fact that the documents were virtually correct. Somebody needs to do an investigative job on this so all the nails will fit in all the coffins
      •  Who else reports for "Talon News"?? (none)
        One thing I haven't heard mentioned so far... Is Gannon/Guckert the only "reporter" for Talon news or are there others (presumably under fake names as well)????

        Just how many of these leaked stories and fake documents have been passed through Talon News and who reported on them?

        Has the White House had a direct hand in using Talon News to put out whatever propaganda they wanted (at least whatever Faux new didn't feel comfortable running)?

        It's like a giant cable-knit sweater, that someone keeps knitting, and knitting, and knitting, and knitting, and knitting....

        We must go forward, not backward, upward, not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom! - Kodos as Clin-ton - The Simpsons

        by Czarvoter on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:14:53 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Hm... (none)
      It may be old news, but it's still important.

      The New Democrat

      Envision the future. Visit The New Democrat -http://www.newdemocrat.blogdrive.com

      by demburns on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:28:28 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  PRESS RELEASE ON THIS STORY (none)
      Please go here and get this story out.

      Thanks,
      NYBri

      "Off we go into the Wild New Yonder"

      by NYBri on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:42:59 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  sent to Dallas Morn. News (none)
        to their Wash. writer, B. Hillman - - I sent him the previous one last week.  There was a 2-column inch graf ("from wire and staff reports") on p. 12A of my driveway copy this AM.  Jerks should wake up.  I listed all the other outlets that were covering this, and reminded him of the TX connections.
        •  props to you... (none)
          n/t

          "Off we go into the Wild New Yonder"

          by NYBri on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:54:58 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  GOT MAIL ON SHAWN MORAN!? (none)
            Dropped by today, should let you know.

            [new] Shawn Moran (none / 0)

            I can assure you that I am not Jeff Gannon. Jeff wrote a few articles for my site, boottotheskull.com, and then was not heard from again.

            I think you guys are making a little too much of out this whole "conspiracy."

            The shavedmonkey.net site belonged to my younger brother who is now dead. I re-registered the domain to keep the name only. I hope that clears things up.

            by Pipes McGee on Fri Feb 18th, 2005 at 13:43:03 EST  

            In 2005 - Be liberal: Support our Allies of Democracy on Human Rights, the Environment, Gay and Minority Rights & EU and UN Third World Development Programs & Our Friends

            •  Shawn Moran /Pipes McGee - Border Patrol Agent (none)
              Shawn Moran works got the Border Patrol:

              http://www.boottotheskull.com/archives/politics/index.html

              [QUOTE]
              It appears as if Bernie Kerik will not be the new Secretary of Homeland Security because of a "nanny problem." Let me guess, she was illegal? Why does that not surprise me? Maybe if New York and other big cities didn't have sanctuary laws protecting illegal aliens this kind of crap wouldn't take place.

              While I am annoyed that this happened since it re-opens the door for Asshole Hutchison to become Secretary of the DHS, I am relieved not to have to work for someone who violates the very rules we strive to uphold

              [/QUOTE]

  •  predictions (4.00)
    A news producer for a major network just told me that Gannon told the producer the US was going to attack Iraq four hours before President Bush announced it to the nation.

    Well, it isn't that bad.  Some of you guys could've told me that the US was going to attack Iraq four months before President Bush announced it to the nation.  

    •  But we wouldn't (4.00)
      have been able to predict the exact time at which the President was going to announce it in a news conference.  The story's not about whether everyone knew that "Shock and Awe" was coming; it is about the fact that not-Gannon knew particular facts, such as the President's schedule, before real news outlets were privy to this information.  This clearly proves that not-Gannon had a direct line of communication with the WH and was not some anonymous, mistakenly admitted to the press corps, reporter as the WH is currently claiming.
      •  (you're right) (none)
        This is just supposed to be a joke about how early on the administration had decided to go to war.  Many Kossacks have told me that they saw this coming a mile away.  Back in November '02 I thought that Colin Powell would be able to keep things from going completely bonkers.  Of course, that didn't happen and everything went completely bonkers.  
      •  Someone in the WH Situation Room in BIG trouble (4.00)
        This is a violation of top-of-the-pyramid highest state secret information. This is a bigger violation of national security than anything Hansen or the Walker family gave the Russians.
        •  hypothetically, of course. (none)
          but remember, we're living in bushworld now. this is an outrage in the reality based world, but in the bushuniverse, I suspect this is going f*cking nowhere fast.

          "There are times in politics when you must be on the right side and lose." John Kenneth Galbraith

          by susanp on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:21:11 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  i think the sclm will take this (none)
            as a further afront on their egos. why did this prostitute get this great leak, and we did not???

            also, how is gannon related to all of those false terror threats before the election?

            i remember my sis-in-law telling me about a story, which she heard on a freaky fundie radio station in houston(ksbj), regarding a discovery of a cd with school floor plans that was supposedly found in a terrorist raid. the schools were in several states, but specifically i remember new jersey. i told her it was probably just a cd for the rebuilding of iraqi schools, and they were using it for propoganda because the election was close in new jersey at that time. they needed to frighten security moms.

            sure enough that came out in the news later(buried news on the internet, not the sclm). i bet ksbj never did a retraction, either.

            this outright propaganda makes me furious, especially since the attacks on the russian school children were fresh on people's minds.the way these immoral thugs exploit everything for their own power is unbelievable.

          •  Some members of GOP will not stomach this (none)
            We are talking about reveling a state secret on the order of "D-Day is June 6th, and the target is Normandy, not Calais" level of military state secret.

            This is high treason we are discussing. The listed punishment for this crime is the death penalty.

            There will be Republicans that break away from Bush on this.

            •  The angle is ... (none)
              that this prostitute was blabbing top secret information that could have gotten our soldiers killed.
            •  This is going nowhere (none)
              So he accurately predicted the nature and substance of a major Presidential announcement 4 hours before it occurred.

              Think of it, with all of the pressure and rhetoric that had been building at that point, and a major Presidential announcement looming in a few hours, and the obviousness of the adminstrations wanting a war - what do YOU think the announcement will be about? Changes at the Department of Transportation?

              He speculated correctly, and that's all they'll say it is, is speculation. You didn't need a crystal ball to predict what the nature of that speech would be.

              •  Then why was a M$M news producer surprised? (none)
                If it was easy to predict as you claim, why did the source say they were so surprised by Not Gannon's announcement? This isn't just some Joe Blow on the street. This was a M$M news producer that was right there at the same moment in time. If it was so easy to predict, that M$M news producer would have predicted the story all by themself without the aid of Not Gannon.
              •  Agreed (none)
                Bush had also given the UN inspectors their 48 hours' warning a couple of days previously.

                The declaration of war was not a big surprise.

                •  But Not Gannon's accuracy was surprising (none)
                  That the whole point. That M$M said Not Gannon's material was "golden" and was surprised regarding the accuracy of the material.

                  Nothing personal, but if people have to weigh the "surprise factor" between a M$M news producer saying they were surprised how good Not Gannon's sources were, and somebody on the net saying 2 years after the fact that they wouldn't be surprised, don't be shocked that the vast majority of people will agree that the network news producer's expert testimony is more weighty.

                  •  Pay attention to what he didn't say (none)
                    He was surprised at that announcement, 4 hours before I-day. He also mentioned Gannonfake had OTHER scoops that turned out to be very accurate.

                    What other scoops ?

                    So Gannonfake was a good insider source for WH info. Wouldn't a good journalist be interested in knowing just exactly who was this guy who had all this info  ? How come this MSM exec did not dig more about Gannonfake and his WH access ?

                    PS: The way those people are coming out of the woodwork and telling all those interesting Gannonfake stories (this guy, Ari Fleischer) makes me think he was a well known, much DISLIKED person in the WH political circle.

                    Bush's America: The WH planted the real thing right down with the other Media Whores and nobody noticed for 2 years

                    by lawnorder on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 04:23:05 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

        •  WH situation roomies in trouble? (none)
               Trouble? What trouble? Don't look for too big of a scandal, nor for punishment on the inside. What if Jim/Jeff Gannagukart got his heads up from Prince Bandar (aka Bandar Bush)? Remember him? He's the Saudi prince who was given access to the tactical war plan before our own Secretary of State was even permitted to see the maps.

          When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.HST

        •  ONLY the WH SitRoom? (none)
          Let's say Guckert (a former Marine) maintains his ties with his former Marine associates. He then decides to become a wingnut journalist, perhaps in part because he knows he's got these inside angles into the Corps.

          Anyway, somebody he's maintained contact with since leaving the Corps happens to be working either at MacDill or in Qatar and is under strict instructions to give Guckert a call - perhaps with the understanding that Guckert only wants to know so he can brag about it to his friends.

          Once the order comes, it is disseminated throughout the military and reaches, by default, plenty of ears who A) don't have a security clearance and B) have enough anonymity to know that they could probably leak something without getting caught.

          One wouldn't have to know anyone that special in order to know about the strike order a few hours before Bush announces it to the whole world. He could easily have gotten a phone call from some Marine buddy working the tower at Incirlik. Or an email from a Marine who's on an aircraft carrier. Or in about two thousand different ways.

          Sorry to check reality. But this won't blossom into what we want it to if we continually go tinfoil over things that can be defended (like the now-debunked video blow-up of Guckert's Talon badge) and forget the importance of being our own biggest skeptics.

        •  Gannon story on HBO/Bill Maher (none)
          Just watched Maher re: Gannon -  [talking by remote to Leslie Stahl] of "60 Minutes". Stahl kept repeating................"How did he get FBI clearance, that's what I want to know?"
      •  agree (4.00)
        If this happened and Gannon/Guckert was out there tipping off the media, he could very easily have passed this on to the "enemy" inadvertently or by accident. Loose lips sink ships, as they say.

        Of course, someone will make the point that, even if it did end up reaching the Iraqis they couldn't have done much to avert the shock and awe attack, but that's not the point. If his telling of state secrets did result in Iraqi foreknowledge of the coming attack, that's no different than a spy passing along state secrets.

        That's not too tin foil hatty, is it?

        "I have lived with several Zen masters -- all of them cats." - Eckhart Tolle

        by catnip on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:24:52 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Gannon is obviously a WH op -- (3.66)
        His goals:

        1 - "steer" the daily story
        2 - create/reiterate WH talking points
        3 - bailout W or WHPS as needed

        And now it's becoming apparent just how involved Gannon was with WH roots.  How many people would know the "hour of attack" that launches a war?

        Moving on these assumptions, what is it going to take to get a real investigation launched?  Where is a goddam special prosecutor?  Are there any "real" real investigative reporters left?

    •  Right (none)
      I was thinking this as well, but later in the post it was clear that Gannon knew when the press conference would be, which we certainly didn't know in advance.
    •  And if four hours (none)
      indicates that "Jeff" had a pipeline to the higher levels of the WH, who does Kos know:

      US/UK: 1441 is good enough
      It's clear that the US and UK couldn't get more than a few votes. While 1441 did not include language authorizing force, those two countries will claim it's enough to go to war. So they won't follow through on Bush's promise to force a vote and face an embarrassing 4-11 or 5-10 vote.

      The UN has ordered its inspectors out of Iraq. It's now just a matter of "when".

      Bush will address the nation tonight at 8 p.m. EST.

      Ari says "diplomacy has failed". The US never engaged in diplomacy aimed at averting war. Its "diplomacy" efforts were targeted at gaining world support for Bush's invasion, not peace. So he now gets his war, having damaged old alliances and international organizations and putting our troops at increased risk by failing to secure a second front in Turkey. Brilliant.

      Posted March 17, 2003 07:12 AM

      If that was PST - then Kos knew ten hours before GWB announced it.

      What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away

      by Marie on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:15:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Different address (none)
        Bush made one address on St. Patty's day, basically giving Saddam an ultimatum. Then he made another address on March 19 (the one depicted in F911), where he announced that we had started to bomb Baghdad.

        The address in question, I believe, is the March 19 one.

        •  if i remember correctly (none)
          wasn't the information that led to the bombing less than an hour old at the time the first bombs were dropped, or are we referring to the 'shock and awe' night when CNN got kicked out?

          "The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." ~ George Washington

          by guyermo on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 01:56:44 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  if i remember correctly (none)
          wasn't the information that led to the bombing less than an hour old at the time the first bombs were dropped, or are we referring to the 'shock and awe' night when CNN got kicked out?

          "The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." ~ George Washington

          by guyermo on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 01:57:57 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Do you think (none)
    Gannonuckert was calling or text-messaging johns/clients from the White House while waiting for the press conferences to begin?
  •  Jesus (4.00)
    That would make him a walking threat to national security, wouldn't it?  How the fuck did he get such a high security clearance?  Or did he have such a security clearance?  

    Speaking the truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act. -- George Orwell

    by Page van der Linden on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 08:59:40 AM PST

    •  Docs in Socks on Box... (4.00)

      And the Republicans claimed Sandy Berger (?) was lax about following proper classification protocols... We need to hammer this, and hard. Looks like Propagannon might not be usable just to destroy their media ops or homophobia campaign... If we can use this to kill their national security advantage...

      It's like the media listened to Weird Al's "Dare to be Stupid" and said "Yes! This is how the world should be!"

      by RHunter on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:10:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Exactly. (none)
        Knowing that we were going to start bombing the hell out of Iraq four hours before it happened, and then talking about it - well, that's a huge slip in security, I'd think.

        Something is so wrong there.

        Speaking the truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act. -- George Orwell

        by Page van der Linden on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:12:38 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not if it's your job (none)
          to tell someone in the mainstream  media who you feel "deserves" the scoop....

          After all the light that has been shed, I still have midnight in my head--RealWest

          by hillaryk on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:18:33 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  It's bigger than Hansen or the Walker family (4.00)
          Gunkert was running around spilling the operational details of a decapitation strike. Bush was trying to take out Saddam in a hideout with a surgical strike. The strike is completely pointless if Saddam moves from the hideout.

          Bush did miss on the decapitation strike. It is remotely possible that the wrong person heard the details of the strike from Gunkert and relayed the info that Saddam needed to move to a new hideout.

          •  CRAP!!!!! (none)
            I hadn't thought of it that way! You're right! Woooohooooohoooooooooo Nellie!

            "Help him...help the Bombardier!" "I'm the bombardier...I'm OK!" "Then help Him, help him!"

            by Bulldawg on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:35:29 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  We'd have a tough time proving this (none)
            But it really wouldn't hurt to start asking,

            Did Jeff Gannon's security breaches save Saddam's life and make it possible for the Iraqi resistance to prepare for battle?

            That might illustrate to some folks the seriousness of the charges.

            •  You've got the frame right. (none)
              This is a state secret right there with "D-Day is June 6th, and the target is Normandy, not Calais" type of state secret.

              This is high treason we are talking about. Nothing less.

              •  Loose lips sink ships n/t (none)
              •  Did Jeff Gannon save Saddam's life ? (none)
                How's that for a frame ?

                By leaking sensitive info 4 hours before Saddam's strike he may have saved Saddam's life. 4 hours was enough time for Sadman (sic) to evacuate the bombing site

                (4 hours before that he talked to this media guy, who knows who else Gannon talked to)

                Bush's America: The WH planted the real thing right down with the other Media Whores and nobody noticed for 2 years

                by lawnorder on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 04:31:44 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  Prostitute/"reporter" using (none)
        alias to get access to the president plus Kerik nominated for Dir. of Homeland Sec. = a pattern of national security compromising.
    •  We Have to Identify His Patron (4.00)
      I've been repeating myself a bit on various Gannon/Guckert threads, but every single fact we have uncovered points to the existence of a high-powered PATRON who placed Guckert in the White House -- whether purely for covert propaganda or also for more prurient reasons.  Tracking back over his attacks on Dashle, his Leesburg partying days, and his GOPUSA links will be the key to finding it.  The fact that he knew about shock & awe is also a clue in its own right, as it suggests his Patron is someone who WOULD have the security clearance and "need to know".

      Fuzzy only works for pets.

      by NotFuzzy on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:13:52 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Just pillow talk (none)
      maybe one of his top ranking military bottoms let it slip...
      •  Ive been thinking (none)
        we need to step back from the Sexuality in this scandal.

        But this sounds amazingly like pillow talk. By Scotty? By Bush? By Rove?

        Once again we have the White house releasing classified intelligence to its political allies. Its time the Democratic party stepped up and took the security of the United States seriously by calling it what it is.

        Treason

        The Democratic party needs to adopt its own moral and values principles (clawed)

        by cdreid on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:52:13 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  then bush should be OUTRAGED (none)
        at this breach of security, if he truthfully had nothing to do with it. he should be hammered hard to get to the bottom of this breach of national security. this is a no win situation for bush. i love it.
    •  Maybe he already had security clearance... (none)
      In other words, maybe he was already a long-time agent/operative... But if that's the case then he's leaking things left and right.  Why?

      The prostitution angle does seem more likely.  So what is going on now?  Is he having some fun at someone's expense?  i.e., blackmailing and being successively more bold to show he means business?

      This is all just speculation, but something fishy is definitely going on.

      •  If true.... (none)
        If that were true, he would still be there.  They just don't hand out security clearances to gigalos.  There would be no leak.  He was an amataur with a big ego hence all the leakage.

        Across the River http://acrossriver.blogspot.com

        by Marines Girl on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 12:55:37 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  How do I put this? (none)
    Holy shit!  :-O

    Arrogant lips are unsuited to a fool-- how much worse lying lips to a ruler - Proverbs 17:7

    by Barbara Morrill on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:00:33 AM PST

  •  Everyone: Take a look at this (4.00)
    Link 1

    Link 2

    JeffJim Gankert?

    No more Mr. Nice Democrat

    by Viktor on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:00:47 AM PST

    •  yup (none)
      yeah, that's him.
    •  Wow (none)

      In the midst of life we are in debt, etc.

      by ablington on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:16:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  early arrival (none)
      how many seat rows are in that room?
    •  The West Wing Anniversary... (none)
      ...at the White House was November 13, 2002.  Check out this question to Scottie at the press briefing that day:

      Q Scott, on another subject. In Nevada, 67 percent of the voters supported an initiative confining marriage to one man and one woman, while in his Florida debate with Bill McBride, Governor Jeb Bush, when asked if homosexuals should be prohibited from adopting children replied -- and this is a quote -- "I believe they should. If you're going to have permanency, it should be with a loving couple that is man and wife." And my question is, the President doesn't disagree with either his brother or the majority of Nevada voters, does he, Scott?

      MR. McCLELLAN: What was the statement again?

      Q I believe -- this is what Jeb Bush, with 650,000 votes, he said when he was asked if they should be prohibited from adopting children, he said, "I believe they should. If you're going to have permanency, it should be with a loving couple that is man and wife."

      Now, the President doesn't disagree with his brother, does he?

      MR. McCLELLAN: I think the President's views are very clear on that issue, as well.

      Q So he doesn't disagree. The New York Times reports this morning that the Catholic Bishop's Conference meeting here in Washington has just debated the question of whether action in Iran is a just war. In a debate presided over by Cardinal Law of Boston, whom the Times identified as "the leader at the center of the abuse scandal," even as abuse victims are calling for his resignation. And my question, does the White House hope the bishops can achieve some real solution to their pedophile priest problem before making any proposal of pacifism towards Saddam Hussein?

      MR. McCLELLAN: You mentioned Iran. I think you meant Iraq when you said that earlier?

      Seems rather Guckert-like...and bear in mind the question before this one was rather contentious and regarding the possibility that Saddam didn't have WMD's.

      Arrogant lips are unsuited to a fool-- how much worse lying lips to a ruler - Proverbs 17:7

      by Barbara Morrill on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:05:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  NEW NEW NEW update (none)
      link

      No McClellan in sight at the launch in 2002; Casts doubt on when Scotty's replaced Ari... I haven't watched Ari's video for Gannon yet though.

      No more Mr. Nice Democrat

      by Viktor on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:09:18 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I watched it (none)
        No live gaggle images in Ari's piece. More about the Press Room as FDR's swimming pool -- complete with trap door.

        Good catch from the wayback machine -- I'll see if I can find when the video was switched. The current page was last updated April 9, 04. The archived copy was from Jan 20, 01

      •  Ari's video there even in 2003 (none)
        Wayback machine is indexed through 2003 for this page. The McClellan PR video was clearly too recent to be interesting. The dated gaggle videos on C-Span are a much better source IMO
    •  It's Him - Compare Side by Side (none)
      This is from the WH Tour video and our friend James D. on USMCPT.
    •  URGENT: DOWNLOAD (none)
      and SAVE these videos.  if history is any indicator, they WILL be scrubbed.  anyone/everyone who knows how - PLEASE COPY NOW

      No matter how cynical you become ... you can never keep up.

      by LegalSpice on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:49:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  That's HIM! (none)
      That's our Jimmy/Jeff!

      Across the River http://acrossriver.blogspot.com

      by Marines Girl on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 01:01:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Gannon (none)
    He got his information from pillow talk, obviously.  Now someone just needs to find out whose pillow and the walls will come tumbling down.  Actually, if I was Gannon, I would go into hiding because I think he is a dead man.
  •  This will carry Gunkert story through to next week (none)
    They have to talk about it Sunday, and there will be a BS response on Monday. Minimum Wednesday before they can try to drop it again.
  •  Gannon=Guillaume? (none)
    This is starting to look mighty fishy. White House hack blabs about the most important information there ever is in the White House? Um, haven't we heard about this somewhere before.....?

    "We must uphold a familiar commerce together in all meekness, gentleness, patience and liberality."

    by Marshall on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:03:30 AM PST

  •  Peice of advice (4.00)
    If you find anything new about Gannon today, sit on it until Monday morning, it will get lost in the "filter" this weekend.
  •  Some additional questions (none)
    1.  Were any other "journalists" given access to this information or was he the only one?

    2.  Who is the producer?  (This is a pre-emptive question.  If he is generally known as a producer of a "liberal" news network/program, he will be discredited as just trying to bash the administration.)

    3.  In terms of the Iraq aspect, this is a breach of national security and breaks Federal law, so is Gannon going to be prosecuted?

    4.  More interesting in a way than the "Shock and Awe" revelation is the one dealing with Rathergate.  This is a thread that may finally lead to the source of the memo.  Could it start with an "r"?

    Bush, so incompetent, he can't even do the wrong things right.

    by JAPA21 on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:06:48 AM PST

  •  his "sponsor" (none)
    must be someone at a very high level...

    I blog here (music) because man cannot live on politics alone!

    by jdavidson2 on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:08:12 AM PST

    •  I Tend to Think So Too (none)
      The key in this particular piece of the story is WHO would actually know about shock & awe before it was launched?  Top White House staff, top Pentagon and DOD staff, but as with any circle of secret-holders, the number of people involved must be in inverse proportion to the size of the secret.  We can expect that only a very elite few knew of the exact timing of shock & awe and of the President's announcement.  I think we will find the Patron (or perhaps a GrandPatron in this group.

      Fuzzy only works for pets.

      by NotFuzzy on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:19:45 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Many in the WH would know (none)
        Each section of the WH operation would have their piece of action on the day of the announcement.  That would included the political (Rove) office and the communications office, too.  They would work in concert to have a well-crafted story ready to give to the public and the news outlets once the president made the announcement.

        I suspect, rather than it being an orchestrated leak, JG just liked to blow his own horn by letting people know that he was privy to inside information.

        "This machine kills fascists." -- Inscription on Woody Guthrie's guitar.

        •  Not on a surgical decapitation strike (none)
          They were attacking early specifically to go after Saddam in his bunker with cruise missiles and bunker-busters.They wanted to kill Saddam as the first strike of the war and have the leaderless forces of Iraq surrender as a result of Saddam getting killed.

          If Saddam gets word one that they know what bunker he's in and it's targeted, Saddam moves to safety.

          This is a state secret of the highest order. "Location of Pacific fleet N of Midway Island before Battle of Midway" type of state secret. "D-Day is June 6th and the target is Normandy, not Calais" type of state secret. Revealing these type of secrets is like right there with Benedict Arnold handing the British the keys to West Point. HIGH TREASON.

        •  But remember Bush's personality (none)
          He's a braggart. That type of personality will tell whoever he wants to tell anything they want to tell them, especially when nobody can/will call them on it.

          He can get away with whatever he wants, or thinks he can. If anybody has read Woodward's book, he told the Saudi ambassador things that were NOT for foreign consumption, details that nobody else got.

          I can see Bush doing this -- leaking something to somebody who's NOT MSM, just because he can and it would piss off the MSM.

          Unfortunately, they never noticed.

          •  They Both Are (none)
            Both Bush and Gannon have that kind of personality, just one of many reasons why I think this traces back to them together.  

            Jimmy-Jeff, if you read this do what others have suggested...try to get some kind of deal because if they don't kill you...a treason conviction definately could.  There has been a long history of small plane accidents and mysterious suicides in the Bush Family's wake.  Think about it...with you out of the picture....NO STORY.

            Across the River http://acrossriver.blogspot.com

            by Marines Girl on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 01:14:08 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Pillow Talk Isn't Shocking At All (none)
    I don't understand you're amazement kos, I mean if you were having sex with senior administration officials, you'd know all about military strategy, official state secrets, etc. too. What's so shocking or strange about this? Pillow talk is pillow talk.

    /sarcasm.

  •  When did the WH ask for the (none)
    airtime for the "we are now at war" Presidential address?

    Doubt it was less than four hours before -- and I knew what the announcement would be when the address was scheduled.  Not to say that Gannon wasn't told what was up - but plausible deniability may exist on this one.  

    What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away

    by Marie on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:09:31 AM PST

    •  I think (none)
      the gist of John Aravosis' story is that Gannon always seemed to know the inside story, i.e. more than other reporters (such as the one quoted).

      So, I get the feeling this was not the only time Gannon was able to scoop other legitimate new sources.

    •  It was a Surprise Start (none)
      remember the attack sorta started ahead of schedule.

      Sorta in the sense that the planned attack went ahead as scheduled.  But prior to that, they attacked a safe house they thought that Saddam had gone to. [for a long time Tenent reportedly maintained that he was killed in the attack]

      There has been much made of this and reported, Woodward wrote about how the info worked it's way up to tenent and then the WH gave the ok to attack the location (remember the photos they released of Tenent and cheney jawing about this).  The event wasn't part of the scheduled start.

      •  a timeline of the (none)
        events and announcements of that day and the day before may illustrate something I'm not seeing in this revelation.

        What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away

        by Marie on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:02:28 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  For one, (none)
          the attack was supposed to be a surprise and based on a last minute decision in an effort to catch Saddam off guard and from a source that supposedly had Saddam hiding in a particular place. I don't think the WH itself had much more then four hours notice of such a chance. At least I'm thinking this story relates to the "we've launched a preemptive attack in an effort to kill Saddam.." announcement.

          Secondly the source is a "news producer for a major network" and had no idea about the announcement, yet G/G did.

          Something stinks at 1600.

          •  A lot stinks there but (none)
            until I can see all of this laid out in a timeline, I'm concerned that things are being confounded and we may be engaging in revisionist history.  

            What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away

            by Marie on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 11:56:52 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Yes. (none)
      Presidential address went on at about 9 pm. Announcement of it was probably about 12 noon = nine hours of common knowledge of it. This is a false flag and possibly deliberately so. There's no way they would have announced this theatre piece less than four hours before the telecast.

      And then 2/27/33 happened, and that changed everything.

      by Julian on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:22:26 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Trend: Prince Bandar, Chalabi and Larry Franklin. (4.00)
    So a male prostitute, a Saudi Prince, an Iranian spy and an Israeli spy are getting access to top secret military info.  Lovely.
  •  no tin foil hat here... (none)
    But look for Gannon to come up missing, flying a small engine plane, in a car accident...

    Seriously, folks, if he has the goods, he'll end up in the same Hilton bin Laden is currently holed up in.

    Be realistic.  He'll be dead within a week.  I absolutely LOVE what the blogosphere has done for breaking stories, but don't sell our CIA deathsquads short...there's still plenty of poison-tipped canes in the basement of the Hoover building.

  •  Feb. 18 updated timeline (4.00)
    I will keep on updating this timeline of "Gannon's" early appearances in the White House Press Briefing Room (both confirmed and suspected) as long as people find it useful. Please reply with anything I missed:

    "Jeff Gannon" is suspected of having been present at WH press briefings on the following dates:

    I feel confident in stating for sure that "Gannon" was in the press briefing room on Feb. 25th, Feb. 28th, and March 4th. As for March 3rd, a man who looks very much like Guckert is sitting in a very similar position to a man who is almost certainly Guckert in the Feb. 25th briefing.

    The November, 2002 evidence is of the back of a man's head in the briefing room, and it looks very much like Guckert. The video cannot be accurately dated, but it is logical to assume that the video was not edited post-November 2002, when the "video tour" was released as part of the 100th anniversary celebration of the West Wing.

    There are certain to have been more instances of Guckert appearing in the White House. But keep in mind the context here. These briefings were being held in the very last weeks and days in the run-up to the Iraq war. Important questions were being asked about international diplomatic and military developments.

    And a prostitute who: (a) is actively selling his services online, (b) is using a fake name, (c) has zero journalistic background or experience, and (d) can not even claim to be working for a news agency, is taking up a seat in the White House briefing room and occasionally asking questions.

    Timeline:

    • James D. Guckert appears to have attended a well-known gay orgy party near Leesburg, VA in December, 1998 (he later claims to have moved to the D.C. area in 2001).
    • "Jeff Gannon" doesn't appear as a writer on the web anywhere until November, 2002.
    • GOPUSA.com's news section started up in January, 2003.
    • The first "Jeff Gannon" byline in GOPUSA was on January 15, 2003.
    • James D. Guckert, supposedly cleared under his real name, appears in the WH briefing room no later than February, 2003, possibly as early as November, 2002.
    • "Gannon" allegedly receives word 4 hours ahead of time that the campaign against Iraq has begun on March 19, 2003.
    • "Talon News" starts up on March 29, 2003.
  •  The Leaker? (none)
    Although the Bush Administration is known for its incredible discipline in preventing leaks, could it be that they used Gannon as a strategic leaker, along with his usefulness in pitching the old softballs at the gaggles?

    Would be really helpful to know the leanings of this "major news outlet."  If it's something like FOX or USA Today, for instance, that would lend credence to the idea that he was intentionally sharing this info with him/her.

    After all the light that has been shed, I still have midnight in my head--RealWest

    by hillaryk on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:15:25 AM PST

  •  where's ken starr when you need him (none)
    ...I smell pillow talk!

    "no one likes missionaries with bayonets" -- Robespierre

    by Dont Tread on Me on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:15:36 AM PST

    •  where's ken starr when you need him ? (none)
      Wanking it to pictures of Monica. (Or maybe, as Jon Stewart pronounced it, "Gookurt."

      "Help him...help the Bombardier!" "I'm the bombardier...I'm OK!" "Then help Him, help him!"

      by Bulldawg on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:58:22 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  asdf (none)
    http://www.thelawparty.com/FranklinCoverup/franklin.htm

    Also, saw this posted at Buzz Flash.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Rumsfeld part of the Reagon administration too?  Maybe that is the key.

  •  Of course (none)
    He also might have said "we're going to invade Iraq" in the same way I did several times to several different people that day -- as a logical, educated guess.

    And it's tough to say that Gannon had information about the AWOL scandal as though it was a scoop given him by the white house, since that story had nothing to do with the white house and was broken in public by blogs—not given to reporters by the White House.

    What am I doing on DailyKos? I'm Running for the Right...

    by RFTR on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:17:38 AM PST

    •  key phrase in the story (none)
      Gannon "told them that in four hours the president was going to be making a speech to the nation announcing that the US was bombing Iraq."

      That's a little different than saying, "You know, we're gonna bomb Iraq," which is something all of us said at one point or another around that time.

      After all the light that has been shed, I still have midnight in my head--RealWest

      by hillaryk on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:22:14 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Except (none)
        that that's NOT what the story says.

        Here's what you say:  "[Gannon] told them that in four hours the president was going to be making a speech to the nation announcing that the US was bombing Iraq."

        Here's what the story says:  "Gannon told the producer the US was going to attack Iraq four hours before President Bush announced it to the nation."

        There's a difference there, and if you can't see it, then there's something wrong wtih your vision.  In reality, we already knew he was announcing something, and Gannon probably just said what he thought that announcement would be.

        What am I doing on DailyKos? I'm Running for the Right...

        by RFTR on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:26:31 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  cut and paste (none)
          directly from Americablog:

          According to the producer, Gannon specifically told them that in four hours the president was going to be making a speech to the nation announcing that the US was bombing Iraq.

          I'm sorry, perhaps it's because I'm light-headed from lack of lunch, but I cut and paste this directly from Americablog.

          After all the light that has been shed, I still have midnight in my head--RealWest

          by hillaryk on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:36:10 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes (none)
            As I did mine.  So we're both right, strangely.

            I don't know what to make of that, except that AmericaBlog apparently doesn't know the difference between the two, and I don't know which one is actually accurate.

            What am I doing on DailyKos? I'm Running for the Right...

            by RFTR on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:40:20 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  ambiguous reporting (none)
              There's clearly a difference between the two statements.

              Still, whichever it was, the producer seemed to believe it was significant enough to tell John at Americablog about it, which is interesting in and of itself.

              After all the light that has been shed, I still have midnight in my head--RealWest

              by hillaryk on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:44:53 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Unless (none)
                of course, you realize that the producer is most likely a dem who has a private interest in hurting the Bush administration, and at least has the self-respect not to use his public position to do so.

                Or, then again, he's doing both and we just don't know about the other half yet.  Either way, I'm always wary of "anonymous" sources.  If this producer knows something about this, then why doesn't he come out and say it?

                What am I doing on DailyKos? I'm Running for the Right...

                by RFTR on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:00:42 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  "realize that the producer... has.." (none)
                  a private interest in hurting the Bush admin"

                  you're treading perilously close to troll territory.

                  If you're really interested in presenting an intelligent alternate perspective to the Kossacks, you'll want to drop the kneejerk RW b.s.

                  •  Nice dowdification (2.25)
                    I challenge the author of AmericaBlog to add one piece of information to his post: for whom did that producer friend of his vote in 2004?

                    That's all the private interest I'm talking about.
                    And when you look at the polling history of news producers, you'll see that it is much more likely than not that I'm right.

                    And again, the basis for this, as I said, is not a kneejerk RW reaction, it's a kneejerk reaction against anonymous sources.  As you'll see if you ever try to post on my blog, I much prefer people who are willing to put a name to their claims and accusations.

                    What am I doing on DailyKos? I'm Running for the Right...

                    by RFTR on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:39:44 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

        •  yeah, that means (none)
          he knew about the secret attack on hussein those hours before bush officially announced the beginning of the war to the public.

          that would be known to far less fewer people in the administration. this really stinks to high heaven.

          the wording of this statement by gannon must not be allowed to be misinterpreted by the sclm and rethug hacks.

          •  that producer needs to be nailed down as (none)
            to the exact wording that gannon used.
            •  Agreed (none)
              100%

              If you come back at me with evidence that Gannon actually knew what was going to happen before anyone else, instead of the second-hand testimony of some anonymous source who may or may not have an interest in hurting either the administration or Gannon (how would we know??), then I give you my word here and now that I will respond to this post acknowledging that there is more that needs to be uncovered, and that someone in the administration is guilty of a serious crime.

              Sound good?

              What am I doing on DailyKos? I'm Running for the Right...

              by RFTR on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:41:44 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  There's kind of a conspiracy theory (none)
      that Rove actually produced the documents, gave them to CBS, and then used Buckhead and Gannon to spread the news that the documents were fake.

      Same modus operandi as leaking the cocaine story to the Fortunate Son author, then revealing his criminal past. Make the story look like it's nothing.

      •  Except (none)
        1)That's not where the accusations that they were fake came from.

        2)The documents got to CBS from a guy who was doing everything he could to get Kerry elected and tear down Bush—not the kind of guy who would shill for Rove.

        What am I doing on DailyKos? I'm Running for the Right...

        by RFTR on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:28:10 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  But he.... (none)
          isn't really sure who gave him the documents, right?  I haven't been closely following this story, so I could have that part wrong.

          After all the light that has been shed, I still have midnight in my head--RealWest

          by hillaryk on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:31:47 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not beyond a reasonable doubt... (none)
            ...I don't think, but again, I could be wrong about that.

            What is known is that the Kerry campaign was approached with similar documents and declined to use them, and that they consulted with Mary Mapes about the story that was finally produced.  And I forget the guy's name who tried to give the documents to the Kerry campaign, but the fax that brought them to CBS came from his hometown in Texas.

            What am I doing on DailyKos? I'm Running for the Right...

            by RFTR on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:36:04 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Unless Gannon (none)
            provided the fake documents for the TANG story, then went to Freeperland and planted the thread that would unravel CBS and Rather, remember the TANG story turned into the Rathergate over night.

            It was probaley no accident, It smells like  Rove style tactic.

            So we have Gannon connected to :

            Plame's outing
            Rathers demise
            Bush's announcement that War has commenced ...

            This is unbeleivable, the MSM is not reporting this right now and I can only think WHY ?  

        •  Burkett wasn't a shill for Rove (none)
          but he was a patsy.

          Rove or his minions could very easily have conned him into accepting those documents as genuine.

          It's far more logical that the documents came from someone wanting to diffuse the TANG story than from someone who wanted to promote it.   The rapidity with which the fighting 101st keyboarders got the story and were able to focus on obsure elements to cast doubt on the memos is more proof.

          The contents of the documents were well verified in other sources.

          •  Sigh. (none)
            "The contents of the documents were well verified in other sources."

            Such as?

            What am I doing on DailyKos? I'm Running for the Right...

            by RFTR on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:43:01 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Hunter was all over this (none)
              There were, IIRC, four individuals whose statements corrorborated the information contained in those memos. However, their stories and the arc connecting them went largely ignored as a whole new story evolved about "liberal" CBS, Dan Rather, Mary Mapes, and righty bloggers.
              •  Yes (none)
                because once the story broke, far more than merely 4 people, all of them people who knew the involved parties better than any of the 4, came out and said it was BS.

                That's gone largely ignored by the Kossacks.  Nice how people can ignore things they don't want to face, isn't it?

                Oh, and, Dan Rather and Mary Mapes are liberal, in case the scare quotes around the word were meant to extend to them too.  CBS I'm perfectly willing to admit is not, since entities that large generally have trouble coming down as one political persuasion or the other.

                What am I doing on DailyKos? I'm Running for the Right...

                by RFTR on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 11:51:53 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

    •  You seem to be overlooking this (none)
      that story had nothing to do with the white house and was broken in public by blogs--not given to reporters by the White House.

      Within moments of the CBS story airing, questions were being raised by a man (forget his name - a lawyer connected with the GOP) on a conservative website.  He had no background or expertise in documents/forgeries, etc...curious, eh?  Concerned citizen or plant?  

      Arrogant lips are unsuited to a fool-- how much worse lying lips to a ruler - Proverbs 17:7

      by Barbara Morrill on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:45:03 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Hindrocket from Powerblog? (none)
        n/t

        After all the light that has been shed, I still have midnight in my head--RealWest

        by hillaryk on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:55:15 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Buckhead (none)
        Buckhead from Free Republic. A lawyer... MacDougal or something.
      •  Hillary is right (none)
        I think you're thinking of PowerLine.  Unfortunately, this establishes nothing, as I also responded to the report very skeptical upon seeing it, and the White House has certainly not asked for my help.

        Unfortunately, I didn't have the forsight to post about it—and I don't have the audience that would have made it matter anyway.

        The problem from the beginning was an allegation with a bunch of documents from an anonymous source as the only evidence to begin with.  It looked suspicious -- and it wasn't the White House that called it into question, it was individuals with no known association to the GOP or the White House.

        And you admit as much in your question "concerned citizen or plant?"  It seems all too common these days to make accusations with ZERO evidence to suggest their accuracy, as you've just done.

        What am I doing on DailyKos? I'm Running for the Right...

        by RFTR on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:05:12 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  No... (none)
          ...I'm basing it on this

          It was the first public allegation that CBS News used forged memos in its report questioning President Bush's National Guard service -- a highly technical explanation posted within hours of airtime, citing proportional spacing and font styles.

          But it did not come from an expert in typography or typewriter history, as some first thought. Instead, the Los Angeles Times has found that it was the work of Harry W. MacDougald, an Atlanta lawyer with strong ties to conservative Republican causes. He helped draft the petition urging the Arkansas Supreme Court to disbar then-President Bill Clinton following the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

          The identity of "Buckhead," a blogger known previously only by his screen name on the Web site freerepublic.com and lifted to folk-hero status in the conservative blogosphere since last week's posting, is likely to fuel speculation among Democrats that the efforts to discredit the CBS memos were engineered by Republicans eager to undermine reports that Bush received preferential treatment in the National Guard more than 30 years ago.

          A bit more than zero, eh?  Certainly more than you had when you accused me.  

          Arrogant lips are unsuited to a fool-- how much worse lying lips to a ruler - Proverbs 17:7

          by Barbara Morrill on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:27:33 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Nope. (none)
            There is still zero evidence of any ties to the White House.  Sure, the guy sponsors many Republican causes, and gets very involved—but again, he was just voicing an uneasiness about the report that, as I said, many people felt.

            I'll repeat: There exists absolutely zero evidence that the White House had any hand in the discrediting of Rather's report.

            And they certainly didn't expect the furor of the blogosphere--before that, it hadn't been seen in nearly the same way by anyone.

            What am I doing on DailyKos? I'm Running for the Right...

            by RFTR on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:35:45 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Please reread my initial post (none)
              I was responding to your post saying that  

              this story had nothing to do with the white house and was broken in public by blogs

              My initial point was and is that the person who broke this story wasn't an uninterested party who just thought something was wrong with the memo's.  This was someone with longtime GOP ties, someone with no expertise in the subject, presenting a case that would require knowledge that he didn't possess.  I didn't mention the White House specifically.  

              Arrogant lips are unsuited to a fool-- how much worse lying lips to a ruler - Proverbs 17:7

              by Barbara Morrill on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:48:47 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Intentionally Blind (none)
                I think he wants to keep those scales on his eyes.  I would let him blather on if he wants to but you don't have to waste the time responding to him unless you like talking to walls?  

                Across the River http://acrossriver.blogspot.com

                by Marines Girl on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 01:43:36 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

  •  Even geniuses make mistakes (4.00)
    The problem with secrets is people. Someone at some point will slip. In this case it was Guckert's ego propelling the error. The need to look important by having information not generally available. THAT is a common way that these things come out.

    The method Rove came up with for controlling the various leaks was the ridacule machine. Up until now it has been extremely effective as a tactic.

  •  Just to sound a note of caution (4.00)
    This story has gone from Americablog to Atrios and now Kos, the three sites that the investigation has been credited to.

    If this turns out to fall flat, the story is fucked.

    I don't distrust John, but this is almost too good to be true territory.

    Just my two cents.

    •  That's why (none)
      it is important to have a name for this producer and have him speak out in public.

      Again, if just this aspect turns out to be false or discredited in any way, it discredits the bloggers who have worked on the whole story and then the whole story gets classified as junk.

      It's how they worked with Rather. Discredit a small protion and everything is suspect.

      Don't stop looking into it, but be very careful about your sources.

      Bush, so incompetent, he can't even do the wrong things right.

      by JAPA21 on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:52:20 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  oh oh someone may question the credibility (none)
      of 40,000 anonymous internet users!

      Even if it is just smoke, they just can't tar this many messengers, especially since there is little real credibility to begin with.  I just don't think that strategy can be effective against us.

    •  Yes, don't jump to conclusions (none)
      The broader story has legs -- a man who wasn't a journalist but is a whore, got preferential access to the White House press room.  Somebody coordinated that access.  He was a plant.  Who was that person?  Everything else is tangential, even the Iraq bombing stuff.  This isn't a spy story, its a propaganda mixed with sex story.  Keep the eye on the ball.  When did he show up?  Who has he been seen with?  Try to narrow down the possibilities.  There ought to be a list by now of his potential handlers.  Go through each of them one by one, follow what leads there are.  This will keep the heat on, and somebody will make a mistake.
      •  The problem (none)
        is two-fold...

        One - the story will turn to 'blogs run wild with theories' and 'sources are discredited'... that's all we'll hear about this story moving forward. remember, Rather's info was entirely correct, but one wrong move and the whole spin changed.

        two - Raw Story has already reported this to Rep Slaughter and if she bites and this tidbit is proved wrong, her entire investigation goes away.

        unless the producer goes on the record this is a non-story and should be treated as such.

        Jaded Reality... I've had enough spin for today thanks...

        by spiderleaf on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:28:49 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  yes, get this producer (none)
          on the record! i ask myself: why was this not suspicious to this producer, that gannon had all of this privy info before he/she had??? his finger seemed to be in so many pies, and he/she did not have suspicions all this time to try and find out who gannon was??? this producer raises a red flag with me. are producers in the sclm really this camplacent and lazy??? that would explain a lot of the sorry media coverage, though.

          i mean the whole blogosphere caught gannon's puffed up question about social security, and was curious about who he was en masse. it is strange that this producer was not piqued by this curious guy.

  •  Another old media manipulation story (none)
    I can't remember the details, but wasn't there a story that the ABC WH pool reporter was sent home right before the war started?  My vague memory was that they were deliberately told nothing would happen that night, so they could leave.  Then ABC was ~30min slow to get on the air with the war story as a result.  It was supposedly a slap at ABC for previous critical reporting of Bush.

    If anybody remembers or has those details, it'd make a nice counterpoint to this assertion.  Just like Dowd not having press access makes it that much more obvious that Gannon shouldn't have been allowed in the press room.

    •  if true, (none)
      it fits with my thoughts that Gannon could have been used to dole out scoops or leaks to "deserving" media outlets.

      Or, of course, he could have been a blowhard (no pun intended, please!) that couldn't keep his inside information to himself....

      After all the light that has been shed, I still have midnight in my head--RealWest

      by hillaryk on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:27:36 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Blue shirt (none)
    Maybe someone should start looking for a blue shirt that Guckert/Gannon may have worn will visiting the Oval Office - there just may be a little bit of W still crusted on it.
  •  Thank fuckity fuck (none)
    that we have John Negroponte as the new director of national intelligence to shore up these security breaches !

    Let the Democratic Reformation Begin

    by Pounder on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:23:38 AM PST

  •  Thanks for publicizing the editorial (none)
    Heck, the title in the Star Tribune itself was worth a diary.  I love having a liberally-biased nespaper.  

    "The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." ~ George Washington

    by guyermo on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:25:34 AM PST

  •  Kos... (none)
    I was thinking...

    "When are you "fraudsters" going to get real and stop trying to pretend there was any kind of conspiracy?

    It makes all of us look like the tin foil hat brigade."

    Then I realized this isn't an Ohio vote thread. Never mind!

    "...there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.

    by thingamabob on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:30:11 AM PST

  •  Is this all a setup??? (none)
    I'm starting to wonder of the ooze of stories about JimJeff is being orchestrated by Rove and company to set him us as the leaker of the Plame story.

    Clearly, the guy is a blabbermouth. his vaingloriousness got ahead of his frontal cortex, and perhaps the WH is trying to take advantage of this to make him the fall guy.....and no higher source will be found. Novakula will take the secret with him to the fires of Hell.

    "There are times in politics when you must be on the right side and lose." John Kenneth Galbraith

    by susanp on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:30:26 AM PST

  •  What did he know AND (none)
    when did he know it?

    I've heard that question before.

  •  JG2's source inside the WH (none)
    JG2 would have known the sorts of things he knew, in advance of the other media, including wingnut media, if he had a "confidential" higly-placed source inside the WH, probably the same person who took him from being an internet hooker to being a "conservative news correspondent" and who either got him a hard pass or kept him on a two-year string of day passes.  Somebody with whom he was intimate, and who fed his sense of self-importance, either out of personal regard or because of personal "debt".  Somebody who had clout, somebody who had access to the innermost circles of the WH on highly sensitive national security issues like the launching of a war.  Who might that be?

    Yo, Karlyboy ...

  •  A press, a press..my kingdom... (none)
    for a press.

    There is just so much wrapped up in this story. It just takes a little intelligent investigative work, something today's msm news media seems unable or unwilling to do.

    How did G/G know about "shock and awe" hours before Bushie goes on air to tell the nation; how was he able to tell others something was about to break in the Rather/Bushie Guard story. And just WHO gave him his white house press pass day after day for years? This is PRAVDA - American style. And today's news "professionals" roll over and accept it without question nor word of protest.

    Now, more than ever, America needs a Woodward and Bernstein (well, Bernstein anyways). Sad fact is today's "reporters" are totally lacking in any investigative skills and "newsmen/women" are little more than media personalities wrapped up in their own overblown sense of importance.

    If I were the recently fire 60 Minutes producer (forget her name) I'd be using my newly found spare time (and obvious talents) finding out who set up Rather (and her) with the falsely produced memos with the totally true content.

    I think the place to start might just be with our military stud/white house reporter boy. (They sure pulled him underground fast, didn't they?).

    •  Mapes believes they are real. (none)
      Mary Mapes the CBS producer still claims the memos are real and feels that she was fired from CBS without just cause.

      I think she was set up and probably by Rove through Eberle, Gannon's boss at GOPUSA or some other people in Texas where the memos came from.

  •  Bush's pretzel logic and Gannon as a Dominatrix (none)
    Gannon/Guckert is a male dominatrix. He tortures or abuses people who seek sexual gratification through abuse.  

    Was Gannon/Guckert in the Whitehouse or press corp when President Bush "fainted, fell out of his chair" and got a black eye, and numerous scrapes?

    President Bush also had a number of scrapes and cuts which appeared more authentic when he claimed he fell off his bike in Texas.

  •  A serious review of timelines (none)
    I think we have Bush's supposed timeline just prior to the initiation of the Iraqi invasion, because, if you remember, at the last minute he changed the opening when George Tenet came in with intelligence regarding the hiding place of Saddam on the edge of Baghdad, and they reprogramed some cruse missles and re-targeted some of the fighter-bombers to try and decaptitate the regime.  In addition, they moved up the hours for beginning the invasion from Kuwait.  This was called "rolling start" -- and the narrative about it was supposed proof of Bush's Bold approach to his C in C role.  

    Anyhow we need to fit this bit of Gannon intel into the existing timeline.  

    And another point.  "Shock and Awe" as I understand it referrs to the multicolored bombing of Baghdad, which actually came about three days into the campaign.  Lots of news people and much of the public knew about this in advance because reports of the take-off of the B52's from England was no secret -- published on take-off on the various net sites with pictures included, and anyone with a calculator could figure out it would take 6-7 hours for the B52's to be over and around Iraq for "Bombs away."  The media knew in advance, because they had all their cameras hot and on target so we could munch popcorn and watch the show live.  They were alsp positioned to show the firings from subs in the Red Sea and in the Persian Gulf.  Likewise they had their embedds on the carriers.  

    We need to be clear what is being discussed here -- the beginning of the invasion timeline?  or the choreographed bombing of Baghdad three days later?  A four hour heads-up on the bombing is no story -- on the actually kick off of the invasion, well I think it would throw into question Bush's narrative about his bold decision to try to take out Saddam at the last minute.  

  •  Freepers holding a rally for Gannon LOL (none)
    www.freerepublic.com :
    D.C. Chapter to Hold Demonstration in Support of Jeff Gannon and the First Amendment, 2/18/05
          Posted by kristinn
    On News/Activism 02/18/2005 6:28:03 AM PST · 57 replies · 1,060+ views

    Friday, February 18, 2005 | Kristinn
    All FReepers and lurkers in good standing are invited to join the D.C. Chapter in our demonstration this evening. Details in the following press release: DEMONSTRATION IN SUPPORT OF JEFF GANNON& THE FIRST AMENDMENT WHEN: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 2005, 6 P.M. TO 8 P.M. WHERE: THE SIDEWALK BY MONICA'S GATE, AKA THE NORTHWEST VISITORS ENTRANCE THE WHITE HOUSE, 1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVE., NW, WASHINGTON, D.C. (Washington) The D.C. Chapter of Free Republic, an independent grassroots organization, will be holding a demonstration at the White House this evening in support of former Talon News White House Correspondent Jeff Gannon and the rights...

    Let the Democratic Reformation Begin

    by Pounder on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:41:35 AM PST

  •  Who was paying Gannon? (none)
    Recall in 2004, Talon News tried to get in the Congressional Press Pool (http://mediachannel.org/mc/gannondoc.pdf):

    "Talon News is an on-line news service owned by Bobby Eberle. He said Mr. Eberle told him Talon News is an all-volunteer news service, though since Mr. Guckert's application was submitted, a stipend was arranged that would provide more than half of Mr. Guckerts [sic] income in an effort to comply with the gallery's requirement that
    correspondents be paid, full time employees of the organization for which they are applying. Mr. Keenan said Talon News is the primary news supplier for GOPUSA, also owned by Mr. Eberle, and provides its news service at no charge to other organizations."

    Remember, Eberle claims that Talon News wasn't Gannon/Guckert's primary means of income from 2002-2004.  Since Gannon's request was denied, I doubt Gannon was getting most of his income from Eberle.  Eberle appears to claim that Gannon is a VOLUNTEER REPORTER.

    •  I believe he stated before.. (none)
      I believe Jimmy-Jeff stated before, that when he first started at Talon that it was "lean" as he was only paid a small amount and the rest was "savings" that he lived on.  How much "savings" could a man with a $20,000 tax debt to the state of Delaware have?  I don't believe he mentioned who he lived just prior to his gig at Talon starting.  

      Across the River http://acrossriver.blogspot.com

      by Marines Girl on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 02:01:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  All I want (none)
    .. out of this "scandal" is to hear GW Bush say:

    "I did not have sex with that man."

    If it comes to that, I'll be happy.

  •  Freepers hit new low (none)
    DC Chapter of Freeps to Hold Demonstration in Support of Gannon

    No.  Seriously.

    Kristinn Taylor, Co-Leader of the D.C. Chapter of Free Republic, issued the following statement: "It is common knowledge that Jeff Gannon was singled out for personal destruction for the crime of asking a question of the President of the United States at a press conference that was insulting to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

    "The Clintonista slime machine, led by former Clinton White House Chief of Staff John Podesta's Media Matters for America, went into high gear and made an example of Mr. Gannon to any reporter who might dare to challenge Sen. Clinton's credibility in her anticipated 2008 presidential candidacy.

    "What was done to Mr. Gannon was the Clinton impeachement era Ellen Romesch strategy played out for all concerned parties to see. The D.C. Chapter of Free Republic will be out demonstrating for the rights of Mr. Gannon and all other reporters to exercise their rights without fear of personal destruction."

    And so, they take to streets, waving American flags, in support of a tax-evading, GOP activist prostitute who leaked highly classified information, which is a federal crime!  

    Ah, I love America.

    How do I get me one of those White House Press Pass thingies?

    by Georgia Logothetis on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:45:38 AM PST

  •  where's the Beef (cake) (none)
    is there any evidence Gannon actually worked as an escort?

    so we know he advertised...but that by itself doesn't mean he had any customers

  •  I love how the right dismisses this story (none)
    - Usually by claiming Gannon is a small-time story not worthy of much attention or worry on their part.

    You'd think he took part in some sort of "second-rate burglary" or something...

    I knew Ted Hitler. Ted Hitler was a friend of mine. Ted Hitler ate my panda. You're no Ted Hitler.

    by nightsweat on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:49:03 AM PST

  •  'feels good' - offered without comment (none)
    War begins in Iraq with strikes aimed at `leadership targets'
    By Martin Merzer, Ron Hutcheson and Drew Brown

    Knight Ridder Newspapers

    WASHINGTON - War erupted Wednesday night as the United States launched dozens of Tomahawk cruise missiles and aimed 2,000-pound bombs at Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and other "leadership targets" in Baghdad.

    [...]

    President Bush announced the attack in a four-minute television speech to the nation. "On my order, coalition forces have begun striking selected targets of military importance to undermine Saddam Hussein's ability to wage war," he said. "These are the opening stages of what will be a broad and concerted campaign."

    Minutes before the speech, an internal television monitor showed the president pumping his fist. "Feels good," he said.

    [...]

  •  I say (none)
    we should follow the good advice of the Rude Pundit.

    Here's what we do: we start invading the Christian conservative websites (and right-wingers who hate gays). Try to stay as "mainstream" as possible. Hit the chat rooms and message boards. E-mail like crazy. And pretend to be Christian, conservative, and mad as hell that the President would allow someone like Gannyguck into the sanctified pure whiteness of America's house. Go on Fox's website and do the same. Never, never make it that you hate Bush - make it that you're betrayed. Fuck, if a few cranks from Focus on the Family can get the FCC to criminally raise fines on indecency, then we can use those cranks to our advantage. (The Rude Pundit is not going to list sites to contact because, in case anyone does this, he doesn't want such complaints to be seen as "illegitimate" because of the Rude Pundit's involvement.)
    •  Exactly! (none)
      That's how I play it in my angry emails to Fox News about Brit Hume's Social Security bullshit: "I watch you guys every day! I trust you for my news! You are how I know what's going on in the world! And this idiot is lying to me! Even I could understand what FDR meant in that letter to Congress!"

      The public wants what the public gets, but I don't get what this society wants -- Paul Weller

      by jamfan on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:06:23 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Then with your other username (none)
      Argue against smearing someone just because they are a gay military prostitute. Maybe talk about Mary Magdalene, maybe speculate that JG had found JC and was mending his ways. Say that explains why he had those special prayer sessions 1-on-1 with our saviour and Commander-in-Christ. Remind them of the christian value of forgiveness.

      watch the heads explode!

      •  Actually, (none)
        there seems to be a good bit of controversy in freeperland.
        •  From Freeperland (4.00)
          To: kristinn Gannon never became a "reporter." Anyone with an ounce of objectivity can see that. It will not do any conservative any good to take this guy's part - and most folks here have the stones to admit that. While y'all are whining about the "attacks" on Gannon, why not stop and think about how geared up you would be if a male prostitute was regularly admitted into the CLINTON WH press room after being denied Capitol Hill credentials and did nothing but lob t-ball questions whenever the going got a little rough for Lockhart. Think about it, and be honest with yourself about what you would be saying and doing. Then come back and explain why you think you should protest in this guy's corner. 47 posted on 02/18/2005 9:09:46 AM PST by lugsoul (Until at last I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside.)

          "Help him...help the Bombardier!" "I'm the bombardier...I'm OK!" "Then help Him, help him!"

          by Bulldawg on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:55:40 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Asking freepers to be honest with themselves (none)
            that poster must be a lefty troll! Sweet!!

             lugsoul - sounds like a Mordor orc name (lug=tower in the Black Speech, if I recall correctly), but he is quoting Gandalf in his sig...  
            definitely not standard freeper material. Thanks for fishing that tidbit out of the swamp for us. I did not dare follow that link myself.
            Please accept some mojo.

    •  There's lots of ammo (none)
      in the Bible. Yep, go to Psalms, for example, and you will find lots of verses to present to the fundies about:

      lying
      deceit
      divine judgment
      God's wrath on sullied leaders

      etc.

      These so-called "Christians" must not only have the facts thrown at them, but scriptural verses which vividly illustrate this morality play. Hurling scripture at them will force them to compare what they advocate with "God's word." And God's word on this isn't pretty.

  •  need some help (none)
    at 10:16 pm eastern Bush made his announcement that the early stages of the war had begun.

    Does anyone know when the bombing actualy started?

    "They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."- Benjamin Franklin

    by bluestateLIBertarian on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 09:53:40 AM PST

  •  So... (none)
    Does anyone really believe the WH would go through all this trouble of planting Gannon and covering up his real identity, just to get a few slow pitches at press briefings? Doesn't that seem out of place for a party that prides itself on cost-benefit analysis?

    So if that wasn't really it, what are the current theories on what the WH stood to really gain from his presence? Was he essentially spying on the WH press corps itself, giving the WH the scoop on what questions would be forthcoming from other journalists, etc.? Or was he a point man in some deeper strategy to contort the media to the WH's wishes? Or was it something else entirely?

    What is everyone thinking in terms of the reward the WH was expecting?

    •  re: cost-benefit (none)
      i'm sure gannon did it for free, and that he felt it was his "patriotic duty" or that any salary he recieved came from talonnews.com.

      so, the WH felt that they could shape journalistic discussion for free, basically, much the same way the swift boat vets did.

      regarding the bigger picture, i'm sure he was given questions based on whatever the WH had to say that day, and that at certain points, the script said to call on gannon.

      •  But it's not free (none)
        Even if he wasn't being paid by the WH. They were still taking a risk that someone would eventually find him out and cause some political problems for the WH. Imagine if this thing had broken, say, two weeks before November 2nd? Maybe it would have had no effect, but maybe it would have.

        So you're Karl Rove, the evil genius of contemporary politics. Do you really risk the house that Gannon won't be found out? You can't answer the question unless you know what you're going to get out of the deal. If it's just some softball questions, I don't think that's a reasonable gamble. There's got to be a bigger payoff in mind.

        I dunno, maybe it's just me hoping that Gannon is the break-in that leads to the slush fund that leads to the 18-minute gap that leads to the smoking gun. But it just feels like there's more to Gannon's role than just a few lobs at the president.

        •  and the really stupid thing is (none)
          there was no reason. If all they wanted to do was get specific questions asked, there are plenty of MSM reporters who would have been happy to do it.

          No one would have questioned who they were or why they were there.

          There is something more here. Something much larger and/or more sinister.

          And if Gannon was paid by Talon, there will be a record of it somewhere. Anybody found one yet? If he WAS paid, and by Talon, where did THEY get their money? They sure didn't have any revenues.

    •  It's common (none)
      It's common CIA tradecraft.  You drop bits and pieces of information that pan out and suggest you have inside knowledge as a means of establishing bono fides.  If this is repeated on a number of levels over time, those who receive your information leaks, trust you as a source.  This then establishes you as someone to be generally trusted.  Then -- eventually, you can plant disinformation, and it too will be trusted.

      You guys need to read more spy novels.  

    •  follow the money (none)
      presumably someone who has to spend a lot of time in the WH got tired of having to nip out to the Mayflower for a little relief between meetings. Talon news is just a cover to justify JJGG's presence in the WH, and cover the money trail for his services.

      Who ?

      -B

  •  Anyone want to place bets -- (none)
    -- or start a pool that, should any shit hit the fan on this story, Gannon will mysteriously "commit" suicide before he is compelled to talk?
  •  unrelated comment (none)
    grats! dkos had a huge surge in hits after the daily show broke the breaking of gannongate.

    i got to see the ratings through freerepublic.com. :) their lame-o hit-bot couldn't keep up, although i'm sure they'll get a related surge in traffic shortly.

  •  Possible connection with Killian memos and Gannon? (none)
    I posted this question on John's site, specifically dealing with his question #5:

    5. How would Gannon get inside information on the Dan Rather scandal BEFORE the rest of the major media? Assuming the producer is correct, did it come from a White House source, and if so, what does this say about possible White House involvement in creating this scandal in the first place?

    It is a definite longshot, but has anyone by chance thought of a possible connection between Burkett's source on the Killian memos and Gannon/GOPUSA/TalonNews?

    I mean, hey, we're talkin' Texas connections running pretty deep here!  Just a "what if" to throw out there, but it does beg the question as to how Gannon knew the Rather info. before others did.

  •  Now I see (none)
    Hmmm...this affair involving Jeff Gannon/Gukert/et all is providing powerful illumination into past events.

    You have J.G. and his special band of brothers on military reserve providing outcall service (would I like to see their client list!)in the D.C. area.  Later (or during), J.G. gets daily press passes to the White House for several years somehow avoiding the scrutiny one would think employed given he sat just feet away from the president at a time of war.  The gods (in togas no doubt) must smile upon J.G.  

    Now I see why Republicans were so adamant about impeaching Clinton after his affair with Monica was known.  He wasn't supporting the troops!!  

  •  what's really sad (none)
    if there was no homoerotic angle to this story, would the MSM have even bothered to pick it up?
  •  Where's the Right on Gannon? (none)
    Conservative bloggers are barely looking at the Gannon story (Instapundit has only had a couple of posts on it), and when they do address it, they are either defending Gannon like mad or attacking fellow bloggers for pointing out the hypocrisy of the Bush administration giving preferential treatment to man who created and maintained gay websites.  Why?  How is Gannon not worse than the Eason story which had them all salivating every minute of every day until he resigned?  Instapundit had over 25 posts about Eason but he's had only 2 about Gannon.
    •  In fairness (man, do I hate saying that (none)
      in relation to rightie bloggers!), our Eason-to-Gannon thread ratio is pretty heavily lopsided in the opposite direction. But then again, Gannon is soooooo much worse, I agree.

      The public wants what the public gets, but I don't get what this society wants -- Paul Weller

      by jamfan on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:10:16 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  JG 2 self preservation (none)
      Maybe JG2 had outlived his usefulness to whoever, or had done other more vile things for them, and he was feeling that he was in danger, and that to remain obscure would increase the likelyhood of foul play being visited upon him.  Maybe that is why he asked such an outrageous question, perhaps hoping someone would finally notice him, and give him the protection that being known would give him.  Couldn't that explain the look of suprise on Bush's face when JG2 asked the question.  Just a thought
    •  Maybe it's obvious... (none)
      ... and maybe it's spin, but it's pretty readily evident to me that the Right is taking something of a straw-man argument in this controversy (see: link from above and here).

      Claiming that Kossacks, and others who are similarly oriented, are attacking JJGG solely because he "broke rank" with some gay-rights contingent seems to be the argument du jour.   The notion is laughable, but it might have legs.

      For what it's worth, have the LCRs released a statement on this?  

  •  The Incompetence Frame (4.00)
    Another way to frame the issue is to look at the level of incompetence.  If these guys can't keep some dude out of the White House, how can they keep terrorists out of the Country?  

    Either they have to admit they are incompetent, or that this wasn't just some dude.

    Accusing them of lying seemingly has no impact.

  •  I know how he knew before... (none)
    Pillow Talk!

    ~Some undisclosed location~
    Gannon: So, did you enjoy that ----?
    ----: All I can say is Shock and Awe, I am so glad you are a Top!
    Gannon: I will forgo the $200 if I can get another few press passes, if not, pay up
    ----: You will get them, and you want to be here later today
    Gannon: Really hun, why?
    ----: Because Saddam is about to have something 8" cut jammed in his ass, His own Shock and Awe

    I am a man without a Nation, without a voice... BushsAmerica

    by Ioo on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:18:53 AM PST

  •  Republicans are a threat to Nat'l Security (none)
    These guys are so friggin' incompetent.  There a tremendous threat to national security.
    •  what do we do? (none)
      I voted, I post and repost...

      less we take up arms,  what do you think we shoud do?

      less insults, more ideas

      I am a man without a Nation, without a voice... BushsAmerica

      by Ioo on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:21:43 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Agreed (none)
      And THAT is the angle that needs to be shoved right down their throats.  Over and over and over again.  THAT is the angle which is resonating with the public.  THAT is the angle that got Bush re-elected.  So THAT is the angle to consistently push right back at them so they fall right off the cliff with it.  Period.
      •  To what end? (none)
        I agree that this is a huge nat'l security issue, but push to what end?

        The media refused to cover all the issues Bush has.

        Republicans have openly stated that Bush can do no wrong, they have openly shielded him from the mechenisms laid out in our gov to remove him, a la.

        Lastly the Dems are not really sceaming about all this, they chat, they talk, but they will not do what they knows needs to be done.

        So again, what am I "Blogger #98048372.3485" should do?

        I am a man without a Nation, without a voice... BushsAmerica

        by Ioo on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:34:49 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I hear ya (none)
          Oh I certainly share your sentiments, but to me this issue, Bush's supposed "strength" of national security is really his greatest weakness.

          Perhaps the MSM won't listen and report.  Perhaps they will continue to wilt and be the little beggers they are to remain in Bush's good graces.

          But then again, this Gannon story had very little legs when it started.  And looking at John's site, just see how many MSM folks have decided it's worth covering after the bloggers did the dirty work for them.

          And again, you're right to point out about the Dems. not wanting to do much with this security issue.  They're picking their battles carefully, perhaps too carefully to some, but this certainly isn't quite on their agenda just yet.  Right now SS and the Budget takes precedence as their priorities, and look how well they're doing with those - Bush is begging for someone to throw him a bone, and the Dems. aren't budging.

          This issue of the Dems. and SS is also thanks much in part to the bloggers efforts (thereisnocrisis.com) and the grassroots support, among other things of course.

          My point is the bloggers and the grassroots efforts are making a significant difference on these issues.  Perhaps it's not up to the Dems. and the MSM to take up the torch on this national security issue.  Most likely it will come down to whether or not the bloggers and the grassrooters will want to take up this issue for the Dems. to latch onto and run with.  I'd contend that we can and should, because it's a gaping hole in this Administration's armour.

  •  While you're [un]covering the fun parts ... (none)
    in dKos diaries, some of ...
    the stubborn kossacks just won't let the topic rest
    by Jeff alone in the WH:

    "Bedrock" Freudian Speak by Bush
    by creve coeur  Fri Feb 18th, 2005

    Pax! Bon sauvage.

    In 2005 - Be liberal: Support our Allies of Democracy on Human Rights, the Environment, Gay and Minority Rights & EU and UN Third World Development Programs & Our Friends

  •  Gannon an "embed"? (none)
    I've been wondering who Gannon might be "embedded" with.  Someone got him in and fed him all the information.  After all the guy is a whore, so who was his John?  My first thought is Karl Rove.  They make quite a couple. Any other ideas?
  •  Moving the goalposts again? (1.00)
    The Plame thing fell flat on the facts, so now it's on to "Shock and Awe?"  Laughable.

    Face it, this is a minor story with no legs that only reinforces the notion that liberals expect a monopoly on softballing Press Corp members (we call it the Helen Tomas treatment).  By restricting membership to Big Media, they know that liberal shills will outnumber conservative shills by 12-to-1.

    Remember this "hard-hitting" Press corp question to Bill Clinton?

    Q Sir, will you tell us why you think people have been so mean to you? Is it a conspiracy? Is it a plan? They treat you worse than they treated Abe Lincoln.
    http://www.clintonfoundation.org/legacy/031999-presidential-press-conference-on-kosovo.htm

    •  Todays ABC The Note, begs to differ (none)
      Very bottom of the page, last section:

      "Media: Anne Kornblut finds that Ari Fleischer had doubts about Jeff Gannon and said he stopped calling on the man after a while. LINK

      Why is it that most savvy Democrats think this story is going away, while some pretty plugged in Republicans say the opposite?"

      ABC The Note

      "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." ~ Gandhi

      by mad ramblings of a sane woman on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:35:53 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I saw that earlier (none)
        I think the republicans know something we dn't yet.....Keep digging
      •  What did Ari say? (none)
        Fleisher's comments only further dampen the story -- he says that he checked, and there's no connection between Talon and the Party.

        As to search hits, it was on national TV this week that the guy had a gay escort site -- OF COURSE, that's going to spike hits short-term, but without connection to the WH (and given the proven-specious nature of the Plame bandwagon), we all know this story is a dying animal.

      •  That's VERY interesting! (none)
        I despise The Note but they are often pretty accurate about stuff like this.

        Hmmm.  Well, keep digging, people.  If the GOP is protesting too much, keep digging.

    •  No legs? (none)
      Google NEWS search gannon
      Results 1 - 10 of about 1,570 for gannon

      No legs? 1,570 stories from sites that are NEWS sites, not DailyKOS..

      If you just google
      Results 1 - 10 of about 1,430,000 for gannon

      I always wondered what it would be like to be a blind follower of Bush right now... No TV, No newspapers, no web... It is getting harder and harder to shelter yourself from the short comings of this farce of a president

      I am a man without a Nation, without a voice... BushsAmerica

      by Ioo on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:42:07 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Pardon us (none)
      But who the hell are you to say the "plame thing fell flat on the facts" and that this is a "minor story"?  I've looked through your comments, and you, in the words of Guckert, are "divorced from reality."  You call the left "fascists" because it thinks...gasp!...the White House Press Corps should be comprised of the PRESS and not some cheap D.C. hooker that got special treatment from the White House?

      You call us the Drama Queen Party apparently because we don't roll over like passive obedient puppies and take the war, lies, and deception that this Admistration has spoon-fed to the American public.

      Please.  Take your apathy and submissivness elsewhere.  Don't be pissed cause some Americans still give a damn about the truth.

      How do I get me one of those White House Press Pass thingies?

      by Georgia Logothetis on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:42:27 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Consider yourself pardoned (1.00)
        But who the hell are you to say the "plame thing fell flat on the facts"

        Only because it did...

        You call the left "fascists" because it thinks...gasp!...the White House Press Corps should be comprised of the PRESS and not some cheap D.C. hooker that got special treatment from the White House?

        Your sarcasm detector was off.  I don't think you are fascists for trying to silence all dissent (the charge often launched at the Right by Kossacks) -- I just think you are looking after your partisan interests.

        And what's so offensive about a guy asking a QUESTION again?  I guess fake outrage only needs fake stimulus...

        You call us the Drama Queen Party apparently because we don't roll over like passive obedient puppies and take the war, lies, and deception that this Admistration has spoon-fed to the American public.

        While I personally find you cute as little buttons, I call you the "Drama Queen Party" because of the Democrats' transparent attempts to inflate to the point of bursting ANYTHING that they think they might have a chance of sticking to this President (including this story, and fake Iraq statistics, and ridiculous accusations of "lies").

        Don't be pissed cause some Americans still give a damn about the truth.

        If truth were even a slight concern of the Left, I would respect it.

    •  From your own cite/site (none)
      Face it, this is a minor story with no legs that only reinforces the notion that liberals expect a monopoly on softballing Press Corp members (we call it the Helen Tomas treatment).  By restricting membership to Big Media, they know that liberal shills will outnumber conservative shills by 12-to-1.

      Clinton: Helen.

      Q Mr. President, how long have you known that the Chinese were stealing our nuclear secrets? Is there any trust left between the two nations? And some Republicans are saying that you deliberately suppressed the information from the American people because of the election and your trade goals.

      Yup, that's a softball.

  •  Is Scott McClellan gay? (none)
    Just curious.  Thought it might explain the Gannon connection.  Maybe x-boyfriends/lovers or something.  

    Then I start thinking, you know, McClellan does got a little gayness going on.  Not flaming like Mehlman, but something.

    Anyhoo - I Google 'Scotty' to get his family stats - find out if he's married and all that and I come across the press gaggle page.  It just reminded me of Gannon's page - all military and stars and bars and penises and all that.  Check out the bizarre pic.  It's actually not a parody, to my knowledge - it's like real - authentic - whatever the word is for it - i.e. the White House wants it to look like it does.

    •  Scottie got married (none)
      In November of 2003. Gannon sent a card to congratulate.
      •  Raw Story hints that McClellan is gay... (none)
        On Valentine's Day, no less.

        Wouldn't be the first time a gay/bisexual guy got married.

        It may also be telling that they're long-distance.  I think Mrs. McClellan could find non-profit work in DC if she wanted it, and she probably does, but Scottie says no, don't worry about it hun, my tenure is almost up anyways.  

        So, he only has to fly home once every three or so months - get it up while thinking about PropaGannon - hit it - watch the football game, then back to DC.  Whew.

        Is that how it works, gay-guys-who-made-the-mistake-of-marrying-a-woman-only-to-regret-it?

        Just to be clear, from what I've heard, making the mistake of getting married despite having doubts about one's sexuality, can be an honest mistake - it doesn't have to be cynical (only done to provide cover).

        Austin's a liberal town, so Scottie would have had access to gay bars I would think, but it would have been tough to come out - all that pressure of having an entire family of professors, and lawyers, and politicians.

        But a new start in DC - so many gay men - so many gay Republican men - so many gay Republican prominent men ... enough to drive a prominent gay Republican Austin Texan wild.  Drats!  New town, but national spotlight!  Good thing prominent gay Republicans are discrete.

        The new DC spotlight keeps the press whispering among themselves, hey, he's a decent looking guy, not too flabby, shaves, wears suits, comes from an extremely prominent family and now is one of the most connected men in the world - no girlfriend??  

        Scottie parries the questions for months with I'm busy, I'm busy, until finally, he knows they know - the press corps is onto him - but he has to maintain plausible deniability - so he has to beat them to the next checkpoint - he has to intimate that he's seeing someone in Austin (in the 'Niagara Falls' area, I swear).  But the press corps isn't buying it - they know - they know.

        Panic mode ... so, what to do?  Blame God, blame yourself, blame Texas and the GOP, I don't know what to do, but I have to do something ... I can't handle what we put Clinton through ... then, he meets a nice girl at a party, almost feels attracted to her - enough, maybe - and next thing you know, they're engaged, then married, and still living the long-distance lifestyle.

        [Can I get a book deal?]

        My gaydar is pretty good, but I wouldn't necessarily pick McClellan as gay.  In my non-defense, however, I wouldn't ever think that Karl Rove has a frickin family!!!

        •  I was thinking that (none)
          Particularly since:

          • Guckert made such a snide comment about sending a congrats card to McClellan and his wife
          • McClellan's mom made a really snide comment about wanting Scott to give her more grandkids--not the kind of comment that would publicly welcome your new daughter-in-law into the family
  •  I hate to be a party pooper (none)
    But it wasn't too hard to figure out.  Apparently Bush scheduled the prime-time news appearance 3 days in advance to make announcement of a decision he supposedly made just that morning.  What predicated it was 'hot intel' that said Saddam was spotted and the opening salvo was a missile strike to kill Saddam.  There really was no intel - it was a bluff to Saddam's generals to make them think Saddam was dead so they start cutting deals with the US.

    The real story here is how the media willingly participated in government deception.  Granted in this case - getting Saddam's generals to rebel against him - was a good thing, once the machinery is in place...

    BTW - if anyone is wondering, my source for this is from America's Secret War by George Friedman.  I've heard bad things about Friedman, the guy from StratFor here, but the book is solid.

  •  Gabe Caggiano of Montgomery Co., MD (none)
    "The Sentinel"
    http://www.thesentinel.com/344559780258760.php

    This guy is a WH correspondent?  Interesting that it sounds like he know JJGG personally (his article leaves that impression).  Crocodile tears.

    Any Kossacks in MD know more?  Why would this guy weep for "Jeffie"?

    •  Jeff's a top (none)
      You pay him to make you weep.

      -B

    •  He's not a WH correspondent (none)
      According to this list Dan Frookin posted earlier this week.
    •  Caggiano (none)
      Check this out. Yeah, it's an old story. But scroll down and you'll see photos of this guy in a tussle with the Secret Service. So obviously he's got a history. History that would have come up in his background check for his day pass. So how'd he get one? Hhhhmmmm.
      •  Caggiano used to work in Austin? (none)
        So is there a Texas connection between these two?  Is Caggiano another plant?  I'm just asking.

        Caggiano seems to take credit for suggesting that "Jeff" go to Wolf Blitzer.

        "As a fellow White House reporter, I found the witch hunt against Jeff Gannon offensive and malicious and offered him my advice and counsel last week on how to mount an effective counteroffensive. I worked as a media coach and PR advisor in California for three years and know a little bit about stopping the charging rhinos of disinformation in their tracks.

        At first, Gannon said, "No Gabe, I think I just want to lay low for now until this blows over and I will be back at the White House."

        I strongly disagreed and told Gannon, "If you have nothing to hide and there's nothing more out there than what has already been made public, you need to set the record straight. Otherwise, you will be destroyed by innuendo and half-truths."

        Gannon took my advice and went on CNN with Wolf Blitzer. Gannon told Blitzer he had in fact worked for a web-hosting company years ago which attempted to get an online escort business up and running, but none of the businesses were ever successfully launched.

        Gannon went on to defend his news organization and I can tell you first hand I never believed he was a plant or a paid Republican operative. Gannon hosted a weekly Internet radio show on "Rightalk.com" and I was a regular guest and my opinions often differed from Jeff's, which were to the extreme right.

        Unfortunately, Gannon didn't stem the tide with his appearance on Blitzer's show. The Washington Post, on Thursday printed a story about Gannon which refers to naked pictures of him and his possible inclusion on a gay web site offering male escorts. Gannon also, according to the Wilmington News-Journal, owes more than $20,000 in back taxes to the state of Delaware.

        I feel very sorry for the man I know as Jeff Gannon, whose real name is James Dale Guckert. And while I feel empathy for him, I also feel betrayed. He wasn't candid nor honest with me when I offered my support and counsel."

        •  Thanks, leftilicious (none)
          I've posted this at Propogannon, fwiw
        •  oh really? (none)
          Gannon also, according to the Wilmington News-Journal, owes more than $20,000 in back taxes to the state of Delaware.

          So he lived here, huh? Somebody will know him. This is a small state, and you don't get away with jack. And somebody will leak something to the press. Everybody knows everybody.

          If the News-Journal is on it, things may get interesting. They seem to actually have some real reporters.

  •  Shit, I could have told you that (none)
    A news producer for a major network just told me that Gannon told the producer the US was going to attack Iraq four hours before President Bush announced it to the nation.

    Hell I knew Bush was going to attack Iraq like, a year before he officially announced it.  George Bush wanted to occupy Iraq from day one, and I honestly find the way the left has entertained the GOP's little kabuki play about it alternatingly hilarious and maddening.  I mean there's this bizarre willingness to believe that there was anything Saddam Hussein really could have done to avoid this occupation.  Uhm, like what, hand over the non-existent WMDs?  

    Of course, the fact that Gannon knew about the official decision hours before it was announced is important.  We should disseminate it.  I just had to comment on the Iraq build-up b/c I seriously think we make a huge mistake by letting the GOP's version of history stand uncorrected.

    It's not over till you're underground.

    by ChicagoDem on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:39:59 AM PST

  •  Guckert probably knew before Colin Powell (none)
    Can we track Powell down ? He'd probably be fairly pissed off.

    -B

  •  Rove Telling Guckert About Shock and Awe (none)
    "And when...the invasion...begins...in less than...four hours...that's right...slower...that's right...it's going...to be...shock...and AWE!"

    We the undersigned urge you to support Federal funding for research using human pluripotent stem cells. -80 Nobel Laureates to Pres. Bush

    by easong on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:43:33 AM PST

  •  One Has to Think that... (none)
    Gannon/Guckert has violated some State laws with his various actions - enough to get an aggressive State AG, e.g., Spitzer, to begin to look at some of this and help cast light?

    Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph

    by mlangner on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:45:55 AM PST

  •  Make "Legitimate Media" Cover This (none)
    I have fired off a message to cnn.com telling them that if they don't start to follow through on this story I will no longer watch their network or visit their website.

    While 1 person doesn't make a difference, a flood of such messages might make them realize that there are repercussions to being an adminstration stooge.

    CNN is probably the best possible network to cover this, since they are fighting FOX news, and they certainly don't want to lose any more of their dwindling viewership.

    It is dissapointing that very few media outlets are striving to keep this story alive.  I think it's up to us to do our part.

  •  Maybe a big thing, maybe not (none)
    This might be a big thing, but it might not be.  I imagine alot of people in the White House knew about the beginning of the invasion. Heck, we all knew it would be happening, if not the exact time.

    But then you get to the part about releasing the information to the public.  If Bush wants to make an announcement on broadcast TV, the White House notifies the networks in advance, sometimes a few minutes, sometimes a few hours, so that the networks can be prepared.  Similarly with print journalism, I would imagine -- as a courtesy, the White House notifies a publication to be prepared for a big story, so that the headline on the morning after the invasion isn't "Elderly Woman on NE Side Keeps 120 Cats!"

    That being said, this story sounds more and more like the WH was using Gannon to shape stories, to distract attention, and who knows what else. And the security aspect of it is the big hook, I think -- why in this post-9/11 world does the WH credential someone using a fake name, working for a fake news organization, and why does the WH allow this person to have classified info?  The Bushie's have given us so many reasons to believe the worst about them, it would be a disservice to our country not to do so!

    In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

    by Paul in Berkeley on Fri Feb 18, 2005 at 10:46:26 AM PST

  •  This is scare....take a look at this article (none)
    There are distancing from Ebele now real fast:

     http://nashuaadvocate.blogspot.com/2005/02/texas-republican-party-denies-knowing.html

    Favorite quote:

    Specifically, Sherry Sylvester, a spokeswoman for the Republican Party of Texas, said, when asked about Eberle, "I'm not going to comment because I don't know him, and nobody here does."

    Thats hillarious what did she do a poll of all the members of the republican party in Texas (as you know they have 5 members in Texas) Nobody knows him sounds like more of a message to republicans, "say you don't know him even if you've played poker every weekend for the last 10 years"

    The article goes on to document Eberle's 10 million connections to the Texas Republican Party.

    There scrammbling we don't yet know why but they are scrammbling

  •  MSM is soooo slow on the uptake... (none)
    saying it appears a reporter was embedded to ask softball questions.... NO SHIT, Sherlock!!  Who'll ever forget that african-american woman at that press conference just before the invasion being called on by Bush saying something like: "So & So, don't you have a question for me about God?"
  •  Somewhat odd though... (none)
    But does anyone else find it odd that this producer says that he find it "odd" that Gannon would know this given that he represented such a "small news outlet."  Well Talon didn't even exist yet according to the timeline.  If it didn't exist yet, he should have been incredulous, not stating that it was small.  It just sounds fishy in a way.  Like he is backtracking his recollection.  If so, then this could be a set up to discredit the story.

    What was Gannon representing himself as?  Was he representing himself as GOPUSA?  Talon? Do we know?  How would this producer have even heard about a Talon News if it didn't exist yet.  I suppose he could have been given given the info by Gannon as a leak, but why would a news producer from a presumably reputable outlet take the word of a "new" reporter with a day pass in the newsroom from an agency that is "small" or that he has never heard of.  The leak story doesn't hold water either really.  He wouldn't be a credible source.  These are questions that need to be asked of this producer.

    I just get paranoid of them trying to discredit this story otherwise this producer would reveal him/herself.

    •  This producer ? (none)
      Did Americablog get his or her name ?

      Without a solid source behind this the Repubs will tear this apart, who knows maybe Rove is in damage control having fake producers call pretending to be real while putting out information that is non existent and will make a mockery our of all the work we are doing ?

      One must be VERY carefull of ROVE and his bag of tricks.

  •  Of course you're right (none)
    I hope, and suspect it will be forthcoming.
  •  Gannon (none)
    Gannon is likely the purveyor of the forged Rather documents.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site