Oliver “Like Kryptonite to Sanity” Willis is continuing to relentless try to find anything in the Jeff Gannon/James Guckert story, this time trying to tie in South Dakota’s Sen. John Thune.
Apparently — gasp! — Gannon wrote several stories about the Thune/Daschle race, and had Thune on his radio show. I mean obviously if a political reporter is writing on the biggest Senate race in the 2004 cycle clearly there has just got to be some kind of conspiracy. Granted, Gannon did run a story about Daschle’s DC residency at the same time as Thune ran an ad on it, but given that the story was already common knowledge at the time, that’s hardly surprising. What Gannon did was what every journalist with an ideological bent does – take a party press release and use it as a basis for a story. This happens all the time, and is common as dirt in the media. Granted, it’s bad journalism, but it’s more reflective of the state of journalism today than any conspiracy.
This is another hopelessly pathetic attempt by the lefties to try and cling to anything that might give the Gannon/Guckert story legs. For the real story, Kevin at Wizbang has the facts of the case. It’s clear Gannon/Guckert was a shill, but no more of a shill than most mainstream media players. The sordid aspects of his personal life are also salacious, but not particularly enlightening. If the White House were to enact a policy of banning any journalist for a partisan news agency, The New York Times wouldn’t be able to step foot in the White House, and if the Secret Service did a thorough background check on every journalist with a day pass there’s a good chance that the White House briefings would be done in an empty room.
The Gannon/Guckert story has no legs, and while the lefties are trying to emulate the research of the blogosphere, they forget the part of the story about actually getting your facts straight first…
Why was Gannon getting journalist day passes months before he was a journalist?
You’re telling me that’s not significant? You’re telling me that story doesn’t have “legs”? But a network bigshot shoots his mouth off in Switzerland or whatever – entirely off the record – and suddenly we’re calling for his head?
Get some fucking perspective, already. Anyway Gannon is starting to look like the conduit through which Rove planted the fake TANG memos; when that comes out in the open I wonder if the blogosphere will call for the reinstatement of all those folks you had fired at CBS. I doubt it. Apparently accountability is something the bloggers only wave at other people, and never anything they’re expected to apply to themselves.
Talk about needing some perspective! Wow.
First of all, any questions about how Guckert/Gannon got his pass are relevant, in my opinion. So I’m in agreement there.
But as of right now there isn’t one single shred of proof that Gannon is the “conduit” for the CBS memos, and no, the ramblings of a diarist at Daily Kos doesn’t constitute “proof.” Without proof, and it doesn’t look like there will ever be any, your charge is ridiculous.
Second, bloggers had no one fired at CBS. CBS fired them. The charge against them was that they used obviously phony and obviously forged documents to try to influence the outcome of a presidential election. If, in some left-leaning fantasy land these documents can be traced to the Rove-Bushitler Global Crime Council, they were fake, fake, fake. The fine folks at CBS should have known better, but let their own laziness and desire to “break” a big story get in their way.
Finally, if you think that Eason Jordan was just engaging in “off the record” chit-chat at Davos, you’re the one who seriously needs to add a little perspective to your life. This man, partially in charge of one of the biggest news agencies in the *world*, claimed that US troops were targeting and killing American journalists. He did so without a shred of proof to back up that bombshell of a statement. What is it with you people lacking proof, anyway?
And if there truly was nothing to Eason Jordan “shooting his mouth off” in Switzerland, how come the videotape of the statement wasn’t released? That would have cleared it all up in a heartbeat. But no, he resigns.
This man, partially in charge of one of the biggest news agencies in the world, claimed that US troops were targeting and killing American journalists.
Oh, I’m sorry. I missed the part in the First Amendment where it says that it doesn’t apply to network bigshots.
As for the Gannon/Rove thing; hey, I’m just speculating. But there had to be a reason that a gay prostitute was gaining White House press access, don’t you think? Months before he was employed by any news outfit?
Oh, I’m sorry. I missed the part in the First Amendment where it says that it doesn’t apply to network bigshots.
And I’m sorry I missed the part where you can’t lose your job (or be pressured to resign your job) based on your poor use of a public forum. It appears that he’s more a casualty of his own poor judgment than anything else.
And I’ve said it before: any information that anyone can turn up about Guckert/Gannon is fair game. The who, what, when, where and why of this man is arguably something that we can all benefit from. Leveling accusations without proof is entirely a different matter, even if you do try to wrap it up in “speculation.”
Just remember that if you want anything done with Gannon, it’s going to require proof, not wild charges.
It appears that he’s more a casualty of his own poor judgment than anything else.
So, given that everything worked its way out in the way you think it’s supposed to, why was the Eason Jordan story of any interest to anyone? I mean, what are you arguing, exactly? That some loudmouth catching fire for saying something stupid is somehow more important than the possibility – nay, certainty, at this point – that the White House was manipulating the press corps with a fake journalist plant?
That’s what I meant about the perspective. I don’t see the news in the Jordan case – who CNN hires or fires is entirely up to them, as you seem to agree. Why should the rest of us care? The White House, on the other hand, has a responsibility to the American people; their actions in regards to their manipulation of the press could only have been to circumvent that responsibility.