PDA

View Full Version : The Gay Monica?


Taco John
02-20-2005, 03:04 AM
This Gannon story is good stuff... Is this impeachable? You'd figure if Monica was impeachable, there has *got* to be something here...

Looking forward to the investigation.

BIG_DADDY
02-20-2005, 03:06 AM
WTF?

Taco John
02-20-2005, 03:07 AM
To tell you the truth, I think the whole thing is stupid. But I figure what's good for the goose is good for the gander. The conservatives drug this country down during the Clinton deal, and now that there is a huge gay scandal with this Administration, I figure it's good for some popcorn.

Taco John
02-20-2005, 03:10 AM
WTF?



This guy is getting all the inside scoops AND prostituting himself out at the same time. Highly doubful that those two roles crossed, eh?

ROFL

Buckle up. The Dems are going to drive this thing into the ground until they find out who he was blowing.

Plus given the recent evidence of whitehouse impropriety in the media (hiring media with American taxpayer dollars to espouse their agenda without telling anybody they are paid hacks), there's a lot to sink some teeth into.

Impeachment is a long shot... But this Administration and gay jokes are going to go hand in hand for awhile.


And seriously man... This thing isn't going to blow over until people find out how a gay prostitute got access to the president, and possibly classified stories...

Cochise
02-20-2005, 07:09 AM
:rolleyes:

Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill.

trndobrd
02-20-2005, 08:28 AM
"classified stories"?

stevieray
02-20-2005, 08:35 AM
All this does is illustrate the Jerry Springer mentality our society thirves on.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 09:27 AM
:rolleyes:

Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill.

What, you mean post 9/11 and the increased security surrounding the WH there is not a problem when fake named gay hooker can get a security clearance from the WH when he was declined NUMEROUS times for Capitol Hill.

ROFL

The scandal is not involving a molehill but Capitol Hill.

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 11:48 AM
At least Monica wasn't so stupid as to make a website listing rates along with do's and don'ts.

SBK
02-20-2005, 12:18 PM
This guy is getting all the inside scoops AND prostituting himself out at the same time. Highly doubful that those two roles crossed, eh?

ROFL

Buckle up. The Dems are going to drive this thing into the ground until they find out who he was blowing.

Plus given the recent evidence of whitehouse impropriety in the media (hiring media with American taxpayer dollars to espouse their agenda without telling anybody they are paid hacks), there's a lot to sink some teeth into.

Impeachment is a long shot... But this Administration and gay jokes are going to go hand in hand for awhile.


And seriously man... This thing isn't going to blow over until people find out how a gay prostitute got access to the president, and possibly classified stories...

Here's the difference between Clinton and Bush.

Clinton had everything stick to him cause the stuff thrown against him was true, or had some truth to it, and he was a slimeball.

Nothing has stuck to Bush, even though dems are throwing everything and the kitchen sink against him, because it's stupid made up crap. If they had something to nail him with they would have got him a long time ago. :thumb:

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 12:21 PM
The difference between Clinton and Bush is that the "liberal media" investigated Whitewater for eight years, but won't touch Harken Energy.

Bush is a piece of crap, he always has been and he always will be.

Anyone that supports him must be too, because they know who he is, and they support him anyway.

Michael Michigan
02-20-2005, 12:26 PM
The difference between Clinton and Bush is that the "liberal media" investigated Whitewater for eight years, but won't touch Harken Energy.

Bush is a piece of crap, he always has been and he always will be.

Anyone that supports him must be too, because they know who he is, and they support him anyway.


Now that is a fine argument.

The left will continue to win over the American voter with supporters like you.

Keep up the good work.

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 12:30 PM
Off the top of your head, how much money did the Clinton's make off of Whitewater, Mike?

We spent $50 million looking into it, surely they must have made a ton cash on the deal, right?

Michael Michigan
02-20-2005, 12:34 PM
Off the top of your head, how much money did the Clinton's make off of Whitewater, Mike?

We spent $50 million looking into it, surely they must have made a ton cash on the deal, right?

I have no idea how much they made nor do I care.

I'm not obsessed with Bill Clinton.


For some reason, the moonbats on the left threw him under the bus.


Now they are stuck with guys like you, and losing election after election after election after....

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 12:38 PM
Really, you seem like a sucha bright knowledgable guy, Mike.

And you seem like you are interested in politics and stay abreast of current events.

I guess my impression was completely wrong....

Michael Michigan
02-20-2005, 12:41 PM
Really, you seem like a sucha bright knowledgable guy, Mike.

And you seem like you are interested in politics and stay abreast of current events.

I guess my impression was completely wrong....

Whitewater is a current event?

Mosbonian
02-20-2005, 12:43 PM
At least Monica wasn't so stupid as to make a website listing rates along with do's and don'ts.

No, instead she was stupid enough to be giving blowjobs to the President of the US....a married man....in the White House no less.

Ever hear of sexual harassment?

Anyone other than the POTUS at that time would have lost his job for having an affair with an employee.

mmaddog
*******

Mosbonian
02-20-2005, 12:45 PM
Off the top of your head, how much money did the Clinton's make off of Whitewater, Mike?


You evidently haven't taken many Accounting classes...."making money" is so blase' a term nowadays.

mmaddog
*******

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 12:46 PM
Well Mike, I also assumed that you are older than 30, so I assumed that politics isn't exactly new to you.

Did you just start following them in the last few years?

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 12:48 PM
If neither of you can tell me how much money the Clintons made on Whitewater you aren't qualified to discuss the subject.

Most honest people would at least admit that they don't know, but that it is a crucial bit of information.

Michael Michigan
02-20-2005, 12:59 PM
Well Mike, I also assumed that you are older than 30, so I assumed that politics isn't exactly new to you.

Did you just start following them in the last few years?

No here is what I said:

I have no idea how much they made nor do I care.

I'm not obsessed with Bill Clinton.


For some reason, the moonbats on the left threw him under the bus.


Now they are stuck with guys like you, and losing election after election after election after....

Comprehension, it’s a beautiful thing.

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 01:02 PM
So how much money did they make?
What you said doesn't change anything.

Your ignorance is showing.....

Mosbonian
02-20-2005, 01:04 PM
If neither of you can tell me how much money the Clintons made on Whitewater you aren't qualified to discuss the subject.

Most honest people would at least admit that they don't know, but that it is a crucial bit of information.

Do you want me to give you the Clinton's version of what they made on Whitewater, or would you like me to spout what money they would have made if there were Generally Accepted Accounting Principles applied? Of if they had been really honest about Whitewater?

See, you don't know anymore than anyone else does...it's just that your shrill voice is louder to obscure the fact that you have no clue either.

mmaddog
*******

Michael Michigan
02-20-2005, 01:08 PM
So how much money did they make?
What you said doesn't change anything.

Your ignorance is showing.....

Note to self, slow down things for Left_the_Illiterate.


I don't care.

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 01:13 PM
poodleboy wrote: Do you want me to give you the Clinton's version of what they made on Whitewater, or would you like me to spout what money they would have made if there were Generally Accepted Accounting Principles applied? Of if they had been really honest about Whitewater?

Yes, please provide all the information you have.

Obviously you don't know what you are taking about, and i would love to see you prove it.

What did the Starr report say about it, for example?

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 01:14 PM
C'mon poodleboy.

You already fell into my trap, when you said they made money.

Now bury yourself the rest of the way.

Mosbonian
02-20-2005, 01:30 PM
C'mon poodleboy.

You already fell into my trap, when you said they made money.

Now bury yourself the rest of the way.

Hairy Left hand......

No...once again you take someone's words and make your own truth. See how easy it is to lose credibility. I asked did you want to know what the Clinton's claim they made.....

You evidently know very little about bookkeeping...and how easy it is to hide profits, or to make a profit look like a loss.

Ask anyone in the music or movie industry....if you are truly a Liberal you probably have many friends in those industries.

mmaddog
*******

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 01:42 PM
Nice try,poodleboy, but you are compounding your ignorance.

If what you say is true, then wouldn't there have been charges brought against them?

But what you say ISN'T true, and you are only making yourseld look worse by pretending that there was something there that wasn't.

Get real, man.
Just because the republican party has elected a known cokehead and liar to the Oval Office doesn't mean you have to lower yourself to their standards.

Or am I lying when I say that George W. Bush did cocaine for years?

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 01:50 PM
Really, you seem like a sucha bright knowledgable guy, Mike.

And you seem like you are interested in politics and stay abreast of current events.

I guess my impression was completely wrong....
LMAO - Yeah, Mike, what about Tuskegee? What about the Nicholas II disaster, what about the Titanic, what about Tippecanoe and how King Tut was truly killed?

Why aren't you up on "current events"?

Mosbonian
02-20-2005, 02:01 PM
Nice try,poodleboy, but you are compounding your ignorance.

If what you say is true, then wouldn't there have been charges brought against them?

But what you say ISN'T true, and you are only making yourseld look worse by pretending that there was something there that wasn't.

Get real, man.
Just because the republican party has elected a known cokehead and liar to the Oval Office doesn't mean you have to lower yourself to their standards.

Or am I lying when I say that George W. Bush did cocaine for years?

Lefty...the only one showing their ignorance here is you.

Your anger makes jAZ's look like a schoolgirl's crush.

And your description of GWB is the same one people were using about Clinton. Try getting new material....or at least be original.

Unlike you I don't let emotion rule my thinking..(unless of course it has to do with football)

BTW.....should we ask for every person who has ever used cocaine or any other illegal drug for that matter to step down from office? Should Ted Kennedy be asked to step aside because he caused the death of Mary Jo Kopechne?

Cocaine.....alcohol.....what's the difference? Still addictions.....

Sorry, but you can't be selective about how you apply ethics.

We can finish this later..I'm off to go house hunting.

mmaddog
********

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 02:17 PM
So Bush wasn't a cokehead?

And he really did go to NASA as governor of Texas?


When the righties said that Bill was a rapist, did you tell them to watch the hyperbole?

When they said that he had Foster killed, and Hillary was a lesbian, did your indignation help you correct the bad behavior of your fellow conservatives?

Didn't think so....

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 02:27 PM
Lefty...the only one showing their ignorance here is you.

Your anger makes jAZ's look like a schoolgirl's crush.

And your description of GWB is the same one people were using about Clinton. Try getting new material....or at least be original.

Unlike you I don't let emotion rule my thinking..(unless of course it has to do with football)

BTW.....should we ask for every person who has ever used cocaine or any other illegal drug for that matter to step down from office? Should Ted Kennedy be asked to step aside because he caused the death of Mary Jo Kopechne?

Cocaine.....alcohol.....what's the difference? Still addictions.....

Sorry, but you can't be selective about how you apply ethics.

We can finish this later..I'm off to go house hunting.

mmaddog
********


Correct me if I'm wrong... :hmmm:

but I did not realize cocaine is a legal addiction. :hmmm: :hmmm:

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 02:41 PM
Republicans are still trying to figure out how to say that Rush wasn't using illegal drugs because they were pharmacuticals.

They seem to forget that cocaine and marijuana can be prescribed too.

But if you don't have a prescription, you are using them illegaly.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 02:49 PM
Republicans are still trying to figure out how to say that Rush wasn't using illegal drugs because they were pharmacuticals.

They seem to forget that cocaine and marijuana can be prescribed too.

But if you don't have a prescription, you are using them illegaly.
Again, Republicans and Rush... What a dumba$$ to keep up the comparisons.

I guess Jerry Springer represents the Democrats if Limbaugh represents the Reps.

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 02:55 PM
Does Jerry say that he represents the liberal point of view on his show?

Talk about false comparisons...

Who's the dumba$$?

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 02:56 PM
Does Jerry say that he represents the liberal point of view on his show?

Talk about false comparisons...

Who's the dumba$$?
Does he have to? What a dumbass indeed!

Taco John
02-20-2005, 02:58 PM
Again, Republicans and Rush... What a dumba$$ to keep up the comparisons.

I guess Jerry Springer represents the Democrats if Limbaugh represents the Reps.



That's a pretty bad argument...

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 02:59 PM
That's a pretty bad argument...
Sorry, I should have used Al Franken as the voice of the Dems?

Taco John
02-20-2005, 03:03 PM
Sorry, I should have used Al Franken as the voice of the Dems?



That would have been a little closer.

But your error is in your dismissal in Rush's role in politics. Whoever you want to pin with the position on the left has nowhere the amount of influence that Rush has on the right, whether you want to admit it or not.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 03:07 PM
That would have been a little closer.

But your error is in your dismissal in Rush's role in politics. Whoever you want to pin with the position on the left has nowhere the amount of influence that Rush has on the right, whether you want to admit it or not.
Limbaugh is not a politician. To say he has influence and then go back to your "the media is not liberal and doesn't try to influence" statement are in direct conflict with one another - whether you want to admit it or not.

Taco John
02-20-2005, 03:11 PM
Limbaugh is not a politician. To say he has influence and then go back to your "the media is not liberal and doesn't try to influence" statement are in direct conflict with one another - whether you want to admit it or not.



I never said any of those two statements.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 03:13 PM
I never said any of those two statements.
Yes, you have stated several times that the media is not liberal.

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 03:14 PM
The "liberal" media spent years on Whitewater when there was no legal wrongdoing on the part of the Clintons.

They also had no problem talking about and speculating on the Presidents sex life.

If you still think that the media is liberal, you are only kidding yourself.

The Jeff Gannon story has proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Taco John
02-20-2005, 03:14 PM
Yes, you have stated several times that the media is not liberal.



I didn't think you were paying attention. I didn't say any of what you just stated. Not even once.

Baby Lee
02-20-2005, 03:16 PM
That's a pretty bad argument...
Particularly as Springer has actually served as a Democrat, and has eyed running for Governor as a Democrat.

Taco John
02-20-2005, 03:17 PM
Particularly as Springer has actually served as a Democrat, and has eyed running for Governor as a Democrat.


So? What does that have anything to do with anything?

Mosbonian
02-20-2005, 05:15 PM
So Bush wasn't a cokehead?

And he really did go to NASA as governor of Texas?


When the righties said that Bill was a rapist, did you tell them to watch the hyperbole?

When they said that he had Foster killed, and Hillary was a lesbian, did your indignation help you correct the bad behavior of your fellow conservatives?

Didn't think so....

Was Bush a coke head? Did you see Bush snorting it or is Kitty Kelley your only source?

I didn't involve myself in calling Bill Clinton a rapist.....but i did see him as a man that abused his position as POTUS for sexual gratification....

I still think it's kinda funny that no one has ever REALLY done a good investigation of Vince Foster's death...but I'm not ready to call that someone in the WH had him killed.....

I could give a rat's ass if Hillary was a lesbian or not...I think she is the the worst thing that happened to politics....a person with a vendetta.

Before you try and label what I did and didn't do when it came to previous events, you should know more. You're too busy making ASSumptions that have no foundation.

NEXT....

mmaddog
*******

Thig Lyfe
02-20-2005, 05:18 PM
The difference between Clinton and Bush is that the "liberal media" investigated Whitewater for eight years, but won't touch Harken Energy.

Bush is a piece of crap, he always has been and he always will be.

Anyone that supports him must be too, because they know who he is, and they support him anyway.
I'm guessing you finished behind a toaster in class rank.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 05:31 PM
Was Bush a coke head? Did you see Bush snorting it or is Kitty Kelley your only source?

I didn't involve myself in calling Bill Clinton a rapist.....but i did see him as a man that abused his position as POTUS for sexual gratification....

I still think it's kinda funny that no one has ever REALLY done a good investigation of Vince Foster's death...but I'm not ready to call that someone in the WH had him killed.....

I could give a rat's ass if Hillary was a lesbian or not...I think she is the the worst thing that happened to politics....a person with a vendetta.

Before you try and label what I did and didn't do when it came to previous events, you should know more. You're too busy making ASSumptions that have no foundation.

NEXT....

mmaddog
*******

Evidently heresay and lack of proof only applies to more important people like Eason Jordan.

He continues to make his bed.

Baby Lee
02-20-2005, 05:35 PM
So? What does that have anything to do with anything?
You said that positing that Springer represented the Democratic party was a bad argument. I simply pointed out that he actually has represented the Democtratic party in an OFFICIAL position, and has talked of seeking election again, as a representative of the Democratic Party. I can recall musings on him running for Governor. I can recall him musing on running for Senate. Further, I can recall him appearing on CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, and Fox representing the democratic party. Not as a party official, but starting the conversation off with "listen, I'm a Democrat, and . . . "
Am I saying The Jerry Springer SHOW represents the democratic party? No. But Jerry likes to think he represents Democrats, and there are a number of Democrats who would like him to represent them officially.
And there's nothing wrong with that. I actually like the guy. He's a self-effacing, HONEST, heart on his sleeve, progressive. A disposition I admire greatly over [failed] Machiavellian sound-byters that compose a lot of the DNC today.

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 05:36 PM
So what you guys are saying is that Ken Starrr wasn't really interested in Vince Foster?

He never "really" investigated his death?

I can't imagine why I keep thinking that you guys are LESS than honest.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 05:37 PM
Oh man, CNN is running with the story the past couple of days and Keith Olbermann has locked on.

This is going to get GOOOOOOOOOD!!!!

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 05:50 PM
http://images.ucomics.com/comics/tmdwa/2005/tmdwa050217.gif

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 05:51 PM
http://images.ucomics.com/comics/tmdwa/2005/tmdwa050217.gif
Actually, that IS funny

Michael Michigan
02-20-2005, 05:54 PM
Oh man, CNN is running with the story the past couple of days and Keith Olbermann has locked on.

This is going to get GOOOOOOOOOD!!!!

Olbermann is locked on? Isn't he on the same level as Talon?


Here's the breakdown per Wonkette.




Henry the Intern takes a wander through the news network transcripts and comes back with the number of segments and mentions of Jeff Gannon in the last month:

CNN: 18
MSNBC/NBC: 9
FNC/FOX: 2
PBS: 1
ABC: 0
CBS: 0

Good luck selling this one.

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 06:06 PM
Why would I care that the rest of the media whores have botched the story?

After all, if they had been doing their jobs in the first place, Guckert never would have lasted a week.

All you are doing is proving that the media is NOT liberal.

If they were, we would already be having impeachment proceedings.

I'm kidding of course.
The republican party will investigate a money losing land deal for eight years with the hope of catching the sitting democratic president in a lie.

But they would never even THINK about investigating one of their own.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 06:10 PM
Olbermann is locked on? Isn't he on the same level as Talon?


Here's the breakdown per Wonkette.




Henry the Intern takes a wander through the news network transcripts and comes back with the number of segments and mentions of Jeff Gannon in the last month:

CNN: 18
MSNBC/NBC: 9
FNC/FOX: 2
PBS: 1
ABC: 0
CBS: 0

Good luck selling this one.

Keep telling yourself this. The story is just now breaking in the mainstream news...Last week doesn't matter.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 06:11 PM
Keep telling yourself this. The story is just now breaking in the mainstream news...Last week doesn't matter.
Really? How long before it breaks full stream?

Michael Michigan
02-20-2005, 06:12 PM
Why would I care that the rest of the media whores have botched the story?

After all, if they had been doing their jobs in the first place, Guckert never would have lasted a week.

All you are doing is proving that the media is NOT liberal.

If they were, we would already be having impeachment proceedings.

I'm kidding of course.
The republican party will investigate a money losing land deal for eight years with the hope of catching the sitting democratic president in a lie.

But they would never even THINK about investigating one of their own.

The story as is doesn't sell.


Moonbats like you, jAZ and meme eat stuff like this up, but you have nothing else to get it to move through news cycles.

No one gives a sh!t.

Unless you find a Hedi Fleiss black book with some really well known names in it, it's nothing more than a left wing echo chamber circle jerk.

Enjoy.

Michael Michigan
02-20-2005, 06:12 PM
Keep telling yourself this. The story is just now breaking in the mainstream news...Last week doesn't matter.

Wager?

SBK
02-20-2005, 06:17 PM
The "liberal" media spent years on Whitewater when there was no legal wrongdoing on the part of the Clintons. ROFL

They also had no problem talking about and speculating on the Presidents sex life. ROFL

If you still think that the media is liberal, you are only kidding yourself. ROFL

The Jeff Gannon story has proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt.ROFL

We have a friggin comedian here. :thumb:

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 06:20 PM
Wager?

Do I think it's going to lead to an impeachment like TJ predicted? No. Do I think there is interest by CBS and perhaps CNN as well as other media outlets to give the WH a dose and if that means exposing their shit via bloggers...

you betcha.

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 06:21 PM
Comedian?
I guess simple logic isn't in your skill set?

BigMeatballDave
02-20-2005, 06:21 PM
The difference between Clinton and Bush is that the "liberal media" investigated Whitewater for eight years, but won't touch Harken Energy.

Bush is a piece of crap, he always has been and he always will be.

Anyone that supports him must be too, because they know who he is, and they support him anyway.You are a useless piece of trash that needs to be banned. As well as jAZ for bringing you here...

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 06:23 PM
You are a useless piece of trash that needs to be banned. As well as jAZ for bringing you here...
I don't care about jAZ, he has finally accepted they lost and moved on. This guy will self implode and get banned eventually. I am betting on it.

Lefty_the_Right
02-20-2005, 06:26 PM
Ah yes, back to the talk of banning me.

I thought you guys got tired of that a couple of days ago?

Well, keep it up.
You certianly have better odds of that than ever beating me in a debate.

Michael Michigan
02-20-2005, 06:28 PM
Do I think it's going to lead to an impeachment like TJ predicted? No. Do I think there is interest by CBS and perhaps CNN as well as other media outlets to give the WH a dose and if that means exposing their shit via bloggers...

you betcha.

A dose?

That's setting the bar pretty low.

No wonder you guys suck at winning elections.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 06:29 PM
You certianly have better odds of that than ever beating me in a debate.
You are right, you are not intellectually honest enough to engage in a debate.

Thig Lyfe
02-20-2005, 06:35 PM
Oh man, CNN is running with the story the past couple of days and Keith Olbermann has locked on.

This is going to get GOOOOOOOOOD!!!!

Oh, damn.

Now it's a story.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 06:36 PM
Oh, damn.

Now it's a story.
Hey! You laugh, but look how he broke the Ohio Diebold Story, people are still talking about......

Okay nevermind.

beavis
02-20-2005, 06:43 PM
Ah yes, back to the talk of banning me.

I thought you guys got tired of that a couple of days ago?

Well, keep it up.
You certianly have better odds of that than ever beating me in a debate.
ROFL

This guy is great. Please don't ban him.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 06:43 PM
ROFL

This guy is great. Please don't ban him.
Nope, I want him to break down and asked to be deleted.

BigMeatballDave
02-20-2005, 06:57 PM
Nope, I want him to break down and asked to be deleted.
ROFL Much like Hel'n?

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 06:57 PM
ROFL Much like Hel'n?
And TJ!

beavis
02-20-2005, 07:00 PM
Nope, I want him to break down and asked to be deleted.
I wouldn't count on it. But watching him make an ass out of himself is great.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 07:01 PM
I wouldn't count on it. But watching him make an ass out of himself is great.
Yeah, I consider it a personal challenge. I have brought down better than him in the past.

beavis
02-20-2005, 07:17 PM
Yeah, I consider it a personal challenge. I have brought down better than him in the past.
Yeah, doesn't look like much of a challenge.

WilliamTheIrish
02-20-2005, 08:51 PM
The thing that bothers me the most about this entire story is this:

I have a hard time fathoming that a POTUS would need a shill in the media to cast him slo pitch softball questions when the fires got turned up in the regular Q/A session.

It's pathetic. I can't believe that Eisenhower or Truman would need something so transparent in order to get by in a press conference.

I wonder if I've just run out of outrage? My ourtage meter is still pegged in the red over Medicare drug benefits, shit fiscal policy...

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 08:55 PM
The thing that bothers me the most about this entire story is this:

I have a hard time fathoming that a POTUS would need a shill in the media to cast him slo pitch softball questions when the fires got turned up in the regular Q/A session.

It's pathetic. I can't believe that Eisenhower or Truman would need something so transparent in order to get by in a press conference.

I wonder if I've just run out of outrage? My ourtage meter is still pegged in the red over Medicare drug benefits, shit fiscal policy...


And a shill like this one too boot...er, no pun intended. ROFL

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/02/man-called-jeff.html

This blog has the goods (ALL OF THEM) on JJGG. DC might love some of the pics. :hmmm:

WilliamTheIrish
02-20-2005, 09:08 PM
And a shill like this one too boot...er, no pun intended. ROFL

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/02/man-called-jeff.html

This blog has the goods (ALL OF THEM) on JJGG. DC might love some of the pics. :hmmm:

So as to be an all around ass in this, I'd also like to question how legitimate news reporters took 2 f'ing years !! to find out this guy was a ... ... a .. whatever the hell he is/was.

Nice job by the WH Press Corps. A nobody reporter, out of nowhere, gets called upon to ask questions of the most powerful leader on the planet, (leading questions at that) and nobody in the WHPC had a light bulb go off in their head? For 2 years?

Unreal. Unethical. Illegal?

the Talking Can
02-20-2005, 09:11 PM
The thing that bothers me the most about this entire story is this:

I have a hard time fathoming that a POTUS would need a shill in the media to cast him slo pitch softball questions when the fires got turned up in the regular Q/A session.

It's pathetic. I can't believe that Eisenhower or Truman would need something so transparent in order to get by in a press conference.

I wonder if I've just run out of outrage? My ourtage meter is still pegged in the red over Medicare drug benefits, shit fiscal policy...

What galls me is that GOPusa sets up a website, calls it a news organization, and then 5 days later Gannon is admitted as a journalist to ask questions like "Why do democrats eat babies?"

The press secretary is on record saying he was admitted because "Talon News" had been a legitimate news organization with a 2 YEAR publishing history. We now know he is either lying or being told to lie.

We also know that Gannon at some point was privy to, or tipped off about, the Plame memos that were leaked to smear Wilson. And just, as a cherry on top- he's a gay prostitute who works for a "news" organization that claims to be "fighting the homosexual" agenda.

I want to know who planted this guy on the inside. But you're right, after the WMD fiasco, the we'll-say-nothing-about-Saudi-Arabia approach to fighting Al Qaida, Powell lying for hours on end to the UN about WMDS, the bribed journalists fiasco, etc...this fake journalist planted in the White House is almost too much to even register.

And what's more amazing still, is you're the only non-democrat on this board who will even acknowledge that any of what I just mentioned even happened or actually matters. Its like the whole country just agreed to live in a fantasy world the minute Bush was elected.

Truly ****ing bizarre.

ps

I didn't even mention Chalabi, Iran's double agent who funneled bogus intel through Cheney's OSP.....wow

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 09:13 PM
So as to be an all around ass in this, I'd also like to question how legitimate news reporters took 2 f'ing years !! to find out this guy was a ... ... a .. whatever the hell he is/was.

Nice job by the WH Press Corps. A nobody reporter, out of nowhere, gets called upon to ask questions of the most powerful leader on the planet, (leading questions at that) and nobody in the WHPC had a light bulb go off in their head? For 2 years?

Unreal. Unethical. Illegal?

I think there is a great deal of CYA going on within the MSM. OTOH, they don't want to ruffle too many feathers with the WH because they will be relegated to meaningless and not granted access if they do. Contrary to what the RWNJs profess, the WH correspondents have been quite gentle with DUHbya.

OTOH, they don't want to seem any less legitimate than they are appearing right now with Bloggers being free to do THEIR (the media's jobs) for FREE (or at least not paid for or ruled by a corporate agenda) and thus the effort to not only distance themselves from the blog world but also to disavow legitimate stories the Blogworld have uncovered...

hence this story taking 12 days to break the MSM.

Taco John
02-20-2005, 09:14 PM
You said that positing that Springer represented the Democratic party was a bad argument. I simply pointed out that he actually has represented the Democtratic party in an OFFICIAL position, and has talked of seeking election again, as a representative of the Democratic Party. I can recall musings on him running for Governor. I can recall him musing on running for Senate. Further, I can recall him appearing on CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, and Fox representing the democratic party. Not as a party official, but starting the conversation off with "listen, I'm a Democrat, and . . . "
Am I saying The Jerry Springer SHOW represents the democratic party? No. But Jerry likes to think he represents Democrats, and there are a number of Democrats who would like him to represent them officially.
And there's nothing wrong with that. I actually like the guy. He's a self-effacing, HONEST, heart on his sleeve, progressive. A disposition I admire greatly over [failed] Machiavellian sound-byters that compose a lot of the DNC today.



You are the king of posting boring shit that nobody cares about and has nothing to do with anything. This has nothing to do with the fact that there isn't a democrat equivalent of Rush Limbaugh.

What a useless wind bag.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 09:16 PM
What a useless wind bag.
Now there is a breeze calling for a wind.

the Talking Can
02-20-2005, 09:18 PM
a concise statement on this Gannon nonsense...

"Why isn't every major network in the country investigating a security breach, forget anything else. How could the FBI, for 17 years I was chairman of the Judiciary Committee, the ranking member. I've read more FBI reports than I ever wanted to know. How could that happen and no one had any idea who this guy was?... The Judiciary Committee of the United States Senate should be investigating it. The House Judiciary should be investigating it. And if it were the other party in charge, it would be investigated." - Senator Joe Biden (D-DE)

Taco John
02-20-2005, 09:18 PM
Do I think it's going to lead to an impeachment like TJ predicted?



Jesus you're stupid. I didn't predict impeachment. I asked if there might be impeachable offenses mixed in there somewhere.
Asking and predicting are two different things, doofus.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 09:20 PM
Jesus you're stupid. I didn't predict impeachment. I asked if there might be impeachable offenses mixed in there somewhere.
Asking and predicting are two different things, doofus.

You indicated an impeachment investigation might be in order...

I doubt we'll get that far but would love if we did.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 09:22 PM
a concise statement on this Gannon nonsense...

"Why isn't every major network in the country investigating a security breach, forget anything else. How could the FBI, for 17 years I was chairman of the Judiciary Committee, the ranking member. I've read more FBI reports than I ever wanted to know. How could that happen and no one had any idea who this guy was?... The Judiciary Committee of the United States Senate should be investigating it. The House Judiciary should be investigating it. And if it were the other party in charge, it would be investigated." - Senator Joe Biden (D-DE)


They will. It took some time. None of them wanted to be the first to take the plunge after what happened with CBS. But there are already three in Congress who have made FOA requests from either the WH or Dept. of Homeland Security.

Taco John
02-20-2005, 09:24 PM
You indicated an impeachment investigation might be in order...




Yeah, that's still not "predicting" impeachment.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 09:25 PM
Yeah, that's still not "predicting" impeachment.

I'm sorry if I mischaracterized your post. Now you can apologize for namecalling like a 5 year old.

Rausch
02-20-2005, 09:30 PM
Ah yes, back to the talk of banning me.

I thought you guys got tired of that a couple of days ago?

Well, keep it up.
You certianly have better odds of that than ever beating me in a debate.

That's it? That's all you've got?

Taco John
02-20-2005, 09:30 PM
You earned 'em. Don't put words in my mouth. I have enough trouble with the other dumbasses that do it.

Taco John
02-20-2005, 09:32 PM
That's it? That's all you've got?



You apparently haven't been following this forum closely lately. I assure you, that's not all this one has got. He can do this all day and all night.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 09:34 PM
You earned 'em. Don't put words in my mouth. I have enough trouble with the other dumbasses that do it.


No, you actually put the words out there by making the comparison and using the word *got*. You made the implicaton and then objected to the characterization. But I know where this is headed so I digress:


This Gannon story is good stuff... Is this impeachable? You'd figure if Monica was impeachable, there has *got* to be something here...

Looking forward to the investigation.

WilliamTheIrish
02-20-2005, 09:35 PM
We also know that Gannon at some point was privy to, or tipped off about, the Plame memos that were leaked to smear Wilson

"Why isn't every major network in the country investigating a security breach, forget anything else.

1) Can, I've been a Bush apologist on the Plame story because I just could not believe that the WH would actually do it. But I've read where this guy had his hands on internal CIA memos. This guy may be in shiot up to his eyes.

2) This is the million dollar question, and it won't ever be answered.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 09:38 PM
1) Can, I've been a Bush apologist on the Plame story because I just could not believe that the WH would actually do it. But I've read where this guy had his hands on internal CIA memos. This guy may be in shiot up to his eyes.

2) This is the million dollar question, and it won't ever be answered.

Yes, I suspect JJGG will suffer from a severe bout of depression and perhaps 'self inflicted' wounds...

SBK
02-20-2005, 09:39 PM
No, you actually put the words out there by making the comparison and using the word *got*. You made the implicaton and then objected to the characterization. But I know where this is headed so I digress:


This Gannon story is good stuff... Is this impeachable? You'd figure if Monica was impeachable, there has *got* to be something here...

Looking forward to the investigation.

Monica wasn't the issue. Lying under oath and obstructing justice, those were the impeachable offenses. And yes, those are both crimes and did get him disbarred.

How quickly we forget.............

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 09:40 PM
Monica wasn't the issue. Lying under oath and obstructing justice, those were the impeachable offenses. And yes, those are both crimes and did get him disbarred.

How quickly we forget.............

Ah, but there had to be a scandal to lie about...

therein lies the possiblity that the WH might be seeing some legal issues in it's future.

WilliamTheIrish
02-20-2005, 09:45 PM
On the lighter side, I thought this was really funny

Gannon's Official White House Press On Ebay!! (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=4103&item=3957884948&rd=1)

SBK
02-20-2005, 09:46 PM
Ah, but there had to be a scandal to lie about...

therein lies the possiblity that the WH might be seeing some legal issues in it's future.

ROFL :rolleyes:

Taco John
02-20-2005, 09:47 PM
No, you actually put the words out there by making the comparison and using the word *got*. You made the implicaton and then objected to the characterization. But I know where this is headed so I digress:


This Gannon story is good stuff... Is this impeachable? You'd figure if Monica was impeachable, there has *got* to be something here...

Looking forward to the investigation.



It's still not a prediction. I don't even know why you're trying.

You got it wrong. You admitted it. Then retracted it, apparently. In any case, you're wrong. I didn't predict anything. I asked the question, and then spectulated that there has *got* to be something there.

You're not the only one on this board who doesn't know the difference between speculation and prediction.

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 09:47 PM
I don't understand this story...I really don't. Did the President lie under oath in a frivolous law suit? What law did he break? I promise this though...if he did break a law...I'll never vote for him again as POTUS.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 09:50 PM
ROFL :rolleyes:

You obviously have been following only the blogger outcry and not the actual story...

because if you were following the actual story you would not be so dismissive of a possible crime or in the least a very dangerous relationship with JJGG and SOMEONE within the WH and who did not properly vet the guy or worse KNEW who he was and was involved with him or somehow otherwise sure he would not pose a blackmail threat.

Joe Seahawk
02-20-2005, 09:52 PM
I'll never vote for him again as POTUS.


Me either.. I promise I'll never vote for him again for POTUS... :p

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 09:53 PM
It's still not a prediction. I don't even know why you're trying.

You got it wrong. You admitted it. Then retracted it, apparently. In any case, you're wrong. I didn't predict anything. I asked the question, and then spectulated that there has *got* to be something there.

You're not the only one on this board who doesn't know the difference between speculation and prediction.

I'm not retracting rather bringing to attention that my understanding of your post was not out of left field. The word 'got' left plenty of room for interpretation that you believed there was something impeachable here. So while not an actual prediction it certainly came pretty damn close when used in context and comparison to Monica and an actual impeachment.

So go f*ck yourself. :p

Taco John
02-20-2005, 09:56 PM
I don't understand this story...I really don't. Did the President lie under oath in a frivolous law suit? What law did he break? I promise this though...if he did break a law...I'll never vote for him again as POTUS.



It's pretty simple, really... The Witehouse planted a guy to throw softball questions that would give the media sound bytes from Bush that they could latch onto and wag the dog a little. It turns out the guy has as much legitimacy as a news reporter as Paris Hilton has as Hollywood Superstar. Now add to the fact that the guy also turns out to be a homosexual prostitute who advertised his rates online who also has connections that run all the way into the Bush Administration, and you have... well, apparently, according to Michael Michigan, no story whatsoever.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 09:58 PM
I don't understand this story...I really don't. Did the President lie under oath in a frivolous law suit? What law did he break? I promise this though...if he did break a law...I'll never vote for him again as POTUS.

Here, this should help.

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/02/man-called-jeff.html

Taco John
02-20-2005, 09:58 PM
I'm not retracting rather bringing to attention that my understanding of your post was not out of left field. The word 'got' left plenty of room for interpretation that you believed there was something impeachable here. So while not an actual prediction it certainly came pretty damn close when used in context and comparison to Monica and an actual impeachment.

So go f*ck yourself. :p


You and Russ are a lot alike. When you get made to look stupid, you blame someone else for all the egg on your faces. I'm lucky that you're not a mod. He's able to do something about it.

jAZ
02-20-2005, 10:00 PM
I promise this though ... I'll never vote for him again as POTUS.
ROFL

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:01 PM
You and Russ are a lot alike. When you get made to look stupid, you blame someone else for all the egg on your faces. I'm lucky that you're not a mod. He's able to do something about it.

Nah, I was going to be graceful and let it drop until I realized that civility doesn't work with the likes of you...

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:04 PM
Me either.. I promise I'll never vote for him again for POTUS... :p


Oh, I'm quite sure the culprit behind this (Karl Rove) will be involved in other campaigns for other RWNJs you'd normally support. :p

Taco John
02-20-2005, 10:05 PM
Nah, I was going to be graceful and let it drop until I realized that civility doesn't work with the likes of you...


You can blow it out your ass. Your idea of civility is blame shifting.
I didn't predict shit. You were wrong.

You said you misrepresented my post before. You should have stuck with that. That was accurate.

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 10:05 PM
It's pretty simple, really... The Witehouse planted a guy to throw softball questions that would give the media sound bytes from Bush that they could latch onto and wag the dog a little. It turns out the guy has as much legitimacy as a news reporter as Paris Hilton has as Hollywood Superstar. Now add to the fact that the guy also turns out to be a homosexual prostitute who advertised his rates online who also has connections that run all the way into the Bush Administration, and you have... well, apparently, according to Michael Michigan, no story whatsoever.

Well....I think I'd have to agree with MM to a point...it is a story....it is news worthy. It's actually kind of funny. But beyond the WH having some egg on it's collective faces, that's it.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:07 PM
You can blow it out your ass. Your idea of civility is blame shifting.
I didn't predict shit. You were wrong.

You said you misrepresented my post before. You should have stuck with that. That was accurate.

And you should have had the balls to accept the apology with graciousness...but alas, that is a foreign concept to you as all of us have witnessed.

I'm done with this. I'm sure one of your other boytoys will be on soon for you to play these games with.

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 10:08 PM
Oh, I'm quite sure the culprit behind this (Karl Rove) will be involved in other campaigns for other RWNJs you'd normally support. :p

Maybe...maybe not. I'm a free agent. I don't have my mind made up before I get to the table. I might have the chicken...the beef... or both...or neither. It's my vote the politicians fight for...because it seems certain ones already have yours.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:10 PM
Well....I think I'd have to agree with MM to a point...it is a story....it is news worthy. It's actually kind of funny. But beyond the WH having some egg on it's collective faces, that's it.


Yeah, that is what many were saying over the past ten days as this story has continued to grow and grow and grow.

There are now links with Gannon, Rove, and the GOPusa man, Bobby Eberle, a Texas Republican who has been a very active participant in Texas politics of late.

Taco John
02-20-2005, 10:10 PM
But beyond the WH having some egg on it's collective faces, that's it.



Until the investigations, that is... There's no telling what an investigation could turn up. And since we're dealing with a gay prostitute here, literally anything could, erm, come up...

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:12 PM
Maybe...maybe not. I'm a free agent. I don't have my mind made up before I get to the table. I might have the chicken...the beef... or both...or neither. It's my vote the politicians fight for...because it seems certain ones already have yours.


BS, I've posted lists of Republicans I would support. None of them are currently on the RWNJ's "A" list though. :hmmm:

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 10:14 PM
Until the investigations, that is... There's no telling what an investigation could turn up. And since we're dealing with a gay prostitute here, literally anything could, erm, come up...

What's to investigate?

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 10:18 PM
Yeah, that is what many were saying over the past ten days as this story has continued to grow and grow and grow.

There are now links with Gannon, Rove, and the GOPusa man, Bobby Eberle, a Texas Republican who has been a very active participant in Texas politics of late.

Yeah...I guess if you do throw enough shit at the wall something could stick....my question is....what do you get when shit sticks to the wall?

Taco John
02-20-2005, 10:19 PM
What's to investigate?


Well, for starters, how does a male prostitute with no media credentials go about getting access to the most powerful man in the world in the day and age of terrorism.

And how does this prostitute get called on to ask questions on a regular basis by both the president and his press secretary?

For starters...

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 10:19 PM
BS, I've posted lists of Republicans I would support. None of them are currently on the RWNJ's "A" list though. :hmmm:

Of course you have.

Taco John
02-20-2005, 10:19 PM
Yeah...I guess if you do throw enough shit at the wall something could stick....my question is....what do you get when shit sticks to the wall?



Ratings.

Taco John
02-20-2005, 10:20 PM
Of course you have.



She has.

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 10:22 PM
Well, for starters, how does a male prostitute with no media credentials go about getting access to the most powerful man in the world in the day and age of terrorism.

And how does this prostitute get called on to ask questions on a regular basis by both the president and his press secretary?

For starters...
Yeah....it just sounds like an embrassing thing for the WH. Maybe they didn't do their homework. What law enforcment would do an investigation something like that?

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:22 PM
Ah, JJGG is thinking of suing...

oh, won't that be a fun witness list. :clap: ROFL

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6999385/site/newsweek/

Politics: Gannon's Enemies List
Newsweek

Feb. 28 issue - Jeff Gannon is considering suing liberal interest groups, bloggers and others for a "political assassination" that drove him from his job as a reporter for a conservative news outfit called Talon News, he told NEWSWEEK. Gannon, whose real name is James Guckert, singled out Media Matters—a "well-funded" liberal group headed by longtime "attack dog" David Brock. ("Everything we wrote about him came from the public record," Brock replied.)

It remains unclear how Gannon got routine White House press access for nearly two years; he acknowledged he first began getting clearance to White House press briefings in early 2003 as a representative of GOPUSA, a group headed by Texas GOP activist Bobby Eberle—months before Eberle even created Talon News. Gannon said he had no access to White House aides outside the press room, nor did he try to interview any. When President Bush called on him at a press conference last month—during which he asked a question with false info about Sen. Harry Reid—"nobody was more surprised than myself," said Gannon.

—Michael Isikoff and Holly Bailey

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 10:22 PM
She has.
No...I believe her.

WilliamTheIrish
02-20-2005, 10:23 PM
Yeah....it just sounds like an embrassing thing for the WH. Maybe they didn't do their homework. What law enforcment would do an investigation like that?

FBI

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 10:24 PM
FBI
For what...the guy being a gay hooker? What federal law was broken?

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 10:25 PM
FBI
And SS - Unless the WH gave him a free pass and pre-empted any investigations.

However, I have heard it said that typically reporters are not background checked before being issued creds. I don't know if it is true or not (but bet it will be in the future), but even if so, it is stupid not to do so.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:25 PM
FBI

Time out. JJGG was DENIED MULTIPLE TIMES his request for a security clearance/press pass for CAPITOL HILL...

Does not the same FBI work for the WH? What about the Secret Service???? :hmmm:

Taco John
02-20-2005, 10:27 PM
Yeah....it just sounds like an embrassing thing for the WH. Maybe they didn't do their homework. What law enforcment would do an investigation something like that?


The Federal Beurau of Investigation? :spock:

/trying to fiugre out if you are making a joke

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:27 PM
And SS - Unless the WH gave him a free pass and pre-empted any investigations.

However, I have heard it said that typically reporters are not background checked before being issued creds. I don't know if it is true or not (but bet it will be in the future), but even if so, it is stupid not to do so.

Completely untrue. WH Reporters are given a "hard pass" which means they passed a Secret Service security clearance.

Taco John
02-20-2005, 10:27 PM
For what...the guy being a gay hooker? What federal law was broken?



Hence an investigation...

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 10:30 PM
Completely untrue. WH Reporters are given a "hard pass" which means they passed a Secret Service security clearance.
Link?

I am not doubting you, I have just heard the statement both ways and cannot verify either.

Also note that Scott McClellan has already stated that Guckert has never received a hard pass.

WilliamTheIrish
02-20-2005, 10:30 PM
For what...the guy being a gay hooker? What federal law was broken?

Sorry dude. I thought by "Who would do that investigation?" you meant "Who would have done the background investigation?", prior to this man being allowed unfettered access to the White House Press Room. And being called upon for two years. With no journalistic background. And being able to see classified CIA (Plame) memos.

That kind of investigation. And yes, if he had gone through a real background check instead of being ushered in by somebody in the WH, his d*ck smoking background would have kept farther away from the WH than Rosie O'Donnell.

NTTAWWT, of course.

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 10:31 PM
Hence an investigation...

Well the last thing I want to see is a waste in federal money like with what happened with President Clinton. That was a terrible waste of taxpayer money.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:33 PM
For what...the guy being a gay hooker? What federal law was broken?

You surely are playing dumb in order to be devil's advocate so I'll play along.

In the days post 9/11 when the entire NATION is on heightened security we are supposed to believe one of the following:

-Gannon passed a background check with flying colors and no indication of a fake name or gay prostitution/pimp background was discovered

-that the background was discovered and the 'Homo'-sensitive WH, who just won re-election on an anti-gay rights agenda, were very pleased to have amongst them a converted former hooker using an assumed name.

-or that someone in the WH had a personal connection to the guy (just how personal) and thus vouched for his character and was able to get him and his credentials issued without following proper procedure and this was fine with the SS and/or FBI even though it was not fine for him to be on Capitol Hill?

Come on. :shake:

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 10:33 PM
Link?

I am not doubting you, I have just heard the statement both ways and cannot verify either.

Also note that Scott McClellan has already stated that Guckert has never received a hard pass.
The White House has verified that Guckert received a daily pass issued by the Secret Service.

Does a daily pass require security clearance and background checks?

Taco John
02-20-2005, 10:35 PM
Well the last thing I want to see is a waste in federal money like with what happened with President Clinton. That was a terrible waste of taxpayer money.



Then turn off your TV. The investigation is coming. That's just a political reality.

It's pretty legitimate to investigate how a prositute with no press experience got White House press credentials. It's not a waste of money if it prevents it from ever happening again.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 10:36 PM
You surely are playing dumb in order to be devil's advocate so I'll play along.

In the days post 9/11 when the entire NATION is on heightened security we are supposed to believe one of the following:

-Gannon passed a background check with flying colors and no indication of a fake name or gay prostitution/pimp background was discovered

-that the background was discovered and the 'Homo'-sensitive WH, who just won re-election on an anti-gay rights agenda, were very pleased to have amongst them a converted former hooker using an assumed name

-or that someone in the WH had a personal connection to the guy (just how personal) and thus vouched for his character and was able to get him and his credentials issued without following proper procedure and this was fine with the SS and/or FBI even though it was not fine for him to be on Capitol Hill?

Come on. :shake:

I would venture a guess at #3. Is it right? Hell, no. But that seems most logical.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:37 PM
Link?

I am not doubting you, I have just heard the statement both ways and cannot verify either.

Also note that Scott McClellan has already stated that Guckert has never received a hard pass.

Lots of info but worth the read:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/212561_Gannon18.html

Friday, February 18, 2005

Lawmaker presses White House on 'Jeff Gannon'
Conservative former reporter has links to gay escort service

By SCOTT SHEPARD
COX NEWS SERVICE

WASHINGTON -- With the mystery of "Jeff Gannon" deepening, Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., yesterday renewed her call for the White House to explain its relationship with a conservative ex-reporter linked to an online gay escort service.

Slaughter said the relationship between the White House press office and "Gannon," whose real name is James Dale Guckert, was "anything but typical." The White House should "stop the stonewalling and come clean," she added, following up on her initial request a week ago.

Slaughter's comments came in response to evidence that the White House allowed Gannon into presidential news briefings weeks before his Internet-based news organization was registered and online.

Presidential press secretary Scott McClellan insisted last week that Gannon, in order to get daily passes to the White House news briefing, was treated "like anyone else" and "showed that he was representing a news organization that published regularly."

But yesterday, the online magazine Salon cited C-SPAN television clips showing Gannon attending White House news briefings as early as Feb. 28, 2003, a month before his Internet news site, Talon News, was registered and online.

And McClellan's predecessor, Ari Fleischer, told Editor & Publisher magazine that in early 2003, during his tenure as President Bush's spokesman, he became so concerned about Gannon's possible ties to the Republican Party that he would not call on him at news briefings.

Fleischer said he later determined, after meeting with Gannon and his employer, Texas Republican activist Bobby Eberle, that Gannon was working for "a conservative news organization" rather than the GOP.

They "assured me they were not part of the Republican Party," Fleischer told E&P magazine, which covers the newspaper industry.

Slaughter and other White House critics suggest, however, that the access given to Gannon to cover presidential news briefings is further evidence of the Bush administration's blurring the boundary between the news media and the government, akin to the payments the administration made to conservative columnists to promote Bush's policies and its production of video news releases that mimic the style of television news.

The White House has denied any special relationship with Gannon. But it has not provided an explanation of its policies on providing credentials to reporters, either the temporary "day" passes for reporters not normally assigned to the White House or the so-called permanent hard passes that White House beat reporters get.

Nor has it explained how Gannon received almost daily passes to the news briefings for about two years using a pseudonym and working for an organization that failed to meet the criteria for media credentials to cover Congress.

Gannon applied for congressional credentials in 2004, but the Standing Committee of Correspondents, made up of congressional beat reporters elected by their peers to rule on such applications, denied his request because Talon News did not meet the committee's criteria as a news organization.

In addition, he applied as "Jeff Gannon," rather than as James Dale Guckert. When the committee inquired about it, he explained that he used a pseudonym because it was easier to market.

White House "hard" passes are difficult to obtain and are typically granted to reporters whose news organizations have been recognized by the Standing Committee of Correspondents on Capitol Hill.

Before his resignation from Talon News last week, Gannon typically asked partisan-edged questions about presidential critics and friendly questions about Bush's policies during White House news briefings.

He also is one of the reporters questioned by special prosecutors about the leak of a secret CIA memo disclosing the identity of Bush war critic Joseph Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, a CIA operative.

However, it was a question Gannon posed to Bush himself at his first post-inauguration news conference that attracted the attention -- and the ire -- of media watchdog groups and liberal Internet bloggers: He asked how Bush could work with Democrats who are "divorced from reality."

The ensuing investigations by Gannon's critics cast doubts about his journalism credentials and linked him to Internet sites that featured nude photos of Gannon and advertised male escort services for $200 an hour.

AMERICAblog linked its readers to the photos and escort Web sites after Gannon denied to CNN that the sites were ever active. AMERICAblog also posted copies of invoices of payments to a California Web site designer to set up the Web sites.

The Web designer, Paul Leddy, told The Washington Post that it was Gannon who initially contacted him in 1999 to set up the sites and that Gannon's postings to the site were later moved to another site where they remained active until March 2003, the month Talon News began operating.

Since resigning his position with Talon News, Gannon has declined numerous requests for comment and has told E&P magazine that he will not speak with the media again.

Jennifer Ohman, in an e-mail sent yesterday on behalf of Eberle, said, "We are not commenting on Jeff Gannon and have not since the beginning of all this."

Texan Eberle, who was a delegate to the 2000 Republican convention, owns Talon News and GOPUSA.

TalonNews.com was registered with NetworkSolutions on March 29, 2003. Until Gannon began drawing attention, the earliest articles on the site were dated April 1, 2003.

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 10:37 PM
Then turn off your TV. The investigation is coming. That's just a political reality.

It's pretty legitimate to investigate how a prositute with no press experience got White House press credentials. It's not a waste of money if it prevents it from ever happening again.

What's the outcome...what is gained by proving that in a court of law?

|Zach|
02-20-2005, 10:39 PM
What's the outcome...what is gained by proving that in a court of law?
What do you think is a better way to deal with the situation.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:39 PM
The White House has verified that Guckert received a daily pass issued by the Secret Service.

Does a daily pass require security clearance and background checks?

Scott McClellan has said a number of contradictory things about this matter so just wait and see what he comes up with next.

Here is a picture of JJGGs pass as taken off of a CSPAN tv shot. It appears to be the 'hard pass' type.

http://img15.paintedover.com/uploads/15/presspass2sharp.jpg

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 10:40 PM
Lots of info but worth the read:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/212561_Gannon18.html

.

The story does not confirm that Guckert received a hard pass. It states that he could have done so or received the Day Pass that the WH has mentioned.

Nor does it answer whether day passes meet the same criteria. I also wonder if anyone else has received day passes for two years straight.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 10:40 PM
Scott McClellan has said a number of contradictory things about this matter so just wait and see what he comes up with next.

Here is a picture of JJGGs pass as taken off of a CSPAN tv shot. It appears to be the 'hard pass' type.

http://img15.paintedover.com/uploads/15/presspass2sharp.jpg
No one else has confirmed that Guckert received a hard pass. I would need to see a pic of the hard pass and the day pass. So slamming McClellan at this point makes no sense.

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 10:41 PM
You surely are playing dumb in order to be devil's advocate so I'll play along.

In the days post 9/11 when the entire NATION is on heightened security we are supposed to believe one of the following:

-Gannon passed a background check with flying colors and no indication of a fake name or gay prostitution/pimp background was discovered

-that the background was discovered and the 'Homo'-sensitive WH, who just won re-election on an anti-gay rights agenda, were very pleased to have amongst them a converted former hooker using an assumed name

-or that someone in the WH had a personal connection to the guy (just how personal) and thus vouched for his character and was able to get him and his credentials issued without following proper procedure and this was fine with the SS and/or FBI even though it was not fine for him to be on Capitol Hill?

Come on. :shake:

What law was broken?

It's ironic in #3 that you of all people would be for persecuting a gay man either Gannon or in the WH.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:44 PM
The story does not confirm that Guckert received a hard pass. It states that he could have done so or received the Day Pass that the WH has mentioned.

Nor does it answer whether day passes meet the same criteria. I also wonder if anyone else has received day passes for two years straight.

The media has tried to locate anyone who has had a day pass for two years straight. I've read it's hard to get one for one day.


http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/02/11/Gannon/

Talon News reporter "Jeff Gannon" lobs White House spokesman Scott McClellan a question at a Feb. 1 press briefing.

Giving "Gannon" a pass
Questions remain about how a fake reporter working for a fake news operation got White House press credentials without a background check.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Eric Boehlert



Feb. 11, 2005 | Before abruptly quitting his post this week as White House correspondent for the GOP-friendly group Talon News, Jeff Gannon enjoyed unfettered access to White House briefings. He gained that access not by going through the normal full background check most journalists face when obtaining a "hard pass," the ultimate White House credential, but rather by getting day passes, which require only an abbreviated background check. According to one current member of the White House press corps, Gannon was the only reporter to skirt the rules that way, obtaining daily passes month after month for nearly two years.

"Why did the White House circumvent the process for him?" asks the White House reporter.


That's just one of several questions that continue to swirl around the man who covered the White House under the pseudonym Jeff Gannon -- his real name is James Guckert -- and his abrupt departure from Talon News. After Guckert piqued interest in the blogosphere with an overly obvious softball question to President Bush at the Jan. 26 press conference, online sleuths uncovered the truth about Talon's close working ties with Republican operatives and their GOPUSA Web site as well as past identity. Faced with allegations that he was tied to gay-themed Web sites, Guckert resigned his Talon position Tuesday night. (Talon has posted scores of anti-gay articles.) Still left unanswered, though, is how a partisan novice reporter working for a fake news organization was able to gain regular access to White House briefings.

Hard passes to the White House are designed to give journalists who regularly cover the White House easy access: They simply swipe their credentials at the entrance while the Secret Service checks their bags. Day passes, which are picked up every day at the press office, are intended to provide flexibility for out-of-town journalists who might need to cover the White House for a day or two, or to allow White House reporters to bring in visitors who want to see the press briefings. But the current day-pass system was not set up to give permanent access to reporters who, like Guckert, fail to qualify for a hard pass.

The White House press office continues to be non-responsive to Salon's questions about the credentialing process and Guckert's apparent ability to rig the system. At Thursday's daily press briefing, White House press secretary Scott McClellan fielded several questions on the issue. He told reporters that Guckert had "never applied for a hard pass. He had a daily pass." Guckert's ineligibility for a hard pass -- the likely reason he never applied -- was left unmentioned.

To receive a hard pass, a journalist must submit a letter confirming that he or she works for a legitimate news organization, lives in the D.C. area, and needs access to the White House for regular news stories. But before the White House will send the request along to the Secret Service for a background check, the journalist must also confirm having received accreditation to cover Capitol Hill. Without Hill credentials, the White House will not forward a hard-pass application. Gannon had no such credentials.

But not because he didn't try to get them. On Dec. 12, 2003, Guckert applied to the Standing Committee of Correspondents, a group of congressional reporters who oversee press-credential distribution on Capitol Hill. On April 7, 2004, his application was rejected when the committee could not conclude that Talon was a legitimate, independent news organization. "We didn't recognize the publication, so we asked for information about what Talon was," Julie Davis, a reporter for the Baltimore Sun who is on the committee, previously told Salon. "We did some digging, and it became clear it was owned by the owner of GOPUSA. And we had asked for some proof of Talon's editorial independence from that group ... They didn't provide anything, so we denied their credentials, which is pretty rare," she said.

It's curious that the White House seemed disinclined to hold the Republican-leaning Talon News -- whose "news team" is made up of political activists with no journalism experience whatsoever -- to the same standards as the committee's. On Wednesday, McClellan insisted that all Guckert had to do to gain entrance to the White House was show "that he was representing a news organization that published regularly."

Still, without any hope of Hill credentials, Guckert had no prospect of landing a White House hard pass, so he simply adopted the day-pass system and turned it into his personal revolving door. In doing so, he created his own variation on a now-defunct third category of White House press pass, called the card index, which once allowed journalists to gain access to press briefings for weeks or months a time. But this system is defunct for one simple reason: It's not secure enough. Following the Sept. 11 attacks, the Secret Service did away with the card index, according to Martha Kumar, a professor of political science at Towson State University and an expert on White House press operations.

Indeed, security is a significant difference between the two types of passes that still exist. The hard pass requires a lengthy background check, punctuated by fingerprints and photographs. Someone picking up a day pass, however, simply presents a name, Social Security number and date of birth while the Secret Service does an instant check. That means Guckert, who covered the White House for nearly two years, was never subjected to a background check. Additionally, questions remain whether his passes were issued under his alias or his real name.

On Wednesday, when asked directly whether the reporter was being cleared by the White House under the name Guckert, McClellan hedged: "My understanding, [is] yes." McClellan did confirm he knew previously that "Jeff Gannon" was not the reporter's real name.

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 10:44 PM
What do you think is a better way to deal with the situation.

Keep on truckin.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 10:45 PM
What law was broken?

That's pretty much what it boils down to. If the extremist pundits who think like TJ and D-enise get enough airtime and use the right buzz words, they will make 60 Minutes. But honestly, no law that I know of has been broken. Merely poor indiscretion and the fact that an unread blogger got to ask easy questions.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:46 PM
What law was broken?

It's ironic in #3 that you of all people would be for persecuting a gay man either Gannon or in the WH.

ROFL ROFL ROFL

Persecuting a gay man. OH PLEASE. You apologists will stop at NOTHING to deflect and divert. This is not about Jimmy Jeffy Gannon (ugh) Gerkert or whatever being GAY. It is about his ILLEGAL past (and poking other men is not what I'm referring too) being completely disregarded by the WH for whatever reason they were doing so.

We don't know what or which law was broken...yet.

Give the journalists time. I'm sure something will surface inspite of the intentions to cover it up.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 10:47 PM
The media has tried to locate anyone who has had a day pass for two years straight. I've read it's hard to get one for one day.


http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/02/11/Gannon/

That means Guckert, who covered the White House for nearly two years, was never subjected to a background check. Additionally, questions remain whether his passes were issued under his alias or his real name.


Well, there it is. Is it inconsistent? yes. Is it untoward? yes. Is it illegal? Doubtful.

And the author seems to disagree with you and believes that no hard pass was issued. A funky pic of the Loch Ness Monster does not support your theory.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 10:48 PM
We don't know what or which law was broken...yet.

Give the journalists time. I'm sure something will surface inspite of the intentions to cover it up.

The new Dem Mantra?

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:49 PM
The new Dem Mantra?

Yes, you RWNJs taught us well. :thumb:

Joe Seahawk
02-20-2005, 10:49 PM
The new Dem Mantra?

They're slipping into desperation mode..

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 10:51 PM
Yes, you RWNJs taught us well. :thumb:
Wow, that's the third "you started it" excuse I have read from the extremist libbies on this board over the last week.

Impressive. Next they will use the dreaded "nanee naneee boo boo".

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:51 PM
They're slipping into desperation mode..

So the WH needs a fake name gay hooker shill to lob soft (and who knows what other kinds) of balls and it's the Dems in desperation mode??? ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 10:52 PM
ROFL ROFL ROFL
Persecuting a gay man. OH PLEASE. You apologists will stop at NOTHING to deflect and divert. This is not about Jimmy Jeffy Gannon (ugh) Gerkert or whatever being GAY. It is about his past being completely disregarded by the WH for whatever reason they were doing so.

We don't know what or which law was broken...yet.

Give the journalists time. I'm sure something will surface inspite of the intentions to cover it up.

It is about him being gay...because if he was straight...then we aren't even talking about this. So don't sit here and post that it's not about him being gay...it has everything to do about it.

I would imagine the WH can legally allow anyone they want to ask questions there. Or is there a law? I don't know.

"Journalists" can investigate all they want, but there again, it's just an embrassing story.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:54 PM
It is about him being gay...because if he was straight...then we aren't even talking about this. So don't sit here and post that it's not about him being gay...it has everything to do about it.

I would imagine the WH can legally allow anyone they want to ask questions there. Or is there a law? I don't know.

"Journalists" can investigate all they want, but there again, it's just an embrassing story.

Bull shit.

If it were a straight guy running an escort service, pimping, or prostituting himself and using a fake name had WH clearance but could not get Capitol Hill clearance you bet it would be a story...

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 10:54 PM
They're slipping into desperation mode..
They slipped in February 2004. They slipped in New Hampshire, in South Carolina, in Oklahoma and Arizona and North Dakota and New Mexico. They slipped in California, Texas, and New York. They slipped in South Dakota, Oregon, and Washington and Michigan. Then they slipped in Washington D.C. to slip in the White House! YEEAAAARRRGGGGGG!

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 10:55 PM
Bull shit.

If it were a straight guy running an escort service, pimping, or prostituting himself and using a fake name had WH clearance but could not get Capitol Hill clearance you bet it would be a story...
I agree with D-enise. This has nothing to do with him being gay. I bet she hasn't even mentioned it once....

ROFL

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:57 PM
I agree with D-enise. This has nothing to do with him being gay. I bet she hasn't even mentioned it once....

ROFL

I didn't say it had nothing. Of course exposing the hypocrite angle here is something. They campaigned on making gays pariahs and yet they have a gay hooker there pimping their message...and he wrote like a homophob so he fit right in with their agenda, didn't he?

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 10:58 PM
Bull shit.

If it were a straight guy running an escort service, pimping, or prostituting himself and using a fake name had WH clearance but could not get Capitol Hill clearance you bet it would be a story...

But it wouldn't be the same now would it? Furthermore...the only person that may have done anything illegal is the hooker depending on state law.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 10:59 PM
I didn't say it had nothing. Of course exposing the hypocrite angle here is something. They campaigned on making gays pariahs and yet they have a gay hooker there pimping their message.
If that is the case, then perhaps BS was not the proper response to Garcia. Obviously him being gay is an issue. Unfortunately neither of you can prove or disprove otherwise the amount of issue it is.

I guarantee if 60 Minutes runs with it, gay will be the first adjective used.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 10:59 PM
But it wouldn't be the same now would it? Furthermore...the only person that may have done anything illegal is the hooker depending on state law.

Have you checked out the link I gave you? Obviously if he's running a web site designed for prostitution then he's doing more than breaking a state law.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 11:00 PM
Have you checked out the link I gave you? Obviously if he's running a web site designed for prostitution then he's doing more than breaking a state law.
So he was proven to be a prostitute? Or he specifically sold sex from his website?

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 11:01 PM
So he was proven to be a prostitute? Or he specifically sold sex from his website?

Both from what I understand.

http://web.archive.org/web/20011103134331/www.usmcpt.com/index2.html

here you go. proceed with caution.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 11:03 PM
Both from what I understand.
From what you understand, read, or linked?

Understanding is not enough for any casual reader on this forum.

WilliamTheIrish
02-20-2005, 11:03 PM
The media has tried to locate anyone who has had a day pass for two years straight. I've read it's hard to get one for one day.

This kind of contradicts the Salon position of "impossible" day passes.


http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ep/20050210/en_bpiep/loosegannonisittooeasytogetintothewhpress


NEW YORK In the wake of revelations about ex-reporter Jeff Gannon, veteran White House correspondents told E&P today they could not recall another instance of a credentialed reporter using an alias allowed on that beat.



White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan acknowledged this morning that he knew Talon News reporter Jeff Gannon was really James Guckert.


Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), meanwhile, asked McClellan today to immediately release documents to my office relating to the White House press credentials of James D. Guckert, a.k.a. Jeff Gannon.


Several White House reported told E&P they are concerned that Gannons ability to get into briefings, and even ask President Bush (news - web sites) a question two weeks ago, suggests that it may be too easy for reporters to gain admission to the James S. Brady Briefing Room despite being from a purely partisan or bogus news organization.


"Virtually no one is not allowed in," said Gwen Flanders, a USA Today editor who oversees the paper's White House reporters. "Getting that [day] pass is a simple matter of passing a background check and working for a news organization." But she added that there is not as much scrutiny of the legitimacy of the news organizations: "Who is in the position to say who is not legitimate?"


Bruce Bartlett, a syndicated columnist and former White House staffer in the Reagan administration's Office of Policy Development, took the concern a step further, claiming the use of fake names could open the door to terrorists. "Some terrorist could invent some publication and put through their name and get in," he said. "It raises the question of whether it is appropriate for the White House Press Office to clear people who are operating under aliases."


White House Press officials did not respond to several calls for comment. Most White House reporters who spoke with E&P declined to comment on Gannon's work, other than to say he was known to be partisan.


"There was a 'there goes Jeff again' attitude among many in the room," said Ken Herman of Cox Newspapers, who often sat next to Gannon at press briefings but rarely spoke with him. "He was often agitated by other's questions. He seemed wound up pretty tight at times."


But Herman, who has covered the White House on and off since 2001, said there are a number of reporters who show up from news organizations he's never heard of or offer questions as partisan as Gannon's, although in their cases, mostly likely, they are working under their real names. "There are times in that briefing room where I am hard-pressed to tell you who they are working for or who sees their reporting," Herman said.


"Every day there are a whole bunch of people there I have never seen, and their questions make you wonder who they are representing," said Judy Keen, a USA Today White House reporter whose time there dates to 1992. "It is not as rigid and structured as people might think."


Several reporters pointed to Russell Mokhiber, editor of Corporate Crime Reporter, who has been attending press events through a daily press pass for several years. Some say he is as partisan as Gannon in his questions, but often with a left-leaning approach. One reporter called him "the ideological flip-side of Gannon."


Most recently, Mokhiber gained notice during a McClellan press briefing on Feb. 1 by asking the press secretary if Bush believed in the Sixth Commandment -- thou shalt not kill -- and if so, how could he support the Iraq (news - web sites) War? McClellan did not respond to the question.


Mokhiber, reached by E&P, did not want to comment on his work, but explained that his print publication comes out 48 times per year and circulates to about 500 people, while his Web site also offers news. He said he was denied access to the White House for about four months in 2001 and told only that it was for security reasons. He also said he requested, but was denied, a long-term pass, called a "hard pass".


Many White House reporters who spoke with E&P were reluctant to bar access to anyone with a legitimate interest in news coverage but acknowledged that questions like those from Gannon and Mokhiber might be out of place.


"There is a certain amount of consternation among reporters from the mainstream media about some people coming in to the briefing room and using it as a platform," said Richard Stevenson of The New York Times, who has covered the White House for more than two years. "I don't think it is good for our profession to have the briefing room hijacked."

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 11:05 PM
I didn't say it had nothing. Of course exposing the hypocrite angle here is something. They campaigned on making gays pariahs and yet they have a gay hooker there pimping their message...and he wrote like a homophob so he fit right in with their agenda, didn't he?

I didn't think the President or the GOP could make "pariahs" out of homosexuals. Homosexuals have been social outcasts for longer than that. No what the President was talking about was supporting the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman. Which I agree with. What I don't agree with is un-equal protection under the law.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 11:05 PM
This kind of contradicts the Salon position of "impossible" day passes.


But more likely. Again, untowards? yes. Poor Discretion? yes. Unseemly? yes. Illegal? Not that I know of.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 11:05 PM
This kind of contradicts the Salon position of "impossible" day passes.




Salon didn't say that, I did. I've read that from various places on the net today. That getting a day pass isn't easy.

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 11:05 PM
Have you checked out the link I gave you? Obviously if he's running a web site designed for prostitution then he's doing more than breaking a state law.

I don't click on strange links,

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 11:05 PM
From what you understand, read, or linked?

Understanding is not enough for any casual reader on this forum.

Again, proceed with caution.

http://web.archive.org/web/20011103134331/www.usmcpt.com/index2.html

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 11:07 PM
I don't click on strange links,

Well then you'll have to take my word for it that he's offering himself as:

'Ex-USMC Jock: Available for hourly, overnight, weekend or longer travel - OUT ONLY!

Personal Trainer: Safe-Sane-Strenuous-Satisfying workouts, Sports training, and competition, especially wrestling....

Big SPORTS Fan: Will go to the game with you, then take you home and....

"AGGRESIVE, VERBAL, DOMINANT TOP"
I DON'T LEAVE MARKS....ONLY IMPRESSIONS'

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 11:07 PM
If that is the case, then perhaps BS was not the proper response to Garcia. Obviously him being gay is an issue. Unfortunately neither of you can prove or disprove otherwise the amount of issue it is.

I guarantee if 60 Minutes runs with it, gay will be the first adjective used.

Indeed

WilliamTheIrish
02-20-2005, 11:07 PM
Salon didn't say that, I did. I've read that from various places on the net today. That getting a day pass isn't easy.

Sorry. I skimmed and apparently took license.

Joe Seahawk
02-20-2005, 11:08 PM
This kind of contradicts the Salon position of "impossible" day passes.


http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ep/20050210/en_bpiep/loosegannonisittooeasytogetintothewhpress




Dude, you're harshing Denise's buzz.. ;)

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 11:08 PM
Sorry. I skimmed and apparently took license.

No problem. Just wanted to clarify.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 11:09 PM
Again, proceed with caution.

http://web.archive.org/web/20011103134331/www.usmcpt.com/index2.html
While there are tons of double entendre's and allusions to sexual connotations, there is nothing in the weblink you provided that would have anyone arrested for prostitution. You guys are going to have to find a legitimate client that hasn't been in bed with Al Franken and has documents proving either the act or payment received for sexual services.

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 11:09 PM
Obviously if he's running a web site designed for prostitution then he's doing more than breaking a state law.

What would that be?

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 11:10 PM
What would that be?
He is not running a website that is illegal according to the link D-enise provided.

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 11:10 PM
While there are tons of double entendre's and allusions to sexual connotations, there is nothing in the weblink you provided that would have anyone arrested for prostitution. You guys are going to have to find a legitimate client that hasn't been in bed with Al Franken and has documents proving either the act or payment received for sexual services.
And if I hear it from Dan Rather or CBS....I'm not going to believe it.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 11:11 PM
And if I hear it from Dan Rather or CBS....I'm not going to believe it.
One would think they would have this down by now. Obviously not.

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 11:11 PM
He is not running a website that is illegal according to the link D-enise provided.


Hmmmmm imagine that

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 11:11 PM
He is not running a website that is illegal according to the link D-enise provided.

That is one link out of DOZENS. And one that you would not have to shower and go to confession over...

there are more if you'd like them.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 11:13 PM
That is one link out of DOZENS. And one that you would not have to shower and go to confession over...

there are more if you'd like them.
The only one I want is a website that says "Hey, I am Jeff Guckert and I will have sex with you for money if you call this number". Otherwise, you are wasting your time.

Hell, even a simple rube on a cop show understands entrapment better than you do.

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 11:13 PM
One would think they would have this down by now. Obviously not.

I was in a company class...long story short...the name Dan Rather was in it ...shortly after that whole fraud thing he did. I blurted out that he was liar.

People came up to me during the breaks and thanked me for saying it. I had to laugh.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 11:14 PM
Hmmmmm imagine that

Again, there are dozens of links. But if you guys are too big of weinees to check them out then suit yourself and your ignorant bliss.

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 11:15 PM
That is one link out of DOZENS. And one that you would not have to shower and go to confession over...

there are more if you'd like them.

So he has the websites that he's the webmaster for....and it's local...or national? Excuse me if this is strangr to me....how do you ho-out on the internet?

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 11:16 PM
Again, there are dozens of links. But if you guys are too big of weinees to check them out then suit yourself and your ignorant bliss.
The only link you gave me did not support your claim. If you are going to call someone a criminal have the proof. Don't say "look at 30 or 40 websites and eventually you will find it", just give the link.

Personally, I don't think you have one that proves by definition of law he was a prostitute.

Now does that mean he wasn't? I am not kidding myself or you - 99% sure he was. But can you convict and can you blame other people for hiring a prostitute if you don't have proof? Not hardly, and that makes you just as bad.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 11:17 PM
The only one I want is a website that says "Hey, I am Jeff Guckert and I will have sex with you for money if you call this number". Otherwise, you are wasting your time.

Hell, even a simple rube on a cop show understands entrapment better than you do.

Oh please. The guy has naked pictures of himself and saying he is available for an hour or a weekend as an 'escort'. I'm sure he's offering his services to attend Disneyworld. ROFL

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 11:17 PM
Again, there are dozens of links. But if you guys are too big of weinees to check them out then suit yourself and your ignorant bliss.


Look....I'm on my company laptop and I'm not going to any strange websites. Including but not limited to...shit that could involve sexually explicit content.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 11:18 PM
The only link you gave me did not support your claim. If you are going to call someone a criminal have the proof. Don't say "look at 30 or 40 websites and eventually you will find it", just give the link.

Personally, I don't think you have one that proves by definition of law he was a prostitute.

Now does that mean he wasn't? I am not kidding myself or you - 99% sure he was. But can you convict and can you blame other people for hiring a prostitute if you don't have proof? Not hardly, and that makes you just as bad.

Russ, I gave you a link that had the entire story at least twice. Here it is again. It has much more graphic pictures and details. Knock yourself out...

just be sure to clear your cache and cookies when you are done.

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/02/man-called-jeff.html

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2005, 11:19 PM
Further...you'd have to prove a cash transaction and find a client.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 11:20 PM
Oh please. The guy has naked pictures of himself and saying he is available for an hour or a weekend as an 'escort'. I'm sure he's offering his services to attend Disneyworld. ROFL
As I said, and unfortunately you have yet to be able to disseminate - I am comfortable stating he sold sex for cash. However, I cannot legitimately and legally say he IS a prostitute unless he has admitted or been convicted of such a crime.

You alluded to the idea that he broke federal laws with these websites. You were either horribly wrong, or a liar. These sites are by the thousands for men and women. None are convicted for the websites at all.

Again, unless you have a site that specifically says he sells sex for money, you have no case and no grounds for your statements.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 11:21 PM
Russ, I gave you a link that had the entire story at least twice. Here it is again. It has much more graphic pictures and details. Knock yourself out...

just be sure to clear your cache and cookies when you are done.

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/02/man-called-jeff.html
Denise - Again, does it state "I will sell sex for money" Other than that you are wasting time with your accusations as they simply won't hold up.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 11:22 PM
Further...you'd have to prove a cash transaction and find a client.
Watch Michael Moore come forward and complain his a$$ still hurts.

WilliamTheIrish
02-20-2005, 11:22 PM
But more likely. Again, untowards? yes. Poor Discretion? yes. Unseemly? yes. Illegal? Not that I know of.

I tend to agree. I don't know if it's illegal. However, if it's true that he was given access to internal memo's (Plame/Wilson) then that's another matter.

Or if he was given access prior to obtaining a day pass. That is most definitely illegal.

Now tying it all to the President? That would be a huge leap.

memyselfI
02-20-2005, 11:23 PM
As I said, and unfortunately you have yet to be able to disseminate - I am comfortable stating he sold sex for cash. However, I cannot legitimately and legally say he IS a prostitute unless he has admitted or been convicted of such a crime.

You alluded to the idea that he broke federal laws with these websites. You were either horribly wrong, or a liar. These sites are by the thousands for men and women. None are convicted for the websites at all.

Again, unless you have a site that specifically says he sells sex for money, you have no case and no grounds for your statements.

Except that he's ADMITTED to it. :hmmm:

I'm not a prosecuting attorney so I don't have to abide by a legal standard at all. I can use his admission of doing 'bad' things, I can see the pictures and websites he sponsored and paid for, at some point I'm sure we'll hear from a 'client' or two who will tell their tale for cash...

again, the story is just unfolding. Let's see what people who have the time, access, and inclination can dig up for this guy.

Rest assured, I'll keep you UP to date on what I hear.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 11:25 PM
Except that he's ADMITTED to it. :hmmm:
If that is the case, that is an entirely separate issue. However, I have not read his quotes to that effect. Do you have a link for his statement? Just to be sure, you realize that there is a legal difference between escort and prostitute before you provide anything, right?

And let me clarify, that admitting you are a prostitute is a grand difference from illegally selling sex from a website. One is a state or local crime (usually a misdemeanor), the other is a federal felony.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 11:26 PM
I tend to agree. I don't know if it's illegal. However, if it's true that he was given access to internal memo's (Plame/Wilson) then that's another matter.

Or if he was given access prior to obtaining a day pass. That is most definitely illegal.

Now tying it all to the President? That would be a huge leap.
If the first is true, then all involved should be charged with treason, IMO. Will that happen, certainly not.

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 11:31 PM
Except that he's ADMITTED to it. :hmmm:

I'm not a prosecuting attorney so I don't have to abide by a legal standard at all. I can use his admission of doing 'bad' things, I can see the pictures and websites he sponsored and paid for, at some point I'm sure we'll hear from a 'client' or two who will tell their tale for cash...

again, the story is just unfolding. Let's see what people who have the time, access, and inclination can diig up for this guy.

Rest assured, I'll keep you UP to date on what I hear.
D-enise here is the only quote I can find from Guckert.

"I am not going to respond to these allegations."
and
"Yes I am not going to address it"

Are you sure you read a his statement admitting the crime?

KCWolfman
02-20-2005, 11:32 PM
at some point I'm sure we'll hear from a 'client' or two who will tell their tale for cash...

again, the story is just unfolding. Let's see what people who have the time, access, and inclination can dig up for this guy.

Rest assured, I'll keep you UP to date on what I hear.

And I am sure the stories will have the veracity of the ilk you quote from the description of the characters you plan to believe above. Good luck.

Taco John
02-20-2005, 11:51 PM
Further...you'd have to prove a cash transaction and find a client.



Which came first... The blue dress or the investigation?

beavis
02-20-2005, 11:56 PM
Which came first... The blue dress or the investigation?
It depends on what you mean by "is".

SBK
02-21-2005, 12:05 AM
They're slipping into desperation mode..

Buddy, they've been there for YEARS. :toast:

Garcia Bronco
02-21-2005, 12:13 AM
Which came first... The blue dress or the investigation?

Technically the investigation....but ultimately purgery in a frivolous lawsuit..brought forth by a woman who's was so insulted by come on's that later posed naked for Playboy...or was it Penthouse?

SBK
02-21-2005, 12:18 AM
I hope someone drags this thread back out in a month or 2 when all this crap blows over like all the other crap that won't stick.

Taco John
02-21-2005, 12:41 AM
Technically the investigation....but ultimately purgery in a frivolous lawsuit..brought forth by a woman who's was so insulted by come on's that later posed naked for Playboy...or was it Penthouse?



Exactly... This thing is just getting warmed up... The skeletons in the closet had better get their dance shoes warmed up.