PDA

View Full Version : Senate Democrats Calling For Full Investigation of Gannon Ordeal


Taco John
02-22-2005, 08:50 PM
And so it begins...

A letter, issued from Minority Whip Richard Durbin (D-IL):


###

Dear Mr. President,

At a press conference in the White House on January 26, you stated that “there needs to be a nice, independent relationship between the White House and the press.” In that same press conference, you called on a reporter then known as Jeff Gannon, who worked for an organization called Talon News.

Since that time, the public has learned that the real name of that reporter is James Dale Guckert, not Jeff Gannon, and that he had regular access to the White House press facilities for more than a year. We have also learned that the questions he posed at White House press briefings and the stories he filed for Talon News frequently mirrored Republican Party talking points, that Talon News is a news organization in name only and that it has apparently close connections to the Republican party.

Given the unprecedented level of security in Washington since 9/11, it is troubling that that a non-journalist using a false name and working for a sham news organization could have gained regular access to the White House for such an extended period of time.

Another reason the Gannon/Guckert affair is disturbing is because of what we have recently learned about apparent efforts by some in your Administration to try to “buy” favorable news coverage. These other efforts include paying news personalities Armstrong Williams and Maggie Gallagher large sums of money to promote your Administration’s education and marriage initiatives, and using tax payer dollars to produce video news releases promoting the new prescription drug benefit for Medicare beneficiaries and other policies the Administration regards as accomplishments. A recent report by the General Accountability Office called such video news releases illegal uses of public funds. More recently, we have heard troubling reports that Social Security Administration officials may be using public funds and pressuring public employees to promote your goal of privatizing Social Security.

As you know, concerns that government officials may be trying to deceive the public by manipulating the media can be extremely corrosive to public

trust. For that reason, we respectfully request that you order an immediate and thorough investigation into the Gannon/Guckert matter. How is it possible that a man using a fake name, with dubious journalism credentials, was able to clear the White House’s extensive security screening process and gain such close access to you and your staff for such an extended period of time? Have there been other, similar breaches of security and journalism standards?

We appreciate your prompt attention to this important matter. We urge you to order a full inquiry so that the American people know the facts.

memyselfI
02-22-2005, 09:04 PM
But why bother for just a 'blog' story... ROFL

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 09:06 PM
But why bother for just a 'blog' story... ROFL
I missed ABC's coverage of it tonight. Was it on NBC or CBS?

memyselfI
02-22-2005, 09:07 PM
I missed ABC's coverage of it tonight. Was it on NBC or CBS?


Didn't watch, don't know. Don't care. The story will proceed without them.

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 09:09 PM
Didn't watch, don't know. Don't care. The story will proceed without them.
Of course it will, and in blog heaven you will be queen and vindicated. But on planet Earth, this is still not a story. And until you tie a real crime or a huge recognizable name to the prostitution angle, it won't be.

|Zach|
02-22-2005, 09:11 PM
I missed ABC's coverage of it tonight. Was it on NBC or CBS?
I hear you guys slam these sources all the time...now they are used for validation?

Jigga wah?

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 09:11 PM
Didn't watch, don't know. Don't care. The story will proceed without them.
BTW - Where are your posts condemning Emmanuel Cleaver? You have heard he hired a black advocate newspaper to write articles for him, haven't you?

Cleaver has admitted to paying the reporter and has agreed to stop immediately. And again, politicians show how stupid they truly are. What black advocate would ever write a negative article about Cleaver? It is like paying an eskimo to insure it stays cold in December.

memyselfI
02-22-2005, 09:12 PM
Of course it will, and in blog heaven you will be queen and vindicated. But on planet Earth, this is still not a story. And until you tie a real crime or a huge recognizable name to the prostitution angle, it won't be.


Yeah, and the Senate Dems are being controlled by blogs too. And they are willing to risk political capital on a non-story fake name gay hooker.

Got it.

ROFL

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 09:14 PM
I hear you guys slam these sources all the time...now they are used for validation?

Jigga wah?
Not validation. In fact, I believe the story wholeheartedly. I don't think it needs any validation. I believe Gannon was deliberately overlooked because he gave softball questions and attacked the left side with occassional questions. And like Emmanuel Cleaver, it was stupid to do so.

However, D-enise and TJ have both assured us how this is BIG TIME NEWS. If it doesn't reach mainstream America, I just don't see how it is a big story.

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 09:15 PM
Yeah, and the Senate Dems are being controlled by blogs too. And they are willing to risk political capital on a non-story fake name gay hooker.

Got it.

ROFL
How many other "Calls for investigation" have missed mainstream America? You may eventually be right, this may come to Peter Jennings or Ted Koppel, but right now, you look horribly wrong once again.

memyselfI
02-22-2005, 09:16 PM
Not validation. In fact, I believe the story wholeheartedly. I don't think it needs any validation. I believe Gannon was deliberately overlooked because he gave softball questions and attacked the left side with occassional questions. And like Emmanuel Cleaver, it was stupid to do so.

However, D-enise and TJ have both assured us how this is BIG TIME NEWS. If it doesn't reach mainstream America, I just don't see how it is a big story.

It could not reach 'mainstream America' and still be a huge freakin story...

for instance, how many in 'mainstream America' know the WH has been accused of illegal activity by the GAO and warned to stop their propaganda efforts because they have previously broken the law.

This is a huge story but I would venture large numbers of people do not know this story exists even though it potentially impacts millions of them.

|Zach|
02-22-2005, 09:17 PM
Not validation. In fact, I believe the story wholeheartedly. I don't think it needs any validation. I believe Gannon was deliberately overlooked because he gave softball questions and attacked the left side with occassional questions. And like Emmanuel Cleaver, it was stupid to do so.

However, D-enise and TJ have both assured us how this is BIG TIME NEWS. If it doesn't reach mainstream America, I just don't see how it is a big story.
I agree it isn't much right now but it does seem like the wheels are uh turnin. It will be interesting to see who things pan out.

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 09:22 PM
It could not reach 'mainstream America' and still be a huge freakin story...
.

If it doesn't get talked about at the dinner table, if Peter Jennings doesn't highlight it, if it is not front page local news, then it isn't a "huge freakin story".


It is about a gay escort who asked easy questions to post on his website. That is about all it is for now. If you can make hay of it and find your Whitewater, then you have a story. The question is, are the Dems willing to take a risk and look like a vigilante mission making up for Clinton after losing all three major parts of the electoral units? My bet is they complain but if nothing arises that can be used as something practical and tangible instead of your whimsical "it could potentially affect millions" they will let it die and move on to a more positive approach to try to gain ground.

memyselfI
02-22-2005, 09:33 PM
I agree it isn't much right now but it does seem like the wheels are uh turnin. It will be interesting to see who things pan out.

Hum, here is another interesting angle...Thume's campaign in SD gave JJGG's blog money...presumably while he was still on the 'Talon News' payroll and covering the WH. (and while his nude photos and profile were still live on the web offering his 'services')

blog article: http://nashuaadvocate.blogspot.com/2005/02/former-staffer-of-senator-john-thune-r.html

known press article:

http://209.11.49.220/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000809455

'Gannon' and S. Dakota Editor at Odds Over Daschle Race
credit: Aya Kawano


By Joe Strupp

Published: February 22, 2005 2:20 PM ET

NEW YORK Among the more curious sidelights of James Guckert's two years as a White House reporter for Talon News and GOPUSA is his deep involvement in coverage of the 2004 South Dakota U.S. senate race, which brought him into direct conflict with the Argus Leader of Sioux Falls. Guckert told E&P today that, in addition to writing articles, he had “traded information” with bloggers who are often credited with playing a key role in the defeat of Sen. Tom Daschle, the Democratic leader.

Guckert, who quit his job at Talon News two weeks ago, after it was learned he had used the alias Jeff Gannon and had ties to several sex sites, took on the Argus Leader last year in at least a dozen articles in which he sought to link the paper to Daschle or claim a bias by the paper against Daschle's opponent, John Thune.

"He mainly wanted to know about areas that made the paper look bad," Executive Editor Randell Beck told E&P Tuesday. "Our alleged bias -- he would keep coming back to that even though there was no proof."

Among the attempts by Guckert to portray the paper as biased in favor of Daschle was a story that Daschle and Argus Leader political reporter Dave Kranz attended South Dakota State University at the same time. "They did know each other there," Beck acknowledged. "But that was all. He took things like that and tried to put it together and make two plus two equal five."

Beck also criticized Guckert for going through stories Kranz had written years ago for other newspapers and "selectively offering passages for claims of his alleged bias." (Kranz declined to comment.)

Guckert defended his work today and said he did not write anything that wasn't true or was not also being reported by several conservative South Dakota blogs. "I think it was spot-on," he said about his coverage of the Daschle campaign. "The Argus Leader's news about Tom Daschle was underplayed."

Although Guckert said he was not paid by, or directed by, Daschle's opponents in South Dakota or in Washington, D.C., to write about the Argus Leader, he admitted to sharing information with local blogs, such as Daschlevthune.com and SouthDakotaPolitics.com.

"We traded information back and forth," he told E&P. "But having some special relationship, I would not characterize it as that. We were pursuing the same story."

Thune also appeared on Gannon's Web-only radio show on Feb. 8, 2004. He eventually beat Daschle in what many considered to be a major upset, given Daschle's standing as senate minority leader.

After the electlon, it became known that one of Gannon's blog comrades received $27,000 from the Thune campaign, and another took $8,000.

But Guckert said no one in the Republican Party or Thune's campaign directed him to cover the campaigns. "I looked at the Senate races, and that was going to be the most interesting," Guckert said. "When I looked at the background, I started looking at the Argus Leader, and it didn't look right."

But Beck contends Guckert's coverage was aimed at making the paper look biased, not at fairly covering the race. "A lot of it was either not true or manipulated to leave the impression that we were biased in favor of Daschle," Beck said. The editor declined to be specific about claims Guckert made, and since Talon News has removed all of his work from its site, those stories were not viewable.

Beck eventually stopped responding to Guckert's requests for interviews because "I realized it was not going to do any good. The best way to deal with it was not to deal with it," he said. "I felt like if we agonized over every new allegation, he was having the effect he wanted."

The editor, who had made a regular weekly appearance on a local radio program for several years, also stopped that practice at one point in 2004 because, he said, the critics would call up and attack the paper. "I made that decision in a politicized climate where the bloggers would so manipulate the conversation that it was not worth it," he said.

But Beck said the Argus Leader never ran a story on Guckert's allegations and, oddly, has yet to publish anything about Guckert's current problems. "What good is it going to do?" he said when asked why the paper was not covering Guckert's activities given his past reporting on the Argus Leader. "Because we never did anything in print to respond to him, there is no reason to do it now. I don't see how it serves the public in any way."

Garcia Bronco
02-22-2005, 09:44 PM
Not validation. In fact, I believe the story wholeheartedly. I don't think it needs any validation. I believe Gannon was deliberately overlooked because he gave softball questions and attacked the left side with occassional questions. And like Emmanuel Cleaver, it was stupid to do so.

.......If it doesn't reach mainstream America, I just don't see how it is a big story.

I agree.

Taco John
02-22-2005, 10:28 PM
I missed ABC's coverage of it tonight. Was it on NBC or CBS?



What? It didn't happen if it's not on ABC or CBS!? ROFL


BAAAA!! BAAA!!! BAAA!!!


ROFL lambs lambs lambs lambs lambs lambs ROFL



Hilarious.

Taco John
02-22-2005, 10:29 PM
"They didn't say anything about it on the 'liberal' media we hate so much. It must not have happened at all!"

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 10:29 PM
What? It didn't happen if it's not on ABC or CBS!? ROFL


Hilarious.
Wow, I said it didn't happen? When did I say that?

No, I said it wasn't a mainstream story.

But I guess if you type enough lambs you may distract one or two people from your earlier statements saying it would be, right?

|Zach|
02-22-2005, 10:30 PM
"They didn't say anything about it on the 'liberal' media we hate so much.
Ya still kind of made me go "hmmm" when seeing those networks referenced.

Taco John
02-22-2005, 10:32 PM
The Monica story started out as a nothing story by some Internet yahoo...

KCWolfman
02-22-2005, 10:40 PM
The Monica story started out as a nothing story by some Internet yahoo...
Maybe you could try the Lefty statement that Watergate was not initially reported as well?


Again, it looks as though all indications point to someone paying a homosexual escort to ask easy questions of the White House and post them on his website. That is nothing the average American cares about, no matter how you delude yourself.

You have to ask the question, do the Democrats want to chance looking vindictive by attacking the POTUS and this situation? The answer right now is "no". There investigatory inquiry you posted earlier indicates that they will start the ball rolling if something else is found, but not angry enough to cause a big stink on its own.

If all the Dems have is what they have now, this story will live in blog infamy and give Maher a joke or two and never be heard on the average American's television or in the average American's newspaper. They will have to dig deeper and not dig at the cost of the American taxpayer if they want to take control of any part of congress anytime soon.

Amnorix
02-23-2005, 07:46 AM
Maybe we should appoint an independent counsel to investigate it. It should initially be a moderate member of the other political party, but then when he finds nothing wrong -- he should be replaced with a more radical member of the other party. And then, once he finds out there's nothing there, he could investigate anything and everything else he could possibly think of, just in case there's something there, even if it's completely unrelated to the original purposes for which he was appointed.

Oh, never mind -- we allowed the Independent Counsel law to expire after we realized how abusive it could be if the wrong person was appointed... Right, gotta keep that in mind.

memyselfI
02-23-2005, 08:22 AM
It looks like somehow, even without the 'MSM', some people are looking to get to the bottom (NPI) of this...



Gannongate: It's worse than you think
Bush's press office gave Jim Guckert access, even knowing his only credentials were from the blatantly partisan group GOPUSA.

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

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/02/23/more_Gannon/index.html
Feb. 23, 2005 | When the press first raised questions about why Jim Guckert had been awarded access to the White House press room for two years running while he worked for Talon News, critics charged that Talon, with its amateurish standards and close working ties to Republican activists, did not qualify as a legitimate news organization. It turns out the truth is even stranger: Guckert was waved into the White House while working for an even more blatantly partisan organization, GOPUSA.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan originally told reporters that Guckert was properly allowed into press briefings because he worked for an outlet that "published regularly." But that's when the questions were about Talon. More recently McClellan offered up a new rationale. Asked by Editor and Publisher magazine how the decision was made to allow a GOPUSA correspondent in, McClellan said, "The staff assistant went to verify that the news organization existed." (Emphasis added.)


That, apparently, was the lone criterion the press office used when Guckert (aka Jeff Gannon) approached it in February 2003 seeking a pass for White House briefings. Not yet working for Republican-friendly Talon News, which came into existence in April 2003, Guckert, using an alias and with no journalism experience whatsoever, was writing on a voluntary basis for a Web site dedicated to promoting Republican issues. To determine whether Guckert would gain entrance to the press room, normally reserved for professional journalists working for legitimate, recognized and independent news organizations, the press office simply logged on to the Internet and confirmed that GOPUSA "existed," and then quickly approved Guckert's access. In a White House obsessed, at least publicly, with security and where journalists cannot even move between the White House and the nearby Old Executive Building without a personal escort, Guckert's lenient treatment was likely unprecedented.

Yet, if there's one other person who did manage to receive the same type of kid-glove treatment from the White House press office, it was Guckert's boss at GOPUSA and later at Talon News, Bobby Eberle. A Texas-based Republican activist and a delegate to the Republican National Convention in 2000, Eberle founded Talon News after he became concerned that the name GOPUSA might appear to have a "built-in bias." With no journalism background, he too was able to secure a White House press pass, in early 2003, on the strength of representing GOPUSA, dedicated to "spreading the conservative message throughout America."

This is not how the White House press office has traditionally worked. "When I was there we didn't let political operatives in. It was completely contrary to what the press room should be used for," says Joe Lockhart, who served as White House press secretary to President Clinton during his second term. Asked what would have happened if a reporter from a clearly partisan operation, say "Democrats Today," had requested a White House press pass, Lockhart said that if the chief of the Democratic National Committee were attending an event at the White House, then perhaps the Democrats Today reporter might be allowed in for that one day. "But to be admitted as a reporter and sit in a chair and act like a reporter" for months on end the way Guckert did? "No," said Lockhart, "that's not within the realm of what [is] proper."

Guckert and Eberle remain at the center of the scandal. When liberal bloggers revealed that Guckert, who posed reliably friendly questions to administration officials, had recently offered his services online as a gay male escort, the questions for the White House only became more uncomfortable.

Guckert first came to national attention when he asked President Bush a question at his Jan. 26 press conference. Guckert's query, in which he ridiculed Democratic leaders for having "divorced themselves from reality," was what initially raised the ire of liberals. It was not how an openly Republican partisan got inside the White House press room, because partisans have been there for years. Lockhart recalls having been confronted with a similar question of White House access regarding veteran Baltimore, Md., radio host Lester Kinsolving, who for decades has pitched eccentric, long-winded and usually conservative-leaning questions inside the briefing room. (Kinsolving is currently recuperating from triple-bypass surgery.) Lockhart thought it was inequitable that Kinsolving was virtually the only local radio show host with daily access. "The issue got kicked up to my level. I thought it was fundamentally unfair, and it was clear that he was an annoyance to everyone in the room. And frankly we should have shut him down. But I knew if we kicked him out it would be a big story with the right-wing press, and I didn't need that."

Unlike Guckert, though, Kinsolving has an authentic background in journalism, having worked for the San Francisco Chronicle and the Indianapolis Star. Talon's defenders suggest that it too is a legitimate news outlet. But providing some insight into how it operates, Eberle told the New York Times last week that he rarely monitored Guckert's White House work. "Jeff did his thing. I did my thing," Eberle said. In other words, it appears that Guckert, who often cut and pasted White House press releases and posted them on Talon as "news," did not even have an editor. As Media Matters for America noted, Talon "apparently consists of little more than Eberle, Gannon, and a few volunteers."

Just how blatantly the White House press office looked the other way in regard to Guckert and his dubious status as a legitimate reporter comes into stark relief when examining his attempt to secure a similar press pass to cover Capitol Hill. Guckert submitted his application in December 2003 to the Standing Committee of Correspondents, a press group in charge of handing out credentials. In April 2004, the committee denied Guckert's request. Writing to Guckert, committee chairman Jim Drinkard outlined three clear deficiencies in Guckert's application:


1) "Committee guidelines require that on-line publications 'must charge a market rate fee for subscription or access, or carry paid advertising at current market rates.' You have not demonstrated to the committee's satisfaction that Talon News has any paid subscribers, that paid client newspapers publish Talon News stories, or that it is supported by advertising."

2) "The application for accreditation to the press galleries states that 'members of the press shall not engage in lobbying or paid advertising, publicity, promotion, work for any individual, political party, corporation, organization, or agency of the Federal Government.' Talon News has not demonstrated to the satisfaction of the committee that there is a separation from GOPUSA."

3) "Gallery rules and the application state that the principal income of correspondents must be obtained from news correspondence intended for publication in newspapers or news services. The committee feels that paying a single reporter a 'stipend' does not meet the intent of the rule."

The White House, in contrast, said that as long as Talon News or GOPUSA "existed," Guckert was free to attend its press briefings. Yet, in the past, a reporter seeking a permanent White House press pass has had to first secure credentials to cover Capitol Hill. Without those, the White House would not submit the application for a background check. But even though Guckert failed to secure Capitol Hill credentials, the White House waved him into press briefings for nearly two years using what's called a day pass. Those passes are designed for temporary use by out-of-town reporters who need access to the White House, not for indefinite use by reporters who flunk the Capitol Hill test.

To obtain a day pass during the Clinton administration, a reporter "had to make the case as to why that day was unique and why [he] had to cover the White House from inside the gates instead of outside," Lockhart says.

So the mystery remains: How did Guckert, with absolutely no journalism background and working for a phony news organization, manage to adopt the day-pass system as his own while sidestepping a thorough background check that might have detected his sordid past? That's the central question the White House refuses to address. And like its initial explanation that Guckert received his press pass the same way other journalists do, the notion first put out by White House officials that they knew little or nothing about GOPUSA/Talon News, its correspondent Guckert or its founder Eberle has also melted away. Instead, we now know, former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer personally spoke with Eberle about GOPUSA, so concerned was Fleischer that it was not an independent organization. (Eberle convinced Fleischer that it was.) Additionally, Guckert attended the invitation-only White House press Christmas parties in 2003 and 2004, and last holiday season, in a personal posting on GOPUSA, Eberle thanked Karl Rove for his "assistance, guidance, and friendship."

Chief Henry
02-23-2005, 08:32 AM
Helen Thomas isn't a partisian bitch, er I mean hack?

penchief
02-23-2005, 02:54 PM
I agree.

I agree to a point.

The main difference, IMO, is the leverage that democrats have in congress and with the media. They don't control it and, IMO, they are more pragmatic and less partisan. Also, and I'm thankful to say, liberals just don't have the stomach for the aggressive tactics that are necessary to make this issue the centerpiece of their attacks against Bush the way conservatives in congress made Monica their priority over the nation's business.

However, if this were to have occurred eight years ago, you can bet your bottom dollar that the republican congress would be having hearings and discussing impeachment as we speak.

Amnorix has it right. Maybe Kenneth Starr should come out of retirement. The Bush Administration is a mountain compared to the mole hill provided by the Clinton Administration.

Let's see.......Plamegate vs. FBIGate, WMDgate vs. Monicagate, AlabamaNationalGuardgate vs. RhodesScholargate, Cocainegate vs. Ididn'tinhalegate, Chelseaisuglygate vs. Thetwinskeepbreakingthelawgate, Whitewatergate vs. IntimateconnectionstotheBinLadensgate.

I could continue but as any moderate on this board knows, that would be a useless exercise.

KCWolfman
02-23-2005, 04:47 PM
Maybe we should appoint an independent counsel to investigate it. It should initially be a moderate member of the other political party, but then when he finds nothing wrong -- he should be replaced with a more radical member of the other party. And then, once he finds out there's nothing there, he could investigate anything and everything else he could possibly think of, just in case there's something there, even if it's completely unrelated to the original purposes for which he was appointed.

Oh, never mind -- we allowed the Independent Counsel law to expire after we realized how abusive it could be if the wrong person was appointed... Right, gotta keep that in mind.
I am not determining what is right or wrong, I am stating facts.

The dems are in the subordinate position. They cannot afford the anger of the American public. If this is nothing more than a gay escort writing for a website that no one has ever heard of, then the dems will let it die for the sake of their party. If more evidence that shows other people were hurt is found easily, then they will move forward with so much vim and vigor we can compare it to Watergate as some liberals have already tried on this bulletin board. Until then, like it or not, it is nothing to the voters of this nation.

KCWolfman
02-23-2005, 04:48 PM
I agree to a point.

The main difference, IMO, is the leverage that democrats have in congress and with the media. .

Congress, yes
Media, no

Less partisan, definitely not.

memyselfI
02-23-2005, 05:00 PM
http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000816326

Both Houses of Congress Get Involved in 'Gannon' Case


By Joe Strupp

Published: February 23, 2005 4:55 PM ET

NEW YORK Two leaders of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee want the federal prosecutor investigating the Valeria Plame case to subpoena a personal journal of controversial White House reporter James Guckert, following Editor & Publisher's disclosure yesterday that Guckert claims he kept the journal for the past two years.

"It is clear that a primary obstacle to the ... investigation is uncovering a precise chronology of when, and to whom, classified information was leaked," Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), one of those seeking the subpoena, told E&P. "The revelation by Editor & Publisher that Mr. Guckert kept contemporaneous records of his 'reporting' activities could well be a major step forward in developing such a chronology."

In addition, E&P has confirmed an online report that Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) is circulating a letter among his colleagues that asks President Bush to launch an investigation into how Guckert, who writes under the byline “Jeff Gannon,” gained access to White House press briefings over two years despite having no journalism background and using a false name.

Both letters are just the latest in a string of inquiries by congressional leaders, which have included a previous request by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) for documents related to Guckert's continued White House access.

In the latest effort, Conyers and Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) sent a joint letter today to Patrick Fitzgerald, the prosecutor investigating who leaked the identity of Plame, a CIA agent, to several reporters. Guckert, who worked for GOPUSA.com and Talon News before resigning two weeks ago, interviewed Plame's husband, Joseph Wilson, last year.

Guckert has been interviewed by FBI agents on the Plame case and given conflicting signals, over many months, concerning whether he saw a secret document or merely knew about it from other sources.

Conyers and Slaughter indicated in their letter that Guckert's journal might contain information of value to the Plame investigation if, in fact, Guckert had been given some sort of access to documents related to the Plame leaks.

"A person in the White House briefing room who had access to a memo revealing the operative’s name also kept a journal of his days covering the White House," the letter to Fitzgerald stated. "We bring this to your attention because we believe your office may need to subpoena the journal to further the work of the grand jury."

"It now appears that Mr. Guckert memorialized his experiences at the White House," the letter added, noting Guckert's comments to E&P that he might turn the journal into a book. "It would be unfortunate if Mr. Guckert published information that would be useful to your investigation, such as the identity of the person who gave him the memo, without your office having the benefit of its contents."

Durbin, meanwhile, is hoping to send Bush his letter demanding that the president investigate how Guckert was able to attend regular press briefings despite working for a Web site with obvious partisan support for the Republican Party, the senator's office confirmed to E&P, after the existence of the letter was first reported at the Raw Story online site.

"We have ... learned that the questions he posed at White House press briefings and the stories he filed for Talon News frequently mirrored Republican Party talking points, that Talon News is a news organization in name only and that it has apparently close connections to the Republican party," Durbin's letter states. "Given the unprecedented level of security in Washington since 9/11, it is troubling that that a non-journalist using a false name and working for a sham news organization could have gained regular access to the White House for such an extended period of time.

"We respectfully request that you order an immediate and thorough investigation into the Gannon/Guckert matter," Durbin declares in the letter. "How is it possible that a man using a fake name, with dubious journalism credentials, was able to clear the White House’s extensive security screening process and gain such close access to you and your staff for such an extended period of time? Have there been other, similar breaches of security and journalism standards? We appreciate your prompt attention to this important matter. We urge you to order a full inquiry so that the American people know the facts."

Michael Michigan
02-23-2005, 06:49 PM
Both Houses?

It should say liberal dems in "both houses."

There's just nothing there. You are going to need a known name to make this interesting.

With the idiotic "security BS" you are never going to get anyone other than the moonbats to give a shit.

Not only that, Gannon doesn't even register on the scoreboard.

Let's see:

The Freepers, Power Line and LGF takes down Dan Rather and CBS.

Ed Morrissey and Michelle Malkin take down Eason Jordan at CNN.

Left wing moonbats are still harping on Jeff Gannon at Talon News.

No matter how much you push it with Durbin and Conyers, it's still 2-0.

Set your goals higher and keep trying.

memyselfI
02-23-2005, 10:17 PM
http://www.bartcop.com/Gannon_daschle.jpg



http://www.bartcop.com/jeff-who.jpg

patteeu
02-24-2005, 12:16 AM
If you can keep this non-story smoldering for the next 2 years AND win a few elections, you might be able to get some kind of investigation going. Until then, the Durbin request is going nowhere. He didn't even say "pretty please."