I saw the interview, too. Or rather, I heard it, as I only had the audio on in the background. Mr. Gannon is not a very credible witness for himself.
From what I can see, it’s unclear whether or not he was a “plant”, but it sure looks like the WH at the very least took advantage of a very “fortuitous” situation rather than just telling the guy that press briefings are for serious journalists and not every Tom Dick And Harry blogger out there.
Ahhh, and here’s where my boredom and non-pissed-offitude enter the picture.
But first…
To everyone trying to get your digs in on me (Hentor, kaylasdad, et al) for defending the guy/WH/Bush/whomever, go fuck yourselves. Then go back and reread my post. I neither slammed him nor defended him. I don’t know enough enough it yet. As in, which aide is responsible, what “damage” it has done, etc. Side note: I notice that in 4 years of Bush bashing, you liberals bring up Clinton more often than in 8 years of Clinton bashing by conservatives. Why the self-hatred? 
Now to Dio, the reason for my boredom with this is probably best described in two ways.
First, for a long time you’ve been saying Fox News is a mere pawn of the White House and little more than an echo chamber for Karl Rove. Fair enough if you say the same of the DNC and NPR, PBS, CNN…
Because it’s asserted doesn’t make…ah hell, you knew that, right?
Second, I put it in context of other rants you’ve had against Bush/GOP/Satan’s Minions. (Charter member, I am! 
)
With all the talk of Bushco (Copyright Diogenes, 19??) being involved in world-wide conspiracies with other countries, business interests, raping women and children, felling magic trees, pissing in the French water supply, denying the vote to minorities and putting grandma out in the streets, I have to question your sincerety in this thread. (BTW, I hear he’s in cahoots with the puppy-kickers!) :eek:
Does this match the same high-standard criteria you place on things to be concerned with? Does it equal the things you think Bush is doing to destroy the world as we know it?
Or was His Evilness having a slow week and you needed something to bitch about? In that case, I hate to remind you this doesn’t go all the way to the Prez. Please come up with something more entertaining. Ranting about the media and it’s pit-worthy actions as an institute itself would kill far too many hamsters than even cloning could handle.
No argument there.
But unnamed White House correspondents have more credibility? They won’t even put their names on the record for this observation, and the observation itself isn’t “I know what I saw” but rather “It looked to me like it might be.”
Infinitely more. They are not politicians they are journalists.
Oh…and if they spiled their names they’d risk losing their passes. This White House is nothing if not vindictive.
Oh please. This is beyond disingenuous. (sp?)
Hey everyone! I’m a journalist! Don’t question my motives here at the ol’ SDMB! I have no agenda other than reporting what I see and hear. I swear I will not let any personal biases to enter in the facts I deliver here!
:rolleyes:
And if there’s one thing we can all agree on, it’s that journalists don’t have their own agendas, right?
… Errr, unless they’re to the right of center. Then they’re obviously working hand in hand with the White House.
Man you guys are brainwashed.
A lot of Bush apologists have damn near perfected the “let’s wait until we have all the facts” defense. When faced with an scandalous act by the administration, they save their outrage “until we have all the facts”–which either never happens, or happens long after everyone else has moved on to another scandal.
Some are still saying we should have all the facts before we conclude that something fishy might have happened regarding Valerie Plame, or that we should wait to hear the perfectly good explanation for the Abu Ghraib photos that is obviously forthcoming.
Since the guy must have been caught on camera a number of times, I would expect that someone, somewhere should be able to dredge up a picture of him that shows what kind of badge he’s wearing. Wouldn’t you think?
And go fuck yourself right back, you lying little shit. Your whole purpose of the yawn was to try to dismiss the matter as unimportant. Don’t try to backpedal or flip-flop now. Defend your implication that the matter is trivial or retract it. It seemed you knew enough about it at the time to be dismissive and flip about it. Now you want to flop about it?
(Part of me feels like I should shape the desired behavior by reinforcing any movement toward the ultimate preferred behavior, but here my baser instincts have gotten the better of me.)
Well, there’s more than one way to Skinner a cat.
Double fuck yourself, asshat. Show me where I defended this. I will retract nothing shitstain. There is nothing to retract.
If the guy didn’t belong there, he shouldn’t have been there. My boredom with this story is…oh wait. I already mentioned it!
If this is the level of action that gets you in such a tizzy, I’d say things are pretty damn good right now, considering the usual vitriol spewed by the likes of you.
One more time. Show me where I defended the guy or shut the fuck up.
Agendae are beside the point raised by Dio in his very next post; namely that they have an interest (arguably quite legitimate) in protecting their continued access to the WH briefing room.
Although I gotta admit that
bears an uncomfortable similarity to J. Danforth Quayle’s famed line: “I’m not part of the problem. I’m a Republican.” Please don’t anybody take that as an intent to equate any two events.
Here’s a nice story that seems to get the priorities in line:
“Are you kidding me? Memo to Howard and Sean. The man’s name was not really Jeff Gannon, he was lying. He was not a journalist, he was lying. He worked for a fake news organization, he was lying. Are you following me? A man with a fake name, fake credentials, and working for a fake news organization was granted free and unfettered access to the White House press pool, for the apparent sole purpose of bailing out the President or his representative. The story here is how the government planted a fake reporter in their pool to further their propaganda efforts against the people of this country. Let’s see if Sean or Howard covers that story or if they are just whores for this administration.”
Maybe I should have been more specific. They are not just journalists, they are White House Press Corps. That’s an elite gig and you don’t get there by being an unethical or dishonest reporter. You get there by being hard working, straight up, ethical and squared away. Thery are not just a bunch of liars who get together and conspire to make things up to embarass the president. The notion that multiple members of the corps would lie about seeing this guy’s pass is ridiculous.
White House Press Secretaries, on the other hand, are professional dissemblers, prevaricators and liars. They are ministers of propaganda, spin and denial. That’s what they do. That’s why they exist. Presidents could not function without them. They
Can anyone imagine a Jack Kennedy, a Dwight Eisenhower, or a Harry Truman having to have a stooge with a fake name to ask planted questions when the fire got to hot at press conferences?
He have sunk so low that some of you don’t even acknowledge that there ever was an up..
I think that Vanderbilt University keeps archives of WH press conferences. It would be interesting to see exactly how “Gannon” was used.
John Mace, your integrity is noted and appreciated.
But also keep in mind that JFK would have been raked over the coals for his extramarital activities and his well hidden health problems had the press then been like the press today. I’m not excusing th kind of activity this thread is discussing, but “Camelot” wasn’t exactly all it was cracked up to be.
Not sure what I did to warrent that, but I appreciate the sentiment. 
The white house site has the briefings and gaggles back to January 2001, here.
Given that whitehouse.gov has on several occasions been caught ‘revising’ their online record, it might be safer to find look for that vanderbilt record.