Tuesday, February 08, 2005
Holy crap
by John in DC - 2/8/2005 07:03:51 PM
Update: He just resigned.
America blogspotLet me say again, holy crap.
The blogosphere has dug up some really really really creepy stuff about that pseudo-reporter with the pseudonym who the White House lets ask all the softball questions about their briefings. His pseudonym is Jeff Gannon, and well, the folks at DailyKos, and Eschaton, have been doing a little digging around on him.
It's a long and sordid tale, but let me give it to you in a nuts . Mr. Gannon's home page is JeffGannon.com. Well, JeffGannon.com is owned by a person and company that owns the following Web addresses as well:
Hotmilitarystud.com
Militaryescorts.com
Militaryescortsm4m.com
And for those of you who are really straight or really clueless, "m4m" is a gay online term for men who are looking to have sex with other men, and "escort" means pros ute. And being a military escort is also against the Uniform Code of Military Justice in at least two different ways, if not more.
Now, I'm not one to judge how folks like to get their jollies (assuming no children are involved and it's consensual), but then again, I don't suck up to the family values agenda like Mr. Gannon does. I've been through Gannon's archives, and it's a horrendous ac ulation of religious right suck-up pieces on gay issues. Some are concerned that perhaps it's not fair to hit him with the gay card, if he is gay. Well, take a look at some of the stories from Gannon's Talon News Service: here, here, here Talon is promoting "ex-gays," defending Bush on gay marriage, and Gannon himself writing a story defending Santorum on his man-dog-sex commments about gays. There are lots more, you get the picture.
Oh, and speaking of pictures, they found photos too.
The big issue here is whether the White House has been knowingly opening its doors to a pseudonymous male hustler (or pimp) so he'll pose softball questions to the president. If that's the case here - and in all fairness, we still need to hear from Gannon - it's not just creepy, it's outrageous and an incredible violation of the country's trust, and just as importantly, White House security. Do these people do a background check on anyone?
Just go and read it all for yourself.
Family values at work, for the GOP.
JeffGannon.comJeff Gannon
A Voice of the New Media
The voice goes silent.
Because of the attention being paid to me I find it is no longer possible to effectively be a reporter for Talon News. In consideration of the welfare of me and my family I have decided to return to private life.
Thank you to all those who supported me.
Now he starts caring about his family.
There is no chance in the world that two people have the same name.
2/9/2005
Congresswoman calls for investigation into White House ‘reporter’ linked to escort sites
Filed under: General— site admin @ 2:25 pm Email This
Rep. Slaughter Calls on President Bush to Explain Emerging White House Briefing Room Scandal
Washington, DC - Rep. Louise M. Slaughter (NY-28), long time champion of media reform and Ranking Member of the House Committee on Rules, sent a letter to President George W. Bush today asking him to explain how discredited “reporter” Jeff Gannon was credentialed as a member of the legitimate media by the White House.
The letter follows
Raw Story.comWednesday, February 9, 2005
The Honorable George W. Bush
President of the United States
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
In light of the mounting evidence that your Administration has, on several occasions, paid members of the media to advocate in favor of Administration policies, I feel compelled to ask you to address a matter brought to my attention by the Niagara Falls Reporter (article attached), a local newspaper in my district, regarding James “JD” Guckert (AKA Jeff Gannon) of Talon News.
According to several credible reports, “Mr. Gannon” has been repeatedly credentialed as a member of the White House press corps by your office and has been regularly called upon in White House press briefings by your Press Secretary Scott McClellan, despite the fact evidence shows that “Mr. Gannon” is a Republican political operative, uses a false name, has phony or questionable journalistic credentials, is known for plagiarizing much of the “news” he reports, and according to several web reports, may have ties to the promotion of the pros ution of military personnel.
Several weeks ago when it was revealed that radio/TV host Armstrong Williams had received payment from your Administration in exchange for his vocal support of the ‘No Child Left Behind’ initiative, I was stunned. For years now I have been leading the fight in Congress for fairness and accountability in the media; the Williams revelation only underscored the need for a media that has integrity, is balanced and expresses the local interests and concerns of its consumers.
Since that time, two more members of the media have been found to have received money from your Administration in exchange for their vocal, yet undisclosed support of Administration policies.
And just this morning we have learned that “Mr. Gannon” has resigned his post at the, so called, Talon News amid growing concerns over his controversial background and falsified qualifications. In fact, it appears that “Mr. Gannon’s” presence in the White House press corps was merely as a tool of propaganda for your Administration.
Mr. President, I am sure we both agree the White House press corps is an honored ins ution in America that should be beyond the scope of partisan meddling, and that a free and independent media is the cornerstone of our success as a democracy. Likewise, I am sure we can both agree the American people have the right to expect that journalists who question their President everyday are experienced, independent, and perhaps most importantly, unbiased in their approach.
I was already concerned about what appears to be an organized campaign to mask partisan propaganda as legitimate news by your Administration. That we have now learned this same type of deception is occurring inside the White House briefing room itself is even more disturbing.
That is why I am asking you to please explain to the Congress and to the American people how and why the individual known as “Mr. Gannon” was repeatedly cleared by your staff to join the legitimate White House press corps?
Mr. President, your Administration has driven the so-called “values” debate in this country. But the most important value for those of us in public service should always be honesty and integrity, particularly when considering the manner in which we conduct our affairs of state.
I would appreciate your prompt response on this matter.
Respectfully,
/LMS
Louise M. Slaughter
Ranking Member, House Committee on Rules
Yet more inside the beltway fodder for partisan nutjobs.
So a guy that was given a press pass to the White house last year, has supposed connections to a company that holds the domains for a few adult sites?
Damn! Now where's Dubyah going to get his little hustlers at?
User, it was a bit more than "some guy with a press pass". This guy was obviously being fed questions to ask by the administration, softball questions, I might add. They don't just pick random journalists to call on. They have handpicked folks that they call on regularly. He was one of them. That implies some sort of relationship with the WH press corps/press secretary.
As for holding domains for adults sites, I tend not to care about those things...right up to the point where there is a relationship with an administration that rode in on the coattails of "family values" and regularly beats others over the head with said values. Seems a touch hypocritical, dontcha think?
And that makes them W's sites. How can you not see that?
Uh, so everyone that has a White house press pass has a inproper relationship with the administration?Damn! Now where's Dubyah going to get his little hustlers at?
User, it was a bit more than "some guy with a press pass". This guy was obviously being fed questions to ask by the administration, softball questions, I might add. They don't just pick random journalists to call on. They have handpicked folks that they call on regularly. He was one of them. That implies some sort of relationship with the WH press corps/press secretary.
As for holding domains for adults sites, I tend not to care about those things...right up to the point where there is a relationship with an administration that rode in on the coattails of "family values" and regularly beats others over the head with said values. Seems a touch hypocritical, dontcha think?
Uh, no. Everyone doesn't get called on. He obviously has/had some sort of relationship with the WH, proper, improper, whatever. The sticking point is that he doesn't conform to their "family values" nauseating , and it makes them look hypocritical for dealing with this guy.
Maybe they don't know every detail about him.
Another crisis averted.
It must be hard to pretend to give a about stuff like this. I applaud the effort though.
One would think that after 9-11, some care and detail would be taken as to who gets into the White House. Pretty weak excuse.Maybe they don't know every detail about him.
So are you saying he broke the law and was a danger or posed a security risk?
I'm not saying anything of the sort. Spurminator is saying that the Whitehouse apparently doesn't research who comes in the damn door, and doesn't care.
You know, I really think y'all are going way too far overboard and making some huge reaches on this, but what's new for the resident liberals.
And now, for a little social commentary. I think it's hilariously hypocritical that those of you on the left, the side that screams for equity, same sex marriages, etc., are trying to smear W.'s name because him and his staff allowed what could possibly be a gay reporter to attend WH briefings.
I mean , if they denied this guy and someone got ahold of the fact Bush denied a person with an (apparent) background like this, you'd be all over his ass for not seperating church from state and in effect "bashing" gays and alternative lifestyles.
But I guess all's fair and hypocritical in the eyes of the left.
Hey maybe the same thing happened to the president from 1993-2001 and before that.
Newt Gingrich and his backbenchers started all of this in the 80s and carried it well into the 90s. Don't cry now because the mud is being slung towards your side of the aisle.You know, I really think y'all are going way too far overboard and making some huge reaches on this, but what's new for the resident liberals.
His orientation, whether true or not, is only a point because not only was he allowed into the briefings, he was some sort of insider, being fed questions by an administration that can only gently be described as phobic. No one cares, Aggie, but to us it's funny. You might have to look that one up.And now, for a little social commentary. I think it's hilariously hypocritical that those of you on the left, the side that screams for equity, same sex marriages, etc., are trying to smear W.'s name because him and his staff allowed what could possibly be a gay reporter to attend WH briefings.
Wow gee ex, tell me more. I guess it'd be funnier if I wasn't living in reality, and not some fictional place where a traitor who turned his back on his country was my party's best political hope, not to mention where flakes like Dan represent the mainstream in my party.
I know that you like to think that everyone who thinks Bush is a tool is a Democrat, but I am a Libertarian. Let me clear that up, too. I actually VOTED Libertarian this time. You Republicans like to say that the Democrats have strayed from their roots, but I can hardly recognize the Drunken Democrat spending, life meddling fools wearing the elephant pins these days.I guess it'd be funnier if I wasn't living in reality, and not some fictional place where a traitor who turned his back on his country was my party's best political hope
If War Churchill can be spun as a intellectual, elitest liberal by right-wing pundits then Jeff Gannon is clearly a backward, hypocritical traditionalist. Guilty by thought association.And that makes them W's sites. How can you not see that?
This from the guy who practically led the rally cry to publicly casterate Dan Rather for over-zealous reporting.You know, I really think y'all are going way too far overboard and making some huge reaches on this, but what's new for the resident liberals
The hypocrisy is over-whelming.
So there is proof that he works for the Bush administration?
So if he is not a criminal or a security risk why should he not be allowed to be at the press conferences?
Hey maybe most people don't give a damn about trivial like the subject of this thread.
Depending upon the team either something is insignificant or not. Either its perjury in a sexual harassment lawsuit or its 'just about a blowjob.'
I'd say the 'blowjob' standard applies in this case, both as analogy and probably, well, literally.
It's no surprise why so many Americans choose not to participate in the political process.
I'm sure he had his background thoroughly checked. And I'm sure whoever did the background check (and it probably wasn't George or Laura Bush) probably didn't deem it necessary to raise the Terror Alert level.One would think that after 9-11, some care and detail would be taken as to who gets into the White House. Pretty weak excuse.
Fake journalist with fake name from fake news service gets to question a fake president
and now hes expendable and resigns from his fake job
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
