King Coal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-11-05 12:20 PM
Original message |
What in the hotel bill is he talking about. Can someone |
|
explain this to me? http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050111/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_commentatorMcClellan said he knew of no other contract in the administration like the one Williams had. He also hinted that Williams shared the blame. "There are also questions about whether or not this commentator should have been disclosing the information publicly," McClellan said.
|
wtmusic
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-11-05 12:22 PM
Response to Original message |
1. There are questions about whether he should have spilled the beans |
|
what is this, the frickin' mob?
|
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-11-05 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. well that is water under the bridge now-the beans are spilled!! |
|
from your link---- White House: Williams Case Was Isolated
Mon Jan 10, 8:34 PM ET Add to My Yahoo! White House - AP
WASHINGTON - The White House said Monday that the case of the Education Department paying a conservative commentator to plug its policies was an isolated incident, not a practice widely used by the Bush administration.
With the Education Department still defending its $240,000 contract with syndicated columnist and TV personality Armstrong Williams, White House spokesman Scott McClellan was cautious in choosing his comments.
"Questions have been raised about that arrangement, it ought to be looked into, and there are ways to look into matters of that nature," McClellan said. The spokesman did not say precisely who should look into it, and stopped short of backing an inquiry by the department's inspector-general, as some lawmakers have sought. He noted that department lawyers have taken up the matter.
The Government Accountability Office is already investigating whether the department illegally promoted the No Child Left Behind law with a video that looks like a news story but fails to make clear the reporter involved was paid by the government. The GAO is also reviewing why the department paid for rankings of how reporters are covering the law.......
|
louis-t
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-11-05 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
8. Yes, and torture in Abu Ghraib was just a few bad apples.. |
|
This action by the * admin was ILLEGAL! I will say it until I'm blue in the face, hoarse in the throat, and maybe a few Americans wake up. GAO investigations? Don't hold your breath.
|
BlueEyedSon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-11-05 12:26 PM
Response to Original message |
2. I guess it's only "illegal" if you "get caught"... nt |
Career Prole
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-11-05 12:30 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Williams scoffed at the omerta-stration? |
|
Tonight he sleeps with the fishes.
|
liberal N proud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-11-05 12:31 PM
Response to Original message |
5. The key here is McClellan never knew |
|
McClellan said HE knew of no other contract...
|
onenote
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-11-05 12:34 PM
Response to Original message |
|
probably, was to suggest that Armstrong being paid might've been all right if he had disclosed the payments -- an attempt to shift the blame away from the administration and onto Armstrong. Of course, this is pure BS -- its not just the failure to disclose that is the problem, its the use of taxpayer money to pay journalists to promote an administrative policy.
onenote
|
wtmusic
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-11-05 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. then let's have a look at the agreement |
|
and see whether that was required of him.
Fat chance.
|
proud patriot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-11-05 01:06 PM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 05th 2024, 06:17 AM
Response to Original message |