auburngrad82
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-10-05 07:58 AM
Original message |
What laws were broken by Jeff Gannon? |
|
He obviously used falsified information to gain access to the WH and Bush. Can he be prosecuted for using a fake name to gain access? Also, how in Hell did he get through security checks? If they can prosecute him then maybe he'll start giving up some juicy information. Like who leaked the Plame memo to him. And who he had to bang to get the gig in the White House.
|
Junkdrawer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-10-05 08:00 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Military prostitution may be problematic - at least it used to be... |
|
under Bushco, who knows? :shrug:
|
mzmolly
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-10-05 08:01 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Other that that, I'd have to run a backround check and get back to ya.
|
LTR
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-10-05 08:04 AM
Response to Original message |
3. There are some pretty serious ethics violations on both sides |
|
Edited on Thu Feb-10-05 08:07 AM by Fighting Irish
Gannon (or whatever the guy's name is) is obviously a GOP shill. And it's obvious the Bush White House was using him and others for propaganda purposes. This sounds straight out of the Soviet Bloc.
As far as the fake name, I'm sure the White House knew about that. Many in broadcasting use on-air names. I used to work in radio and know that this is very commonplace, even on television.
|
DoYouEverWonder
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-10-05 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. Geraldo is probably the most famous fake |
|
his real name is Gerald Rivers.
|
The Backlash Cometh
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-10-05 08:17 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
6. There's another reason why the GOP would cohort with gay prostitutes. |
|
Because they can use them to incriminate liberals by photographing them in compromising positions.
|
bryant69
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-10-05 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
I can see why they might think that--but in reality i'm not sure this tactic would work all that well. Bryant Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
|
The Backlash Cometh
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-10-05 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #11 |
12. It would if the Dem was married and having a fling on the side. |
|
Or, more to the point, if he was lured into a fling.
|
hector459
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-10-05 08:06 AM
Response to Original message |
4. All this means is that the WH was complicit in this deception! |
|
It could never have taken place otherwise. If it doesn't reach Bush it has to go all the way to Rove who controls everything about the WH including the press corp.
|
hootinholler
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-10-05 08:42 AM
Response to Original message |
|
FOIA the logs from the pass issue desk. Verify what name the passes are issued to.
If he hasn't changed his name legally to Jeff Gannon, and was issued passes under that name, then there are false ID charges at a minimum.
Possibly perjury charges about the documentation that got the name on the list in the first place. I've often had to give SSN and other info days in advance to obtain access to govt. offices for interviews, etc. When arriving, I had to present ID in that name that was corroborating to the original info.
I understand that his pass was issued daily. Can anyone confirm this? If so that's one count per day since June 2003, which would translate conservatively to 300+ counts of perjury or falsifying Federal Documents. Both are serious offenses.
There will be some poor schmucks in the SS that will take the fall for issuing the passes.
-Hoot
|
leesa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-10-05 08:48 AM
Response to Original message |
8. How did he get through security checks? They wanted him there. |
|
How did the alleged hijackers get the job done on 9-11?
|
Walt Starr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-10-05 08:50 AM
Response to Original message |
9. If he was paid by the White House he'd be covered under the law |
|
against outting CIA agents and would be a unindicted co-conspirator.
|
Jack Rabbit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-10-05 09:45 AM
Response to Original message |
10. As far as his being a journalist is concerned, none worth pursuing |
|
His private life seems to be another matter, but that's of no interest to the overall issue of the Bushies' undermining of American democracy. In this case, we are speaking of the Bushies' assault on the institution of a free and independent press.
As for the issue of who is a journalist, I'm not sure I want to go there and certainly not with an administration that would, if it could, oblige journalists to apply the same reality-based objectivity to Mr. Bush that the Soviet press once applied to Leonid Brezhnev. The Bushies may want to define a journalist as someone who assists them in getting their message out -- a task which includes, as far as they are concerned, setting them in the best possible light and even bending facts. The White House press corps as it is often is accused of practicing stenography rather than journalism; Mr. Gannon took that a step further. As far as the White House press office was concerned, Gannon did a marvelous job of putting his by-line on their press releases.
The Bushies knew who Gannon was and used him. He was a plant. The questions he asked were not designed to get any story out to the public about details of administrations initiatives and policies, but simply to give Mr. Bush or Mr. McClellan the opportunity to vent against the opposition. That was a waste of the public's time. The public got no useful information other than the administration disagrees with the opposition, but that really isn't news. Why Mr. Bush and members of his staff believe, for instance, that the economy is in good shape and why Senator Reid and Senator Clinton disagree is. That is what the public needs to know, regardless of who is right and who is wrong.
|
LynnTheDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-10-05 10:03 AM
Response to Original message |
13. illegal to use pseudonyms for WH press creds; married female reporters |
|
who use their maiden name professionally, are given credentials with their married name and aren't allowed to be credentialed under their maiden names.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon Apr 29th 2024, 03:42 PM
Response to Original message |