CNN still advancing GOP conspiracy theory that Dems orchestrated Foley scandal
SUMMARY: CNN continued to uncritically report the assertion that Democratic operatives knew "all along" of Rep. Mark Foley's alleged communications with former congressional pages. As Media Matters for America has noted, that notion is contradicted by other media reports.
On the October 5 editions of The Situation Room and CNN Newsroom, CNN continued to report uncritically the assertion that Democratic operatives knew "all along" of Rep. Mark Foley's (R-FL) alleged communications with former congressional pages and are "behind the spreading scandal," ignoring a report in The Hill newspaper that a House Republican aide provided Foley's alleged emails to the media and a statement by ABC News investigative reporter Brian Ross that the sources for his initial Foley report -- to the extent they had partisan affiliations -- were Republicans.
On The Situation Room, correspondent Mary Snow reported on comments by House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) during an October 5 press conference, as well as in an October 4 interview with the Chicago Tribune. During the press conference, Hastert asserted, "Our friends on the other side of the aisle really don't have a story to tell, and maybe they're resolving to -- another way to -- to another political tactic." In the Tribune interview, Hastert pushed the theory that Democrats "knew about this all along." (During an October 3 appearance on The Rush Limbaugh Show, Hastert also entertained the theory that Democrats were behind the Foley scandal, alleging that they "put this thing forward to try to block" the Republican agenda, as Media Matters for America noted.) Snow's report included statements from Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) executive director Melanie Sloan disputing Hastert's claims, but in doing so presented the issue as a partisan dispute. In fact, Ross himself has rebutted Hastert's allegation that Democrats were behind the leak of the alleged communications from Foley. An October 3 New York Times article quoted Ross responding to such theories by saying that disclosures from Republicans had led to the Foley scandal. An October 5 article in The Hill appears to substantiate Ross's account -- and undermine Hastert's assertion. The Hill reported that the source for ABC News' original report on Foley was a Republican congressional staffer.
CNN Newsroom also re-aired a report by congressional correspondent Joe Johns that uncritically reported a similar assertion by conservative activist Manuel Miranda, who echoed Hastert's claims. During the report, Johns asserted that Republicans, "especially conservatives," normally "like campaigns to be run on higher ground," then aired a clip of Miranda who said, "[I]f Democrats were holding back information of this sort, they could also be held liable under criminal law for endangering the welfare of minors." Johns failed to challenge Miranda's assertion or note reports contradicting the claim. As Media Matters noted, Johns's report also aired during the October 5 edition of CNN's American Morning.
From the October 5 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
BLITZER: Some Republicans, including Hastert, are going on the offensive, saying Democrats and the news media are behind the spreading scandal. Let's bring in CNN's Mary Snow. She's in New York. She's watching this part of the story. Mary?
SNOW: Well, Wolf, the House speaker is pointing fingers at Democrats over the scandal, suggesting the news was politically timed to coincide with November's elections. And those who are being blamed are now firing back. As pressure builds around House Speaker Dennis Hastert, the Republican leader is blaming political opponents for the widening scandal surrounding Mark Foley. He tells the Chicago Tribune, "The people who want to see this thing blow up are ABC News and a lot of Democratic operatives. People funded by George Soros." In the same interview, Hastert said political operatives aligned with former President Clinton are also behind the Foley story getting out. But at a press conference today, Hastert stuck to generalities.
HASTERT: Our friends on the other side of the aisle really don't have a story to tell, and maybe they're resolving to -- another way to -- to another political tactic.
SNOW: Democrats fired back. [Democratic National] Committee chairman Howard Dean told CNN, "This is a Republican lie. They are blaming everyone but themselves for what happened." Liberal political activist and billionaire George Soros told us, "The charge that I had something to do with the Foley scandal is laughable. Dennis Hastert cannot divert attention from his responsibility by trying to drag my name into the affair." But last year, Soros donated $100,000 to the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, the group that turned over a Mark Foley email exchange with a page to the FBI this past July. The advocacy group says it's independent.
SLOAN [video clip]: George Soros has no control over what we do on a day-to-day basis. I don't think George Soros even knew that we were involved in this matter until yesterday or the day before, when it started making big news.
SNOW: As for blaming Democrats, some observers say Hastert's strategy could backfire without substantial proof.
DAVID GERGEN (former presidential adviser) [video clip]: Absent hard evidence, the Republicans look like they're flailing around, and they're only going to make it worse. They're going to make it -- they're going to be seen as being even clumsier in responding to this.
SNOW: Now, in the Chicago Tribune, Hastert specifically mentions Dick Morris as one of Bill Clinton's advisers, who claims Democrats knew about the Foley allegations beforehand. Now, many point out that Morris has been highly critical of the Clintons. And in addition, Bill Clinton's spokesman had no response to Hastert's comments. Wolf?
BLITZER: That's to put it mildly -- "highly critical." They don't like this guy at all. Thanks very much for that. Mary Snow reporting.
From the 3 p.m. ET hour of the October 5 edition of CNN Newsroom:
JOHNS: For Republicans -- especially conservatives, who like campaigns to be run on higher ground -- this kind of scandal is especially hard.
MIRANDA [video clip]: There's no doubt that Republicans are associated with moral values and legislation that reflects moral values. So it's perfectly understandable that supporters of Republicans would hold them to a high standard.
JOHNS: But the counterattack that they continue to search for is something that shows Democrats planned all this as an October surprise.
MIRANDA [video clip]: Sure, you know, there's another side to this, of course, which is that this seems to be a fairly well-orchestrated war room tactic -- to go after a congressman like this, just short of an election. And if Democrats were holding back information of this sort, they could also be held liable under criminal law for endangering the welfare of minors.
Deep in the bowels of the White House, Turd Blossom shuffles a stack of paper, selects one containing a list of numbered items, picks up his pen, and triumphantly strikes through:
"5 - MSM repeat talking points re: Soros, Clinton, ABC, etc."
He smiles, flips open his cell phone and hits the speed dial number for Ailes@Office.
...my hope is, in 10 years, we'll look back on this with nostalgia... as the time when people finally woke up.
If you watch the opening of the Neil Cavuto/George Soros interview that's how Neil leads into repeating the claim that Soros is behind the scandal.
[link to www.eyesonfox.org]
Ann Coulter has been mouth off on Fox New blaming the Democrats as well:
[link to www.eyesonfox.org]
All of this partisan blather is accepted at face value by the right -wingers over at Fox News.
would have Bruce Springstine on his show for a less polite response to bullying, slandering, interrupting, cutting off the answers, and so on that was demonstrated by Soros. Even when he defended himself he actually complimented his tormentor by saying he respected him...which he said to contrast his low esteem for the "disreputable" label he had for O'Reily.
Thanks for the link...but not for the one to bacteriaculturecouldter. I couldn't get past the second minute before I thought my breakfast was coming back up.
I'm not going jump on CNN for these reports. Yeah, they could have mentioned the sources that actually refute these claims, but otherwise, I thought it worked well as news.
You're confusing "fair" with "balanced". When a news report about a purely Republican scandal, perpetrated and covered up by only Republicans, can leave viewers with the impression, "I guess both sides have a point," it may be balanced, but it is not fair.
What's remarkable about this event is that it lays bare the willingness of a certain political party to conceal malfeasance and protect the guilty from justice in order to sustain political power. The Democrats don't enter into it. By lending credence to conservatives' groundless accusations, the media are doing exactly what these talking points were designed to achieve: bringing Democrats into the story, thereby totally obscuring its true significance.
Shouldn't a journalist have an obligation to investigate accusations to see if they pass even a minimal requirement of factual basis before presenting them to millions of viewers as an equally valid point of view? If they do not do this, aren't they giving an unfair advantage to the most dishonest argument? And do they not, then, send a signal to politicians that they can score political points by hurling false accusations and unfounded theories without fear of accountability?
I know it seems petty to harp on this little segment, but these kind seem to me to be the most insidious. These are the ones that get deep into people's subconscious, because they sound so apolitical. They sneak by the average viewer's "partisanship filter," and are internalized, becoming part of the viewer's understanding of the American political landscape. By itself, it seems harmless enough. But hundreds of these little "balanced" pieces, over the course of the year, paint a enduring storyine that, incidentally, has no basis in fact: that Democrats are hopelessly partisan thugs, experts at underhanded tactics, who oppose Republicans not because they have any ethical objections to torture or child molestation, but just because they are partisan thugs who are experts at underhanded tactics.
Watch that video again. Now, is it not possible that even a Democrat would walk away from that segment, thinking, "How shamelessly both parties have acted in this whole affair." That is exactly how the Republicans want to play this thing, and CNN gave them a little help here.
They did that with the Abramoff scandal. Even though no Democrats took any money from a convicted felon, they tried to indict the Democrats anyway for taking money from non-guilty third parties. All politicians take money from those sources. Only Republicans took money from Abramoff.
They are trying the same thing with this. Saying that Democrats knew and did nothing too, when it's clear that this is a wholly Republican issue with their fingerprints all over it!
I agree its these little digs that become conventional wisdom that sometimes do the worst damage. I hear liberals repeat them back as if were unvarnished truth as writ on the stone tablets.
Let’s assume that the Democrats did in fact orchestrate this (like the Democrats could ever be this organized), what’s so wrong with outing a pedophile and those who tried to conceal it?
The Rove Play Book doesn't try to convert Democrats. Instead, it's all about energizing the base. And "The Base" in this case loves to hate Democrats. So having them as an enemy of any sort will get them to the polls.
They are known for the hate thing. Its a religious phenom that relates to the piety and the hysterical labelling of anything that conflicts with their agenda as \EVIL/ in their little cult known simply as their 'base'.! Sound familiar? The Publicans openly pander to this weakness, as we have seen, agin and agin...
If Democrats knew all along, then they also protected a pedophile for 3-4 years for political purposes: so that around the same time of mid-term elections, the information would be leaked to voters so they would be discouraged from voting Republican.
I don't feel that Democrats knew and kept the information for 4 years, but I don't think it's unlikely that it was an opponent of the Republican Party that leaked the information in the first place. (Do we know who did originally leak the information, for that matter?)
Keep in mind that we DO know that the Republicans knew all along and kept the information for 4 years.
Did you even read the article?
It was a Republican.
A Republican did it (Foley).
A Republican reported it (unnamed lifelong Republican aide).
A Republican group of Congressmen tried to ignore it, and gave it less attention than it deserved (Hastert, et al).
The Republicans are trying to mislead people.
The Democrats are correctly exposing the misinformation, the lack of attention it got, the lack of bipartisan sharing of info, etc.
"Democratic operatives knew "all along" of Rep. Mark Foley's (R-FL) alleged communications with former congressional pages"
Claiming that the "Democrats" held on to this until now requires one to accept that they would not have used it during the *slightly* more important 2004 Presidential election cycle and not during the off season election.
Even presenting this theory requires the tacit acceptance of the fact that the REPUBLICANS also knew for years yet did NOTHING to report it at all.
So which would be worse, reporting late or reporting not at all?
There is a congressional election every two years. EVERY representative goes up for reelection every two years. WHY skip a close Presidential election year to aim at a midterm? It makes no sense whatsoever
I guess Johns and Miranda have never heard of Karl Rove.
[i]"For Republicans--especially conservatives, who like campaigns to be run on higher ground--this kind of scandal is especially hard."
I guess Johns and Miranda have never heard of Karl Rove.[/i]
Or the smearboat "vets," or Floyd Brown, or Lee Atwater, or David Bossie, or Richard Mellon Scaife, or Ed Gillespie, or Ann Coulter, or Rich Bond, or more right-wing columnists, politicians, commentators, and operatives than can be easily named. Conservative Republicans in the U.S. have, for nearly 20 years, depended almost entirely upon the smear, the caricature, the ginned-up scandal, the low road to win and maintain power. They've created an entire subculture devoted to this.
You make an important point by noting this. Johns comment, there, is even more outrageous than the conspiracy nonsense with which Media Matters rightly took issue.
That's what makes all of this even more objectionable.
to describe the media's reporting of this issue. To continue to lend credence to the notion that Democrats were behind the leaking of the inappropriate emails by not challenging the assertion clearly demonstrates conservative bias.
Let us put to rest who was ultimately responsible for the release of the Foley emails:
From"The Hill" newspaper:
Longtime Republican was source of e-mails
By Alexander Bolton
The source who in July gave news media Rep. Mark Foley’s (R-Fla.) suspect e-mails to a former House page says the documents came to him from a House GOP aide.
That aide has been a registered Republican since becoming eligible to vote, said the source, who showed The Hill public records supporting his claim.
The same source, who acted as an intermediary between the aide-turned-whistleblower and several news outlets, says the person who shared the documents is no longer employed in the House.
But the whistleblower was a paid GOP staffer when the documents were first given to the media.
The source bolstered the claim by sharing un-redacted e-mails in which the former page first alerted his congressional sponsor’s office of Foley’s attentions. The copies of these e-mails, now available to the public, have the names of senders and recipients blotted out.
These revelations mean that Republicans who are calling for probes to discover what Democratic leaders and staff knew about Foley’s improper exchanges with under-age pages will likely be unable to show that the opposition party orchestrated the scandal now roiling the GOP just a month away from the midterm elections.
And if Democrats were holding back information of this sort, they could also be held liable under criminal law for endangering the welfare of minors.
Because, you know... the Republicans were completely in the dark.
As a small hint, it might be suggested that someone timing something for the election would leak it close to Election Day!! You know, like October 29 or so.
Sheesh.
Unless that's too obvious, and you want to avoid the accusation of timing something for the elections. But that isn't working either...
... when she suggested there was a "vast rightwing conspiracy."
Oh, my, my, my! The Rightwingers seem to see a VAST LEFTWING CONSPIRACY under every bush (pun intended). Why is it that they feel THEIR claiming of a political conspiracy will gain traction, when they are so on-record as claiming such a conspiracy is laughably idiotic, outlandish, and foolish?
I know. It's that danged DOUBLE STANDARD again. Suppose anyone is fooled ... THIS time?
This can't be a left wing conspiracy. Why? Because a republican broke it. That's the simple fact right there. Hastert might not even get re-elected in his race from what I've heard. The race is pretty darn close, and this just might tip him over the edge, and out of a job. This is why he's not quitting. Which is funny, he took responsibility for this, but then added a disclaimer at the end trying to blame democrats. He must be listening to Rush and Savage too much these days.
As for the story, it did seem pretty fair to me on this one. They did spend a lot of time talking about how Hastert is going to need some pretty big piles of evidence to show that democrats were behind this, and that it will probably backfire on him, and things like that. They also had the refutation from Soros, and the admonishment from Dean in there. Not too bad of a story at all.
Snow says: But last year, Soros donated $100,000 to the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, the group that turned over a Mark Foley email exchange with a page to the FBI this past July. The advocacy group says it's independent.
So CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics) reports ethical wrong doing to the FBI well before the elections, which is what they are there for.
How can anyone turn that into something that was improper?
That's what Karl Rove gets paid to do. That's what Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, et al are paid to do.
It's also known as "lying".
IF the dems knew 3 years ago, wouldn't it have made sense to use it for the PRESIDENTIAL elections???????????????? DUH! Wake up America and see the sleeze where it is. (BOTH PARTIES...but who like to claim to be the "moral" choice......the perverts Vouyers and pedophiles...the Gross ol' Perverts) Spin won't cost a thing and you can fool the repigs all the time! they ARE that stupid! Bush supporters choose to keep faith in their leader than face the truth either about their president or the world as it is. Jim Lobe
Karl Rove may be gambling here. Could it be that this scandal actually will help Republicans in November? The signs are already clear that the Republican base will not be swayed by this; they may, in fact, be energized by it, seeing their heroes unfairly smeared by those Godless liberals!
Notice what is not being covered very much right now? Iraq, Bob Woodward's book, and the law recently passed which gives Bush the option to ignore Habeus Corpus. Woodward's book should be a bombshell, documenting the absolute dishonesty of the Bush admiinistration. Who's talking about it now?
I won't go so far as to say that Rove orchestrated the Foley scandal, but he wouldn't hesitate to use it to Republican advantage. If the Democrats are too agressive on this matter, it could very well backfire.
I see this over and over again. A claim that some event coincidentally coincided with some damaging news about Republicans.
This just in: damaging news about Republicans breaks every single week. If the Foley scandal broke last month, the timing would have been suspicious. And two months ago, and one year ago, and two months from now, and six months from now...
is belittling the reverse smear plan. He did give homophobic virulent Buchanan an opportunity to vent against Hillary for Marching in a Gay Pride parade as if it were relevant to this topic but Joe and the other two panelists were trying not to laugh at him in derision.
MM is doing the right thing in setting out the context of CNN and others serving as an advertising board for hit man Rove's message that no matter what the Republicans have done wrong anywhere, it is the fault of Clinton and Soros and liberal ABC news. Why should they pay for false swiftboat style advertising when they have CNN to spread the lies instantaneously?
I wish everyone had seen Olberman's usually sharp scalpal at work on this topic and then his special commentary last night on this and lying Joe Bush which may be his best yet. See it at [link to www.msnbc.msn.com]
oops
It blew me away. I wish some of our Democratic politicians had balls that big. If Kerry had said that to Bush during one of the debates...who knows?
That while I am glad to take advantage of anything that will get the current administration and Congressional leadership out of office, including a salacious sex scandal (the Republican last ditch tool of choice when Ken Starr was about to quit and was ridiculed into finally exploring the sex angle that almost brought down the white house)(almost poetic justice, I suppose), I lament the fact that this is what it takes while a majority of the public turns a blind eye to the dismantling of our Constitution. See an excellent piece on this at [link to www.counterpunch.org]
this is pathetic, desperate, paranoid, and a whole bunch of other things…
are Dems behind the timing of this scandal? no… but even if they were, it doesn’t excuse Foley’s actions and those of the people who protected or ignored him… that’s the important issue… nice way to change the subject, Republicants!!! Rove has earned his pay this month!
I don't have a problem with them reporting what the republicans are saying no matter how rediculous, and I thought they did a good job providing balance with Howard Dean, Soros and David Gergen. But what is unforgivable is how they can leave out a report that a House Republican aide provided Foley's alleged emails to the media and a statement by Brian Ross that the sources for his initial Foley report were Republicans. It's as if they want to perpetuate the story by leaving out information that would essentially kill it. I'm not sure if it's republican bias or just plain dollar driven as a good conspiracy will sell. Either way it's outrageous and unforgivable.
Why is the Media allowing Republicans to blame Dems? WHO CARES where the leak came from. Turn the statement around on these Republicans. By blaming the Dems the Republicans are saying they would have hushed up on their Pedophile Congressman and allowed the people of Florida to cast a vote for a Pedophile...... WHERE is Chris Hanson?
The age of sexual consent in Washington D.C. and many states is 16.
Pedophilia or paedophilia (see spelling differences) is the paraphilia of being sexually attracted primarily or exclusively to prepubescent or peripubescent children. Persons with this attraction are called pedophiles.
In contrast to the generally accepted medical definition, the term pedophile is also used colloquially to denote significantly older adults who are sexually attracted to adolescents below the local age of consent,[1] as well as those who have sexually abused a child. [link to en.wikipedia.org]
Came from Florida and Floridas age of consent is 18. However I agree, this is not pedophelia. He is not prepubescent. It is inappropriate and creepy but not pedophelia
Michael Isachov pointed out last night on the Rachel Maddow Show that the republicans are really falling victim to their own procedures here. For the last years, they have turned the house into a one party system, completely blocking the democrats out of the entire process.
However, in this case, that has turned around to bite them. Instead of treating this case as an institutional problem, and involving both sides of the aisle (for example, including the democratic representative on the page oversight committee), they again handled it totally on their own, keeping the democrats out of the process. Given that, however, now they can't blame the democrats for any of it.
Had the chair of the page oversight committee actually informed the entire committee, and the whole thing gone down as it did, then there would be no basis for holding only the republicans responsible. But hey, the Republicans are the ones who have designed it to give themselves full control. That means they bear the full responsibility.
you nailed it exactly, my friend... very insightful comments...