Contradicting CNN's own reporting, Dobbs asserted that Hastert's plane could reach California
SUMMARY: Lou Dobbs asserted that the military aircraft used by former Speaker Dennis Hastert would be able to fly current Speaker Nancy Pelosi "coast to coast." But the day before, CNN host Wolf Blitzer reported that it is possible that Hastert's plane could "fly coast to coast without refueling, but that would also depend on multiple factors, including winds, payloads, and reserve fuel requirements."
On the February 8 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, host Lou Dobbs asserted that "despite a lot of journalistic reports to the contrary," the military aircraft used by former House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) between Washington, D.C., and his district in Illinois would be able to fly House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) "coast to coast for just about $15,000 less than the proposed aircraft for the speaker." The "proposed aircraft" is presumably the larger C-32 (as CNN correspondent Kitty Pilgrim suggested earlier in the program) or C-40, which Republicans alleged on the House floor that Pelosi had requested (calling them by the names of their civilian counterparts, the Boeing 757 and 737). However, CNN itself had reported that Hastert's plane could not consistently reach Pelosi's district. On the February 7 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, host Wolf Blitzer said that "each of those planes [including Hastert's] could fly coast to coast without refueling, but that would also depend on multiple factors, including winds, payloads, and reserve fuel requirements."
Additionally, ABC News senior national correspondent Jake Tapper wrote that "Capt. Herb McConnell, the spokesman for the 89th Airlift wing at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland, said the C-20 [Hastert's plane] is sometimes 'able to make a coast-to-coast flight at times during the year, but not when there are strong headwinds such as during the winter.' " The Los Angeles Times similarly reported that planes like Hastert's "require ideal weather conditions to make the cross-country trip without stopping to refuel." As Media Matters for America noted, Dobbs asserted on February 5 that Hastert's plane could fly Pelosi to her district, despite contrary reporting in Roll Call. Dobb's claim was also contradicted by a report in the February 6 Washington Post.
Earlier on Lou Dobbs Tonight, Pilgrim reported that Pelosi was "in denial" about the story, telling viewers that Pelosi was "so in denial, she even denied it was a plane." In the next video clip, Pelosi was shown making the distinction between having a plane specifically reserved at all times and having access to the use of a plane when necessary.
Pilgrim also reported that "the debate on the House floor raised voices and passions," and then aired three consecutive video clips of Republican congressmen without including an opposing Democratic voice. The only Democrat shown in a video clip during the segment was Pelosi herself, whom Pilgrim dismissed as "in denial."
As the weblog Think Progress noted, Dobbs discussed Pelosi's airplane on Lou Dobbs Tonight and Lou Dobbs This Week every day from February 1-6. He also discussed it on the February 7 edition of Lou Dobbs Tonight.
From the February 8 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight:
PILGRIM: After weeks of intense accusations, the speaker of the House tried to set the record straight. But Nancy Pelosi was in denial.
PELOSI: We didn't ask for a larger plane, period.
PILGRIM: She was so in denial, she even denied it was a plane.
PELOSI: And by the way, it's not a plane. A plane seems to make you think your plane's waiting there. It's a ride.
PILGRIM: What Mrs. Pelosi's staff admits to is asking the DOD for a plane that could fly nonstop to San Francisco. The DOD letter in response doesn't reveal whether she indeed asked for a C-32, the same plane as Vice President Dick Cheney's Air Force Two, a plane that carries 45 people.
[...]
PILGRIM: But the debate on the House floor raised voices and passions.
REP. DAN BURTON (R-IN): And I hope that Speaker Pelosi will take the time to come down and explain to the full House the reason why she thinks she should have $15 million a year to fly back and forth to California.
REP. GINNY BROWN-WAITE (R-FL): Congress should not be above coach or first-class travel.
REP. ERIC CANTOR (R-VA): The ability to fly on a jumbo jetliner is a privilege never before granted to a member of Congress.
PILGRIM: Now, John Murtha, chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, says that he wants to hold hearings later this spring on executive and congressional travel on military aircraft, and he's given the Defense Department a one-month deadline to provide records on congressional travel for the last two years -- Lou.
[...]
DOBBS: Time now for some of your thoughts.
Anita from Louisiana: "Your story about Nancy Pelosi demanding a huge military jet for her personal use was at best inaccurate and slanted, and at worst a smear."
Well, actually, former House Speaker Congressman Dennis Hastert of Illinois flew to and fro Washington, most commonly on a Gulfstream 3 jet. There it is. And despite a lot of journalistic reports to the contrary, that aircraft will fly coast to coast for just about $15,000 less than the proposed aircraft for the speaker.
Dobbs is now an aviation expert.
You don't have to be an aviation expert, people. DO YOUR HOMEWORK!! The range of a Gulfstream III (Hastert's plane) is 3,767 nm (4,335 mi, 6,976 km). Check it out on wikipedia or google. You'll get the same answers. Now, what is the distance from Dulles National Airport (IAD) to San Francisco (SFO)? Well, you can find this on several flight distance calculators on the web. It's 2,417 Miles or 2,102 Nautical miles.
Now, I'm no aviation expert, but I can do basic math and as far as I can tell, 2,417 < 4,335. That's a huge gap.
I've never voted for a republican in my life. But I detest anyone simply spouting a claim as truth without doing homework on it.
So, ask yourselves... those who blindly say the Lou Dobbs is lying here. Did you do your homework? Doesn't look like it.
Can you all re-post your "smear" campaign and apologize? Let's not stoop to the Republican's level. okay?
I don't know the exact flight path but planes do not fly in a straight line from one city to the next. The last time I flew to California from Louisville, KY our plane went up to Canada. So it's possible that the actual flight is a further distance.
If there were no refueling issue why would the Sargeant of Arms decide another plane were necessary? why would he even broach the issue of getting a different plane? Why would it even come up? Perhaps there are other factors here you havent taken into account?
You know, Solon, you're right. We should just trust the military and not ask any questions.
I provided facts I found, now, why doesn't someone tell me exactly how a C-20 CANNOT make it from Dulles to SFO.
Yeah, I know it's not easy, it took me about an hour to find the data I found. So, prove me wrong. This is a challenge!! Give me proof that I'm wrong. I'm begging.
Actual range is determined by the final weight of the plane (what additional equipment the plane was rigged with), the actual flight path, wind conditions, and other factors I do not know doodoo about. Unless you would want me to come up with the fuel requirements for the next plane you fly cross country, I'll take the Sargeant of Arms assesment over any range assesment me or you come up with.
Again, let's just trust the military, the people who brought you the $2,000 toilet seat.
Some here have brought up all these factors to refute the actual range of a C-20, but no one has actually determined it.
One mentioned that planes don't fly in a straight line. Good point. I got my data from [link to gc.kls2.com] This calculates a great circle following the curvature of the earth. Guess what the distance is. Still 2,417 miles.
Now, you could burn though lots of fuel if you are flying at top speed. Not sure if it's enough to warrant refuelling every 2,000 miles. Any adoption of this as an argument would get my immediate "reduce your speed" rebuttal.
And for all those using my post to claim MediaMatters is heading to the right. I'll have you all know I've vote democrat in every election I've participated in. I'm just an advocate for critical thought here. Isn't that what is important here?
Get a grip. The mendacious RNC attack on Pelosi makes it appear she made outrageous demands for a luxury plane, etc., etc. Whereas the actual request was made by the Sergeant at Arms on her behalf but without her knowledge. Pelosi has stated in public that she would be happy to fly commercially. However, new policy dictates that she (like Dennis Hastert did previously) fly on a military transport for greater security. (This makes sense, especially since she is the first female Speaker.) The point that MMFA has been making with this piece (and several others) is that the MSM continues to parrot the RNC press release charging that she is "demanding" all kinds of things. In fact, she made NO demands, no requests, whatsoever.
So, please feel free to make more arguments about whether this or that plane can fly across the continent non-stop. Note, however, that you're missing the point.
Hi,
The website you mention has disclaimers that its info is not to be used for navigational purposes.
I think it's likely that, just like with cars, there's a vast difference between "highway" MPG and "city" MPG. The range you quote is very likely an ideal figure, just like my Corolla's supposed 29 MPG I recall from the sticker 8 years ago has never, in fact, been achieved at any time I drove the car.
Remember, anything can happen weatherwise and air-traffic-wise, and planes have been known to be forced to wait to land. Vast amounts of fuel can be spent in holding patterns. Likely? Perhaps not. Worth it for security reasons? Enough people thought so to make the request.
I don't think you can find any airline that makes routine nonstop flights from coast-to-coast using smaller aircraft.
The real issue is that Pelosi has been villified for this by the same mainstream media that paid attention to the Swiftboaters. I'm sick and tired of the gleeful scrutiny given Democrats and the complete pass and dutiful stenography accorded the Republicans. As a lifelong Democrat, you no doubt feel the same. (I can make no such claim--I've voted for Democrats, Republicans, and Independent candidates, depending on who I felt was the best candidate.)
http://clueless-xtian.livejournal.com
It isn't nearly that simple. US Airways flies the Aurbus 321-200 between Philadelphia and San Francisco, except in the winter, when the plane often can't reach SFO without a fuel stop. I suspect that the smaller plane that Hastert used would work for Pelosi during most months and that a larger plane would only be needed during the winter months.
Yep...the issue with the C-20 flying westbound comes down to two words: jet stream. This isn't so much an issue during the summer, but typically would be an issue during ther winter, i.e., right now. The jet stream can contribute a 100+ mph headwind.
The MSM is so intent on damaging Pelosi (and, by implication, ALL Democrats) that manufacturing a story out of pure flatulence is not unexpected; and that covers why Hastert's real estate connivance is STILL ignored, and will continue to be ignored.
Whenever I think a pundit like Lou Dobbs or Chris Matthews might have a shred of integrity, they say something completely asinine and ruin it all.
Maybe if the plane was full on crisp one-dollar bills and the bundles were thrown-around like footballs and then given to officials of another country, this story would go away. If tons of money were to go missing, this would not be a story at all. Right, media?
"If tons of money were to go missing, this would not be a story at all."
...or if Haliburton had been given a no-bid contract to fly the Speaker to and from California. Now can you imagine how much that would cost?
Well I could be disappointed in Dobbs and company, but I no longer watch cable or network news (except for Keith O). They are so not relevant anymore. And they wonder why people are getting their news online from better sources. The MSM is dead and they are too dumb to know it yet. Their reporting of themselves as dead will come about a year after they are offically dead and will have many factual errors.
The MSM's ratins will drop, so they'll move to the right. Their rating will drop some more, then they'll move to the right some more. Their ratings will drop some more, and they'll say "what should we do? Should we move to the right?"
Dobbs is right. The plane could make it because the "payload" is smaller; Pelosi's like half the size of Hastert.
I almost felt sorry for sean hannity the other day- I heard the start of his radio show, and you could hear him slobbering and hyperventilating, promising to spend the first hour of his show on "the Pelosi plane scandal".
I could have heard him wrong, but i think hannity's numbers were something like this; Pelosi's plane costs 20k an hour to fly,and will cost 300k to fly from DC to California.
If my math is right, it sounds like she wants a really slow plane.
I know this is merely anecdotal but...
I have to agree with an earlier poster. EVERY time I get behind Lou he does something as stupid as this. I wrote him anyway and we'll see if he has anything to say. He is usually more journalistically responsible than most when he makes a mistake.
We'll see.
This whole plane thing was very well explained by Kieth Olbermann today and I asked Lou to watch it and see what his reaction is.
I'll give Dobbs some credit for showing a letter calling him on his smear of Nancy Pelois; too bad he didnt read it beforehand, take it to heart, and apologize for wasting everybody's time on a "story" that should only be "news" to Ingraham, Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, Fox"News" Channel, and the rest of the right wing lie machine.
From sfgate [link to www.sfgate.com] Pelosi flew nonstop from the nation's capital to San Francisco to attend the funeral services of the late Lt. Gov. Leo McCarthy aboard a C-37A, the military's version of a Gulfstream V that can travel 6,300 miles. It is one of the planes used regularly by Hastert, Pelosi's office and the Pentagon said."
the whole plane thing is nothing but blogaganda ...
One thing the plane thing did was get the missing 12 billion dollars that no one knows where it went and Dead-Eye Dick is happy about.
All these stories about a politician using a plane but NONE about the CIA "rendition" flights from torture chamber to torture chamber going on out there. Just another huge fluff peice that distracts from the criminal realities of our government.
The point of all this--if I may be so bold as to speak for MMFA--is that the MSM continues to provide an echo chamber for RNC lies. Some writers here have pointed out that this is simply a distraction from the neo-cons' more serious transgressions--12 billion $ missing in Iraq, torture of prisoners, kidnappings, rendition, the Libby trial, domestic spying, corruption, cronyism, misleading the American public during the run-up to the war, incompetence, etc., etc. While this may true, it also has disturbing implications, especially for the next elections. It demonstrates how the RNC and its minions in the media will do ANYTHING to discredit, slander, and otherwise undermine anyone who intends to investigate or oppose the neo-con Republicks. I suspect that there will be much more of this business as we approach the 2008 elections.