| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 4/4 |
| 2005/4/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:37103 Activity:high |
4/7 Watch popular conservative blog get it wrong on authenticity of
Schiavo memo: http://powerlineblog.com/archives/2005_03.php#009953
The third possibility is that the memo is a Democratic dirty trick.
At the moment, that looks most likely. It is easy to picture how the
document could have been constructed. A Democratic staffer wants to
put in some language that will sound authentic for a Republican memo.
What does he do? He steals four paragraphs from the Coalition's web
site. Then he adds the explosive political observations which are the
whole point of the exercise--weirdly out of place in a "talking
points" memo, but good politics for the Democrats.
\_ You stopped taking your meds, didn't you?
\_ i think a republican staffer just resigned for writing the
memo - danh
\_ A Florida Senator's legal counsel with close ties to... Tom DeLay.
\_ You are correct.
\_ Bahh, I have no need of your useless facts or logic!
\_ From the Sun-Sentinel in Florida: http://csua.org/u/blx
\_ You stopped taking your meds, didn't you?
\_ Do you see the black helicopters too?
\_ You two do realize the paragraph is taken verbatim from the URL?
\_ Powerline is no better than The Free Republic.
\_ Nor is Sean Hannity, nor Rush Limbaugh, nor Michelle Malkin,
nor any of the other commentators who jumped on the meme that
the memo was forged by dems.
\_ Wow--I guess it's a good sign that I hadn't heard this nutty
theory. Sounds just as wacky as the Dems who claim that the
CBS memos were authored by Karl Rove as a trap for the left.
\_ To her credit (never expected to say that...) Malkin came
to her senses today.
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/002017.htm
\_ Not really. Rather than apologize for spreading a
false rumour, she gets all snarky and defensive
ands makes a bunch more unsubstantiated attacks.
\_ Actually she links to an earlier blog entry where
she says other bloggers believed the forgery rumors,
not her, and another blog where she attacked the
believability of a report suggesting so.
now why do i feel so dirty?
\_ Powerline is just as much of a right-wing loony bin as Dailykos over
on the left.
\_ Mediamatters has an entire timeline on how this crap got into the
mainstream media. This all just reminds me of that Negativland
record "Helter Stupid."
http://mediamatters.org/items/200504070005
\_ Heh.
"I think within a week or two it will become clear that it--that
memo was a forgery, possibly written by Democrats on the Hill in
an effort to discredit Republicans." -Tucker Carlson |
| 4/4 |
|
| powerlineblog.com/archives/2005_03.php#009953 got away with a crimin al cover-up today when he pled guilty to a misdemeanor in connection wit h his theft of sensitive documents from the National Archives. It is undisputed that Berger illegally stuffed original documents relatin g to America's response to the threat of Islamic terrorism into his coat , pants and briefcase. Berger then destroyed a number of these top-secre t documents, so that they will never see the light of day. The idea that this was "an honest mistake," as Berger now claims, is ridiculous. Obvi ously, he was trying to destroy documents that showed the negligence of the Clinton administration--of which he was a key member--in dealing wit h the threat of terrorism. Key documents relating to our government's in adequate reaction to the threat of Islamic terrorism prior to Sept. This plea bargain appears, on its face, to be a disgrace. If anyone can think of a reason why this is not correct, please let us know. Those who have been with us for any length of time know that Deacon and t he Trunk are Jews, while I am a member of the most boring religious sect known to mankind: midwestern Lutherans. wonderful site devoted t o the Lutheran liturgy: "A Lutheran Hymnal for Church and Home." Where else are you going to find songs like "Hymn to God the Whatever"? Weekl y Standard, that there is no reason whatsoever to believe that the memo originated with the Republicans, and considerable reason to think it may be a Democratic dirty trick. Allen, like ABC News, took the position that it was all a misunderstanding: the Post had never meant to suggest that Republicans authored or distributed the memo, but only that some Republicans had re ceived it. Allen told Kurtz: We simply reported that the sheet of paper was distributed to Republican senators and told our readers explicitly that the document was unsigne d, making clear it was unofficial. We stuck to what we knew to be true and did not call them talking points or a Republican memo. the fact that it was also distributed to so me Republicans would hardly be newsworthy--although, in fact, hardly any Republicans seem to have seen it. As we have noted, the document has been widely described in th e press as a "GOP talking points memo." Michelle Malkin has identified a number of newspapers that ran the Washington Post's story on the memo, but in a version that (unlike the one that appeared in the Post itself) explici tly attributed the document to the party's leadership. this is what you get: dozens of news sources, including Reute rs, have reported, falsely, that the "talking points memo" was distribut ed by Republican party leaders. Each of these news outlets attributed th e story to "Mike Allen and Manuel Roig-Franzia, Washington Post." Michel le concluded that in all likelihood, the Post had published this version of the story on its wire service, but then revised the story to elimina te the claim that the memo was distributed by Republican leaders before the story ran in the Post the next morning (March 20). archived version of the Post's article by Mike Allen and Manuel Roig-Franzia, dated 10 pm on Saturday, March 19. It includes the discredited language: "A one-page memo, distributed to Republican senators by party leaders, said the deb ate over Schiavo would appeal to the party's base, or core, supporters." The Post originally wrote a story that e xplicitly claimed that the "talking points memo" was drafted and distrib uted by the Republican leadership. That version of the story went out ov er the Post's wire service and was picked up by dozens of news outlets. Before the paper went to press, however, someone at the Post apparently realized that the paper had no basis for attributing the memo to the Rep ublicans, and the key language was deleted from the story that actually appeared in print. That story said: "An unsigned one-page memo, distribu ted to Republican senators, said the debate over Schiavo would appeal to the party's base, or core, supporters." And ever since, reporter Mike A llen and others at the Post have said that they never meant to imply tha t the memo was created or distributed by Republicans. The Post apparently did distribute a ve rsion of the story that explicitly attributed the memo to the GOP's lead ership. And even in the revised version that appeared in print, the impl ication that the "talking points memo" was a Republican strategy documen t is clear. And, as we have pointed out in our prior posts, the Republican party has taken a giant PR hit as a result of the popular belief, fueled by news reports on the fake memo , that the party pursued the Schiavo case out of political calculation r ather than principle. Both the Post and ABC now claim that they never meant to accuse the Repub licans of authoring or distributing the notorious memo. But neither has printed a retraction, clarification or correction. The Post has done not hing to correct or retract the version of its story that apparently went out on the evening of March 19. And to our knowledge, not a single one of the dozens of newspapers and other news outlets that printed the fals e claim that the memo was circulated by the Republican leadership has re tracted or corrected that defamatory claim. There is a story here, if our media wanted to pursue it. Any competent person could look at it and see that it is not a product of the Republican leadership. It is incompetently produced: i t gets the Senate bill number wrong, misspells Terri Schiavo's name, and is full of typographical errors. The only people reported to have distr ibuted it (by the New York Times) were Democratic staffers. And--most fu ndamentally--it is absurd to think that the Republican leadership would produce a "talking points" memo discussing what great politics the Schia vo case was for Republicans. The memo benefited the only party that it could possibly have benefited: the Democrats. If there were investigative reporters working for the Washington Post, AB C, the New York Times, or any other major news organization, they might want to try to find out where the memo came from. Circumstantially, it s eems extremely likely that it was produced by Democrats as a political d irty trick. But such investigation seems to be beyond the capability--mo re important, beyond the ambition--of our mainstream press. Only blogger s look critically at documents that cast disrepute on Republicans. Mains tream reporters accept them uncritically, at face value, no matter how i nept they may be. Sunday morning, I'll be on Howard Kurtz's CNN television program, "Reliab le Sources," to discuss the "talking points memo." It will be interestin g to see whether Kurtz tries to defend his paper's handling of the issue . UPDATE: A reader points out that the Post's original story on the fake me mo, which went out, apparently, on March 19, also included this paragrap h: Republican officials declared, in a memo that was supposed to be seen on ly by senators, that they believe the Schiavo case "is a great politica l issue" that could pay dividends with Christian conservatives, whose s upport is essential in midterm elections such as those coming up in 200 6 Someone at the Post swallowed the fake memo hook, line, and sinker--Mike Allen, I assume. Someone else at the Post apparently realized that the p aper lacked facts to back up its accusations. I've written Allen to see what he has to say about these events. "The Lonesome Death of Hattie Carroll," Bob Dylan expressed the r ighteous anger of a witness to justice gone awry. Dylan's damning refrai n has wide application: You who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears, Take the rag away from your face. Following the last verse that recites the ultimate miscarriage of justice , Dylan changes the chorus: You who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears, Bury the rag deep in your face For now's the time for your tears. Gershman reports: In an effort to manage favorable coverage of its investigation into the complaints, the university disclosed a summary of the committee's repor t only to the Columbia Spectator, the campus newspaper, and the New Yor k Times. Those newspapers, sources indicated to... |
| csua.org/u/blx -> www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/florida/orl-asecmmemo07040705apr07,0,7624154.story?coll=sfla-news-florida Martinez aide wrote memo on Schiavo Counsel resigns after furor over document By Tamara Lytle Washington Bureau Chief Posted April 7 2005 WASHINGTON -- The strategy memo outlining how Republicans could gain poli tical capital by intervening in the Terri Schiavo case was written by Fl orida Sen. Mel Martinez's legal counsel, who abruptly left his job Wedne sday. Martinez, a freshman senator from Orlando who was the leading sponsor of the Schiavo bill that Congress passed in an extraordinary session on Pal m Sunday, said he earlier had been assured by aides that his office had nothing to do with producing the memo that created a furor on Capitol Hi ll. Click Here advertisement "I never did an investigation, as such," Martinez told The Washington Pos t on Wednesday. "I just took it for granted that we wouldn't be that stu pid. It was never my intention to in any way politicize this issue." But Brian Darling, Martinez's legal counsel and a former lobbyist on gun rights and other issues, on Wednesday admitted writing the now-infamous document after Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, told Martinez that the Republica n senator gave him the memo, calling it "talking points" on the GOP's Sc hiavo proposal. In a statement issued Wednesday night, Martinez said that Harkin asked hi m for background information on the bill and that he gave him what he th ought was a routine one-page staff memo on the legislation. "Unbeknownst to me, instead of my one page on the bill, I had given him a copy of the now infamous memo that at some point along the way came int o my possession," the statement said. The mystery of the memo's origin had roiled the Capitol. Republicans disa vowed it, accusing Democrats of concocting the document as a dirty trick ; Democrats accused Republicans of trying to duck responsibility for exp loiting the profoundly brain-damaged woman as she lay dying in a Pinella s Park hospice. The memo called the drama a "great political issue" for Republicans and s ingled out Sen. Martinez apologized to Nelson in a statement Wednesday and said the memo "in no way reflected my motivations for being involved in this legislati on whatsoever." "As a senator, I am ultimately responsible for the work of my staff and t he product that comes out of this office. I take full responsibility for this situation," Martinez said. how I intend to co nduct my business as a United States senator." The unsigned memo -- which initially misspells Schiavo's first name and g ives the wrong number for the pending bill -- includes eight talking poi nts in support of the legislation and calls the controversy "a great pol itical issue." "This legislation ensures that individuals like Terri Schiavo are guarant eed the same legal protections as convicted murderers like Ted Bundy," t he memo concludes. It asserts that the case would appeal to the party's core supporters, say ing: "This is an important moral issue and the pro-life base will be exc ited that the Senate is debating this important issue." The document was provided to ABC News on March 18 and to The Washington P ost on March 19 and was included in news reports about congressional int ervention in the Schiavo case. President Bush returned from an Easter ho liday in Texas and signed the bill shortly after 1 am March 21. Schiavo died March 31 after federal courts would not order her feeding tu be reinserted. "This is not a document that would have been approved in this office for circulation under any circumstances," Martinez said Wednesday night. "Th e person responsible for drafting and circulating this document has tend ered their resignation, and I have accepted it. This type of behavior an d sentiment will not be tolerated in my office. Darling, whose resignation was confirmed by Martinez aides late Wednesday , is a former partner at the GOP powerhouse lobbying firm Alexander Stra tegy Group, founded by a former chief of staff to Senate Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas. The memo flap was not the first controversy for Martinez, the former Oran ge County chairman and secretary of the Housing and Urban Development du ring most of President Bush's first term. During his hard-fought GOP Senate primary campaign against former Rep. Bi ll McCollum last year, he ran ads and sent out fliers bashing his oppone nt as a darling of the "radical homosexual lobby." Martinez said he had not approved the mailings and pulled the ads under f ire from GOP Gov. |
| michellemalkin.com/archives/002017.htm sa id these were talking points -- something that we're working on here." Martinez describe the contents of the memo if he had not s een it? Then there's Brian Darling, Martinez's legal counsel (until last night, w hen he resigned). According to the Post, Darling is taking the blame for authoring the Schiavo memo. reported simi lar allegations, citing "Senate Republican leadership aides to both Sen. Mitch McConnell, as well as the Senate Republica n Policy Committee." Did Darling give a fake tip to Claybourn to try to divert attention from himself? Who exactly spoke to the P rowler and from whom did the Prowler's sources get their information? my suggestion that he divulg e the phone numbers of his sources. Will he continue to play nicey-nice with his sources now that they have been shown to be manipulative, lying smear merchants? Martinez and his former legal counsel may stil l have plenty of 'splainin' to do. |
| mediamatters.org/items/200504070005 Despite a lack of evidence, several media sources have repeated conservat ive speculation and accusations that Democrats secretly authored a "talk ing points" memo that described the Terri Schiavo case as a "great polit ical issue" for Senate Republicans. These baseless accusations, apparent ly hatched on right-wing blogs and in conservative media such as The Ame rican Spectator, were given credibility by The Washington Post and CNN's Inside Politics. March 23 post to his blog on the National Review's website, Jim Geraghty also repeated the "evidence" that appeared on the Power Line bl og, and stated that "creepy phrases" in the memo indicate that the memo was written by a dumb GOP operative or a "Democratic dirty trickster." Kurtz apparently relied on the so-called "e vidence" put forth by Power Line and the Spectator to reach the conclusi on that "there are several strange things about" the memo: While there is no hard evidence that the memo is fake, there are several strange things about it, including the basic fact that no one seems to know who wrote it and that the noncontroversial part of it is lifted f rom a Republican senator's press release. that used a formal survey of S enate offices as "evidence" for questioning the authenticity of the Schi avo memo. Armed with this so-called "evidence" -- that the memo had typographical a nd spelling errors, was not printed on Senate stationary and had passage s pulled from a Republican senator's press release, as well as the fact that Republican Senate offices were not rushing to take responsibility f or a highly controversial and widely denounced memo -- conservative comm entators took to the airwaves and the Internet to suggest that the Schia vo memo was, in fact, a Democratic dirty trick. Syndicated radio host Ru sh Limbaugh pointed to a Democratic "opposition research office" and sta ted: "Apparently the explanation is it was forged! On NBC's The Chris Matthews Show, Tucker Carlson stated: "I think within a week or two it will become clear that it -- th at memo -- was a forgery, possibly written by Democrats on the Hill in a n effort to discredit Republicans." Executive editor Fred Barnes even wr ote in the Weekly Standard that this was another case of liberal media b ias: So rather than an example of aggressive reporting, the memo story turns out to be yet another instance of crude liberal bias, in this case agai nst both Republicans and those who fought to have Schiavo's feeding tub e restored. Fishkite Blog questions whether they are really talking points and al ludes to 60 Minutes scandal. And if they are talking points, why couldn't ABC News just interview any given Senate Republican, rather than "obtaining" them? Power Line blog asks, "Is This the Biggest Hoax Si nce the Sixty Minutes Story?" Most Senate and House memos are written on letterhead that show whose office they came from. Is it simply a one-page memo on blank white paper that purports to come from a Republican? If so, is there any reason to assume that it is genuine? Can anyone write an anonymous memo, and send it to 55 Republican Senators, with a copy to ABC News? Based on the fragments from the memo that w ere reported by the Post, I question its authenticity. It does not soun d like something written by a conservative; it sounds like a liberal fa ntasy of how conservatives talk. argues that evidence on the memo's authenticity puts the b urden on The Washington Post to prove the document is not a dirty trick. So, to sum up: The memo itself contains no clue as to its origins. the memo's contents are hardly appropriate for an anonymous communication. The fact that the memo appeared in Senator s' offices (or, for that matter, at ABC News) proves nothing, as anyone , including a Democratic dirty trickster, could have distributed it. Mi ke Allen of the Washington Post says he knows something he can't tell u s, but his only argument for why the memo is authentic--some Senators h ad it--is silly. Why would anyone mix political strategy points--the ones the Democrats want to talk about--with talking points for Senatorial argument? A com petent staffer preparing a talking points memo wouldn't do that, but a Democratic dirty trickster would. It is possible that som ewhere in the House or Senate there is a Republican staffer dumb enough to have produced and circulated it. The question, though, is: what is the evidence that the memo is genuine? An d, with all due respect to Mike Allen, "trust me" is no longer adequate proof. concludes it is "most likely" the memo was created by a De mocratic source. The first possibility is that it wa s created by a low-level Republican staffer. The second possibility is that the memo was created by a lobbying group, presumably the Traditional Values Coalition ... T he third possibility is that the memo is a Democratic dirty trick. Inside the Blogs": ABBI TATTON (CNN political producer): Now more on those Schiavo talking points that surfaced on Capitol Hill and got into the hands of reporter s over the weekend, then made their way onto the Web. You can see them here at liberal blog, "DC's Inside Scoop," under the title, "GOP Schi avo Talking Points Revealed In Full." As you'll remember, it says -- on e of the points: "This is a great political issue." Well conservative b loggers are now shifting the attention from the content of these talkin g points to who the authors of this memo actually are. You'll remember them as being heavily involved i n the Dan Rather memo-gate scandal. They've got a lot of readers weighi ng in, some of them who allegedly work in Congress, saying that these a re very suspicious, and they don't know what's going on. But he does go down to point out at the very end, Candy -- I just want to show you th is -- "The memo itself contains no clue as to its origins." It is possible that somew here in the House or Senate, there is a Republican staffer dumb enough to have produced and circulated it. It's Rathergate all over again, and the same vigilant entities that brou ght about to the collapse of CBS News could now also cause heads to rol l among Democratic Senate leadership staffers and further shame multipl e news organizations that would appear to have fallen for another docum ent hoax. Republican leadership staffers now believe the document was generated ou t of the Democratic opposition research office set up recently by Sen. Harry Reid, and distributed to some Democratic Senate staffers claiming it was a GOP document, in the hope -- or more likely expectation -- th at it would then be leaked by those Democrats to reporters. In fact, th e New York Times stated that it was Democratic staffers who were distri buting the "talking points" document. Other Republican staffers blame not only Democrats but also the mainstre am media which once again put out a story to embarrass Republicans befo re checking all the facts first. Republicans staffers looking into the "talking points" case believe that at least some of the language used for the original Traditional Values Coalition may have come from documents pulled together by the staff of Sen. Mel Martinez, who has been out front on the Schiavo case, and pre ssed hard for federal action to save her life. But there is no evidence that the talking points were a Martinez staff product. vidence suggests that the memo m ay have been manufactured as part of an effort to make Republicans look bad." Accuracy in Media today questioned the authenticity of the much-publiciz ed "GOP Talking Points" memo on the Terri Schiavo case. The document ha s been seized upon by ABC news, the Washington Post, CBS News and other media to accuse Republicans of having partisan motives in trying to sa ve Terri Schiavo. Cliff Kincaid, editor of AIM, said that the major med ia should explain how they verified the document and why they believe i t is authentic. He said evidence suggests that the memo may have been m anufactured as part of an effort to make Republicans look bad. The Martinez March 8 release had been posted on the web site of the Trad itional Values Coalition, where it could have been easily copied and th en altered. James Lafferty, a consulta... |