USA Today (could) not obtain the (Downing Street) memo or a copy of it?

[Coexist]

"USA TODAY chose not to publish anything about the memo before today for several reasons, says Jim Cox, the newspaper's senior assignment editor for foreign news. “We could not obtain the memo or a copy of it from a reliable source,” Cox says. “There was no explicit confirmation of its authenticity from (Blair's office). And it was disclosed four days before the British elections, raising concerns about the timing.”
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20050608/a_memo08.art.htm

thanks to mediabistro.com for the headsup on this idiocy.

[leftchick]

1. this was read on C-Span this AM

excuses, excuses. PULEASE! I WANT SOME REAL JOURNALISM IN AMERIKA!

:banghead:

[veggiemama]

18. Oh, right! It's just too hard to access downingstreetmemo.com

That's http://www.downingstreetmemo.com

Or http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html

So very, very hard--especially with the limited resources of USAT!

[Sivafae]

36. To quote John, "Remember, you heard it 12th."n/t

[damntexdem]

39. But they specified 'from a reliable source' -- meaning that ...

they couldn't get a copy validated by the Bushistas. ;-)

[AuntiBush]

46. Congressman Conyers, Senator Kennedy & Kerry, the BIA

British Intelligence Agency, and on and on... they're just not credible, huh. Well, haven't seen anyone verbally shoot-down Conyers, yet.

They can't. He's tooooooo CREDITABLE!

[KansDem]

72. Actually, they stumbled over the phrase "reliable source..."

Hey, is this from a reliable source?
??
:(

...from a reliable source?
??
:(

...RELIABLE SOURCE?!?!
??
:(


HELLO?!?!


??
:( What does 'reliable' mean?

[insane_cratic_gal]

76. In the after math of Rathers

and newsweek

Reliable means: "covering my ass."

[KansDem]

78. Now while I agree there is a need to be as accurate as possible...

I believe this is USAToday's way of not offending the Bush Mob. If USAToday really wanted to run with this story, it could have looked up the information on the internet as observed by other DUers on this thread, or done what the MediaWhores are known for doing and lead such a story with the phrase "Some people say..."

on edit: Or even resort to the tired but true media strategy of making the "authenticity" of the DSM the story...How many times as the whore media got a story out in the public arena by simply commenting about the accuracy of the story?

[insane_cratic_gal]

80. It's what I meant

by "covering my ass"

When ever there is a fall out Like Rather-gate and Newsweek. The hammer that has fallen has been that BushINC.

So yes I agree.. not offending, or not wanting to get spanked by this administration.

[AuntiBush]

49. Veggiemama: We should all email those links to the mag.

They're CIA in disguise, mfg to wash your brain.

Oh, welcome to DU! :hi: And the nightmare on K Street!

[wookie294]

58. USA Today was quick to report on the Niger-Yellow Cake Memo

USA Today was quite ready to report on Bush's pre-war BULLSHIT. They had no problem reporting on Colin Powell's cartoons he showed at the United Nations in 2003. What a bunch of douchebags.

[goclark]

91. What reliable source did they use for Monica?

What a phony piece of crap!

[barbaraann]

2. The dog hid it.

:rofl:

[Coexist]

6. funny! That darn mutt is always dragging news behind the BBC!

[damntexdem]

41. Which dog is that? Could it be ...

Rove (r)?

[mrdmk]

69. The dog buried it

:rofl: :rofl:

[fasttense]

3. Rove told us not to print it and keep our mouths (or papers)

shut. We didn't want to embarrass the president when he was on the pot, I mean at war.

[wurzel]

4. This British election was about a month ago.

So what is the excuse now?

[HereSince1628]

5. So if the truth comes to light during a campaign it can't be published?

Hokey smokes!

[Coexist]

7. only if it hurts the GOP

passed by Congress and the Senate via an upordownvote. Signed into law by Bush behind the rose garden so no one could see.

[Blue Belle]

19. Well that explains why no one gave a rat's ass about...

the report regarding the weapons depot in Iraq was left unguarded.... now I know why there weren't any follow up stories to see why the hell the soldiers weren't guarding that but instead had them guard the Oil Ministry (but don't let that little factoid imply that this conflict is about oil).

[kliljedahl]

32. In case there's any doubt

Keith’s Barbeque Central

[chomskysright]

61. USA Today Washington reporters here: WRITE THEM

USA Today - Mimi Hall, White House Reporter [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Address: 1100 New York Ave NW, Washington, DC 20005

USA Today - Laurence McQuillan, White House Reporter [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Address: 1100 New York Ave NW, Washington, DC 20005 (see Reuters)

[chomskysright]

63. here's your letter to use anyway you like:

June 8, 2005

Hello:

As reflected by other posters on www.democraticunderground.com , where your paper is being unfavorably featured, I too have to wonder if you 'could not find' the Downing Street MINUTES (not memo) because Karl Rove or 'dear Scotty' suggested you not bother?

Here are the minutes and we would appreciate some accurate reporting.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html

Sincerely,

[dchill]

86. Hey - None of THOSE guys...

look like cardboard cutouts!

[KansDem]

74. Sure, only lies can be published...

9/11
Iraq WMDs
Swift Boatshit
etc,

Can't publish the truth, though...

[0007]

8. The USA TODAY is as rotten as the cretins that operate the White House

Who'd want to read that bias rag anyway?

[Triana]

23. USATODAY is OWNED by the cretins that operate the White House...

...they're part of the same plutocracy/oligarchy. They are loathe to out themselves. No good criminal would do that.

[kliljedahl]

29. USA Today

The paper for people who move their lips when they read.


Keith’s Barbeque Central

[0007]

34. That's the way I found out that my dog could read his papers

He moved his lips while reading quietly.

[99Pancakes]

85. The paper with really short articles.

Which means: no research behind any of them.

[KurtNYC]

9. USA Today asked everyone outside the Jackson trial for a copy

and none of them had it. Then they went to the arraignment of the Runaway Bride(TM) and no one there had it either! So they got their helicopters and followed a car chase in Los Angeles all the way to its conclusion yet still no sign of the DSM! But of course they are intrepid journalists -- it takes a lot to stop them. They boldly went to the perp walk of Russell Crowe but it turned out that he had thrown a telephone -- not a copy of the Downing Street Minutes!

So you see, it isn't like they weren't trying.

[Coexist]

13. sorry I was so hard on them

I didn't know the "facts". Thanks for the info (and the laugh).

[LibDemAlways]

21. You nailed it.

Maybe that missing girl in Aruba has it. When she turns up, maybe USA Today will ask about it....or not.

[tavalon]

42. Of course!

Hilarious and yet painful.

[Marnieworld]

44. Did they ask Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie?

What about Tom Cruise? He's an expert in women's health and psychology now so maybe he has insight into world politics as well.
:sarcasm:

[Enraged_Ape]

48. I think I saw a copy poking out of Katie Holmes' purse

Or maybe it was just a copy of Dianetics.

[Enraged_Ape]

47. Ha ha!

Thanks for that. Laugh of the day.

[DakotaDemocrat]

10. Did they get cover the bin Laden video

five days before our election last year?

Just wondering, but i think I know the answer already...

[Supersedeas]

25. maybe the bin Laden video was authenticated by Blair and Bush

including the translation.

[K8-EEE]

11. OMG -- GWB ALWAYS Blames "Political Motivations"

Is there a time to release ANYTHING that won't be blamed on "suspicious timing?" Same like when they were rushing into the war "now's not the time to ask these questions, you should support the troops" blah blah blah....basically they are all on the same page as O'Reilly, SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP!

They hate our freedom...

[paineinthearse]

12. See earlier post in GDP

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1838036&mesg_id=1838036

[Coexist]

15. sorry - didn't see it.

[matcom]

14. Page 8A

:argh:

[Coexist]

16. wouldn't you hide it, too, if you had a lame last pargraph like that?

BTW - they printed my LTTEs before, maybe we should all send one on this.

[bunny planet]

17. Is it possible for the people of the United States to bring a lawsuit

against the MSM for their unconscionable bias and outright lies?
Just asking.

[Auntie Bush]

56. Yeah..A Class Action Law Suit....Dems. vs. Bush*

[Blue Belle]

20. You mean this story wasn't originally covered in "Mc News"??

I don't believe it... I could have swore I saw a colorful pie chart about it. :eyes:

[silvermachine]

22. I received this email today, thought I'd pass contents on...

...from the fine folks at www.afterdowningstreet.org. BTW, everyone registered at DU should check out the above link....

Bush, Blair, and Bumiller

By David Swanson, www.afterdowningstreet.org


The corporate media today began its coverage of the Downing Street Minutes, moved to do so by a visit to Washington by Prime Minister Tony Blair, and by the pressure all of us have applied.

And, while most newspapers simply reported what Bush and Blair said, the USA Today, Houston Chronicle, Boston Globe, Columbus Dispatch, and Salon called www.AfterDowningStreet.org for comments. The articles are posted and linked to on our site.

And the Washington Post provided a lengthy and quite interesting chat on its website with staff writer Jefferson Morley, also available via www.afterdowningstreet.org.

But the Post's Dana Milbank declared the story over, having apparently mistaken a starting pistol for a fatal shot.

Here's what he wrote:

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=101

Here's how to politely tell him he's mistaken:

[e-mail]

The New York Times' Elisabeth Bumiller published the following piece of stenography:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/08/international/08prexy.html

This puts into new light Bumiller's famous comment that "You can’t just say the president is lying. You don’t just say that...."

From a panel broadcast on C-Span:

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2481

Bumiller: That’s why it’s very hard to write those, because you can’t say George Bush is wrong here. There’s no way you can say that in the New York Times. So we contort ourselves up and say, “Actually”— I actually once wrote this sentence: “Mr. Bush’s statement did not exactly . . . ” It was some completely upside down statement that was basically saying he wasn’t telling the truth. And I got an email from somebody saying, “What’s wrong with you guys? Why can’t you just say it plainly?” But there’s just—

Loren Ghiglione (Medill School of Journalism, Moderator): Why can’t you say it plainly?

Bumiller: You can’t just say the president is lying. You don’t just say that in the . . . you just say—

Ghiglione: Well, why can’t you?



Bumiller: You can in an editorial, but I’m sorry, you can’t in a news column. Mr. Bush is lying? You can say Mr. Bush is, you can say. . . .



Bumiller : And stop the fussing! You can say Mr. Bush’s statement was not factually accurate. You can’t say the president is lying—that’s a judgment call.

How to politely ask Bumiller to report the truth even if it requires analyzing facts and making judgments:

[e-mail]

[Julius Civitatus]

30. Bumiller is a joke, an insult to journalism

[mod mom]

55. My letter to Dana Milbank

Dear Mr. Milbank,

The investigative nature of American journalism these days is pathetic. I used to follow your writings back in your New Republic days. Now that you have become seasoned, you too have lost the ability to go after a story. If a story is not hand delivered on a silver platter from the bu$h administration, it's suspect and ignored. Middle America used to look to the east coast papers as standards, now, those papers merely parrot the administration and their corporate owners. Perhaps you might be interested in coming on over to Ohio to learn how real investigative reporting is handled. The Toledo Blade is now one of the premier papers in the country, since they have the courage to print the truth. Despite Ohio's entrenchment with Republican office holders, The Blade has researched and sought out "Coingate". What big story have you or the Post covered recently?

It is time for all Americans to stand up for the principles that our constitution was based on. Your job is not to bow to the president, (which if your paper had had the courage to report is John Kerry) but to deliver news to the American people. Roll up your sleeves and delve in. Citizen activists, which I am proud to be, are doing the job of the (formerly) free press. Call a spade a spade, a liar a liar. The Downing Street Memo is important because we are involved in an immoral war! Bu$h lied about the wmd, so why take his word for it when it comes to the DSM? Investigate! Every day countless lives are destroyed and the world is becoming more dangerous because of the actions of this administration.

I closed my business of 17 years to become a full time (UNPAID) activist because what else could I tell my children-"Yes I knew, but I was to busy making money to fight the evil?" All I am asking is that you, and other reporters do your job. Go after the stories with a spine! Our democracy is at stake!

[99Pancakes]

87. My "letter" to Bumiller:

"Bush was lying. See how easy that was to say."

[Zorra]

24. In other words, they were ordered to wait until Bu*h made his lame

(non)-response.

And of course the memo was released right before the election. It was released to damage Blair. (Good idea, Blair is an asshole).

But that fact does not negate the credibility of the memo in any way.

[Julius Civitatus]

26. One word: WHITEWATER

USA Today was never so picky when it came to so-called incriminating "evidence" against the Clintons.

They should just say it like it is: "We at USA Today are terrified of the Bushes, and the idea of getting a call from Rove makes us crap our colelctive pants."

Kid gloves to the end.

[silvermachine]

40. My thoughts exactly...

And let's not forget the Post with "Stenographer Sue".

[Gman]

27. Disclosed 4 days before the British elections raises concerns?

From the memo:

"The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime. No decisions had been taken, but he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections."

As if this is not a problem, or worse yet, an unverifiable illusion.

[Julius Civitatus]

31. But apparently covering the Swift Boat Liars was fine and dandy

and didn't rise any flags for these weasels.

[CJCRANE]

28. Pathetic.

Also pathetic is suggesting that "fixed" means something different in British English. First it meant "corroborated", now it's meant to mean "bolted on". How come all these RWers are suddenly experts on British English?

[ovidsen]

57. The definition of "fixed around"

Robin Niblett of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank, says it would be easy for Americans to misunderstand the reference to intelligence being “fixed around” Iraq policy. “ ‘Fixed around' in British English means ‘bolted on' rather than altered to fit the policy,” he says.

Sorry, Mr. Niblett, your definition of "fixed around" is JUST as damning as the ones put forward by us poor confused Americans.

It means, to put it diplomatically, that the goal of invading Iraq was already set. All that was needed was a collection of "facts" to "justify" the plan.

[cthrumatrix]

33. but they could obtain all they ever want on "MJ or Distraction of the Day"

[RamboLiberal]

35. Did you hear the ass from the Wash Post on Countdown last night?

DSM is going to fade away quickly now cause everyone has made up their mind already where they stand on the war. It's old news, yada, yada, yada.

Too bad Bob Woodward has become such a suck up to the * Admin. I wish Carl Bernstein would smack these journalists upside the head.

No, let's not investigate and dig to see what other info they can get on how * was hot to go after Saddam. Let's not check how he and Cheney and the BFEE were brow beating the intelligence people to fit the intelligence to allow * to go on his crusade.

Now if this was a Dem you know they'd be all over this like flies on sh*t.

[cthrumatrix]

38. Wash Post must benefit more from corruption... than the truth

[sunnystarr]

50. lol I couldn't believe he really had the balls to say that on MSM

but maybe he's on the WH payola ...

So let's see ... according to him Americans already all knew that Bush lied about Iraq ... he was planning a military action from day 1 and all he had to do is give the people a good lie and keep on lying. That bozo proposes that because we all knew and haven't strung him up on impeachment charges that we're all complacent and now this is old news and big HO HUM. Who paid KO to have this A-hole speak on his show?

One thing is true ... this administration firmly believes that if you tell us a lie long enough we'll all believe it .... and that does hold true for many ... but NOT the majority.

[dissent1977]

73. If people have already made up their minds on the war...

then why does support keep steadily falling? God these pundits think we are stupid, unquestioning, ignorant apes who the follow the partyline exactly like they do. And these are supposed to be our experts on the political climate? Screw them all, the only pundits I like are the ones they refuse to put on the television because they speak the truth.

[confludemocrat]

77. Frank Rich said basically the same thing on Air America yesterday

which went unchallenged by Franken.

[Roland99]

37. Talk about your complete and utter COPOUTS!!

You can thank the Propagandist's administration for its lambasting of CBS and Newsweek.

[underpants]

43. 5 questions-Does "timing" affect its factual content?

The "Sunday Times of London" is NOT a reliable source?

That those implicated by it (further) didn't authenticate it makes a difference? Did you expect them to? Didn't they state that they couldn't NOT authenticate it?

[AuntiBush]

45. LIARS! Jeez! It's all over the Internet! Another Mag I'll never READ AGAIN

LIARS! My 83 year old neighbor has seen it, for crying-out loud.

[grasswire]

51. Cox is the former president of WHCA

Cox is the former president of the White House Correspondents Association and the person who wrote to me dismissing the PNAC documents during the runup to invasion of Iraq. I had written to protest the fact that I had to read about PNAC in a foreign newspaper. He dismissed any significance to the PNAC story. "Maybe the Sidney Morning Herald was wrong."

[grasswire]

52. Dana Milbank is SKULL & BONES

Sorry for shouting, but it needs remembering.

Milbank said on TV that the DSM is over.

Milbank is Skull & Bones. He has pledged his allegiance to the secret society over all other allegiances.

[susu369]

81. Thanks for shouting

and reminding everyone about Dana Milbank. I do NOT trust him.

:kick:

[daleo]

53. "raising concerns about the timing"

Like, what? Concerns that it might still be newsworthy?

[MADem]

54. Ah, yes, USA Today

The paper that is written at a 4th grade reading level.

The paper that is full of color pictures for those who find reading a challenge.

The paper that simplifies everything to the Nth degree.

The paper that should be sold with an eight pack of Crayola crayons, for those who are easily bored.

[cthrumatrix]

59. you got it.... that's the US demographics for the most part

[Barkley]

60. The paper that's year-end circulation reached 2,251,035 in 2003.

Its sad but true
http://www.usatoday.com/media_kit/pressroom/pr_timeline.htm

[Roland99]

62. I'd be willing to bet 2/3 - 3/4 of that circulation is at hotels/airports

where they get barely a glancing over.

[MADem]

71. That shouldn't be hard, really

The only time I read the thing is when my "free guest copy" is deposited at my hotel door, or I get one enroute to the shuttle because all the good (read: better, but still lame) papers are already taken. I've never once paid for one....and I wouldn't!!

But if airlines and hotels are getting a bulk rate, I'm sure their numbers are just great! Advertising pays the freight when you have a captive audience.

It's kinda like the free Anne Coulter books that are handed out like poison candy for subscribing to rightwing magazines, or found under your seat as a "parting gift" at a cheesy Nazi fundraiser!!!

[LibinMo]

67. Unfortunately, it's better than my local paper

the Springfield News-Leader. NL has yet to cover the Downing Street Minutes. I e-mailed them both.

[Coexist]

75. I'm blessed to have the St. Pete Times

worth the price of shipping, if you can get it.

[MasonJar]

64. I sent USA feedback, criticizing the paltry, phony press. You can

do it too. The more we hit them the better.

[killbotfactory]

65. rrrrriiiiiight

that's the ticket

[steve2470]

66. USA Today is full of bullshit. Karl Rove would be proud nt

[HR_Pufnstuf]

68. USED Today

GONE Tomorrow.

[Coexist]

70. I wonder if the other memos and minutes that were leaked

have found their way to USA Today, or if they got lost in the translation from English/English?!

[reality based]

79. The internets is so unreliable

[struggle4progress]

82. Pfew! What is that awful smell?

Either their reporters are all dead and rotting -- or Jim Cox is a really big sh!thead ...

[Generator]

83. Lazy ass worthless cowards

It may not be the Holocaust, dammit, but don't tell me you aren't complicit in knowing it's a pile of crap.

Jeez, they couldn't call the Times-couldn't find anyone heh? Maybe that's because the Brits don't take their calls. Of course, if the little USA today rag could find it's way around the internet or find a contact person for the foreign press-if they did something more than just re-hash what everybody else was saying..nevermind.

[VegasWolf]

84. USA Today, last with the news you need! n/t

[dchill]

88. My LTE to USA Today

"'We could not obtain the memo or a copy of it from a reliable source,' Cox says."

I guess Ahmad Chalabi wasn't available? Who were your "reliable sources" for all the lies you have printed since the lead-up to the Iraq invasion?

Cover this story for what it is. It is not a memo; it is the minutes of a high level secret meeting from months before the "decision" was supposedly made. Blair and Bush are only at the top of a list of many who are lying. I don't think there is any question about that.

http://asp.usatoday.com/marketing/feedback/feedback-online.aspx?type=18

(EDIT to add LINK)

[kodi]

89. oddly, they did not ask bush/cheny/rumsfeld to prove Iraq had WMDs

so goes the so-called-liberal-media

[IndianaGreen]

90. How about the Sunday Times, owned by Rupert Murdoch?

It published the DSM in its entirety:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html

[PsyOpsRunsOurCountry]

92. Operation Mockingbird at play. State-controlled press since the Cold War.

Lots of info at this thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3808019

[ngGale]

93. The whole of Europe knew about it...

bunch of bullcrap reasons for protecting our great leaders. I saw the lies printed against Kerry by the Swifties after they knew the truth. Wonder why people don't trust the media anymore?
Cry me a river, USA Today - your credibility is fading faster than ice cream on a hot day in the South.