Guckert was not subpoenaed by the grand jury.

[BurtWorm]

According to himself in his editorandpublisher.com interview of last Friday, and according to David Corn, who says Guckert did not see any CIA document, contrary to Louise Slaughter's letter, but at most a copy of a State Dept. document that was created long after Plame was outed.

If what Guckert and Corn say is true, then DUers need to erase this error from their Guckert/Gannon databases and stop repeating it. Let's try to be better than the freepers who can be told a fact correcting an error in their precious conspiracy theories a million times and they never let go of the error. If the subpoena story is an error, please drop it!

Does anyone have anything other than the March 2004 subpoena list that's been circulating to corroborate the assertion that Guckert was subpoenaed? I doubt it, but I'm open to being corrected myself if I'm wrong.

[rodeodance]

1. nice post--but tell me about this subpoena list you speak of please

.......Does anyone have anything other than the March 2004 subpoena list that's been circulating to corroborate the assertion that Guckert was subpoenaed?....

[BurtWorm]

5. There's another thread in GD based on that list.

It was released dated March 2004. I don't know whose list it is, but it seems to be the only "evidence" that Guckert was subpoenaed. Nevertheless, that's not stopping hundreds of DUers from repeating it as though it were fact.

[grasswire]

6. I believe...

...the list originated at commondreams.com.

[BurtWorm]

9. Thank you.

But who put it together?

[hootinholler]

62. The subpoena list I saw in the other thread

Was to obtain communications between the WH and the people named, not the people. Not a list of subpoenas, but one subpoena listing those people.

-Hoot

Edited for clarity.

[shraby]

2. Someone probably has a link,

but Gannon told Joe Wilson when he interviewed him that he saw the document...if I'm remembering right...don't have a link myself.

[DoYouEverWonder]

3. David Corn is stumbling all over himself

covering for Gannon. Something strange is going on here.

Check out Corn's op-ed piece that just hit the wires.


The Bizarre Gannon Affair
Tue Feb 15, 3:30 PM ET
David Corn


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2281&ncid=742&e=5&u=/thenation/20050215/cm_thenation/32196

[Mistress Quickly]

8. He's been on Fox

too many times. I think they slipped him the kool-aid.

[grasswire]

10. I just don't trust David Corn.

Wasn't he just whining last week about how Democratic/progressive netizens are suspicious of him?

I trust his work about as much as I trust Michael Isikoff. Birds of a feather, IMO.

[BurtWorm]

11. He's taken some contrarian views. A little too cozy with the powers

that be. But I don't blame him for whining about how suspicious netizens are about him, considering netizens actually are suspicious of him. Nevertheless, his piece on Guckert should be read and considered by people here who don't seem to realize how nonsensical a lot of their theorizing seems. A lot of people have jumped on this bandwagon who don't have their facts straight. And they're bloviating, as loudly and gaseously as any winger ever did about Vince Foster or Monica Lewinsky.

[bpilgrim]

29. good

add more 'bloviating' to the storm to keep'em ALL on their toes ;->

peace

[Must_B_Free]

12. Corn was a War Whore whenit counted.

in my recollection

[SpiralHawk]

13. The more they talk about it, the riper the shit pile

people have a news for where the real shit is hidden. Just calling attention to the general direction of the manure pile is, in this case, a public service of a sort.

"The last temptation is the greatest treason,
To do the right thing, for the wrong reason."
-- T.S. Elliot

[oasis]

19. Corn is attempting to throw us off of the trail. He felt compelled to rush

to Gannon's rescue when there is plenty of right wing mischief he could be writing about.

It ain't working Corn, we're going to ride Gannon clear up to the front doorstep of 1600 Pennslyvania Avenue.

"Scoop" that.

[BurtWorm]

20. Yeeeehaw! Git the rope, boys!

Git the tar and feathers!

[oasis]

21. From now on we're fightin' fire with fire, yer either with us or agin' us.

:evilgrin:

[bpilgrim]

30. i'll meet you at the whiteHouse

:bounce:

peace

[FreedomAngel82]

68. That's what I think too

Wouldn't doubt it.

[AuntiBush]

97. Thank you Oasis! Scoop that is right!

Thanks! So damn mad about this. Of course, this is "OK," and not worthy of our mention. Corn is looking corny-er with each passing day. I hope DU'ers don't buy into that crop of bull!

[seventythree]

4. He said he was subpoenaed in his freeper blogs --

lots of discussion about it. Now we know the guy is one big liar -- so you can no more believe him saying he wasn't than his saying that he was subpoenaed. I say -- leave it until we know the truth, and only Firzgerald can give us that.

[BurtWorm]

7. But Corn is right that the document Guckert claims to have seen

is not the one Miller and Cooper and others are in trouble over. Guckert's was not the leak that exposed Plame. It was a propaganda leak purporting to "prove" that Plame recommended Wilson to go to Niger, contradicting Wilson's assertion that that didn't happen. It is therefore not relevant to the original criminal case in front of the grand jury.

But you're absolutely right that Gannon is full of shit and not a word he says can be trusted.

[H2O Man]

16. The list you make

reference to was actually the list that was used to subpoena White House officials' correspondences. Hence, if any WH official had phone contact and/or e-mail with any of the journalists on the list, the records of those contacts were the subject of the subpoena. Early on in the thread, I pointed this out to the people participating on the thread.

On other related threads, I have suggested that if Gannon saw anything, it was not an authentic document. As we know, however, this administration has a history with forged documents.

Whether Gannon has been contacted by the Fitzgerald grand jury is not really a significant issue. The fact that the White House would be connected to a "journalist" who is spreading false information on Wilson, etc, is significant.

[BurtWorm]

17. Well now Fitzgerald has Miller and Cooper where he wants them.

Of course if their employers want to be pseudo-heroes and take this issue all the way to the Supreme Court (again), then we'll be waiting a while for the answer to the question (or corroboration of the suspicion, anyway) of who it was in the government who outed Plame. But the fact is, the WH doesn't need Gannon to spread disinformation. They have a whole press corps for that purpose.

[jdj]

41. but they are saying if a crime is committed there is no privilege

or duty to protect sources. I almost feel it's more of a tradition than a legally supported privilege. And this is treason, not just any old crime.

[BurtWorm]

45. That is what the SC ruled. The First Amendment was not intended

to protect criminals in the government from committing crimes against critics of the government. It was designed to protect the citizens against a too powerful government. Miller is wrong if she thinks she's protecting a source. She's protecting the government in a crime it's committing against a critic of it. Now THAT is an outrage! :grr:

[hootinholler]

65. Yep that sums it up! nt

[seventythree]

22. true,

but he claims to have seen an intelligence document in the Wilson interview, so the question still is -- how did a male prostitute get access to intelligence documents?

[BurtWorm]

23. No, he's being cagey on whether he's seen it or not.

He has said he never said he saw it, and then he coyly turns around and says he shouldn't and won't discuss it. He wants us to believe he saw it. And we do. (Or you do.) ;)

[seventythree]

27. Darn I just read that interview, too,

and now I will have to go back and reread it (the one with Wilson) He definitely uses the words US Intelligence -- gotta look at it again, but I took it to be that he had seen it, but he could have just referenced it's contents -- he doesn't say -- "that I have seen", it's more "according to" -- I'm sure of that. Now, he could reference its contents because someone else has told him of them, but to me it's the same issue -- who is revealing to him the contents of intelligence memos -- this male prostitute who has just shown up in Washington?

[BurtWorm]

32. No, you have to read it carefully.

Only this much is clear. He is full off crap. FULL of it.

A memo written by an INR (Intelligence and Research) analyst who made notes of the meeting at which Wilson was asked to go to Niger sensed that something fishy was going on. That report made it to the outside world courtesy of some patriotic whistleblower that realized that a bag job was underway.


INR is a State Department agency. I'll bet Gannon was too stupid to know that at the time. He was just regurgitating what he'd read in the Wall Street Journal.


....

The classified document that slipped out sometime after the meeting put her name before the public, albeit a small group of inside-the-beltway types, but effectively ended the notion that she was still covert.


Insinuating to his freeper buddies that he's in that small group. But that doesn't mean he really was in it. And note that he is careful not to actually say he is in it, only to imply he is.

....

I raised all of these questions with Wilson in October 2003 in an interview for Talon News. Since I was aware of the INR report, I confronted him about it.

Is "aware" the same thing as "privvy to?" Anyone who'd read the October 7, 2003 Wall Street Journal article would have been "aware of the INR report." Here's Gannon being a blowhard again. Stretching the truth to make himself look like a big shot real genuine insider. (But he's just a dumb freeper!)



What is difficult to understand is the reason that the CIA would want to discredit this report. The first clue came when the agents from the FBI came to my home in March 2003 to question me in connection to the leak probe. I was flattered to think that I was important enough to be included among the luminaries like Andrea Mitchell, Tim Russert and Chris Matthews who were also named in a Justice Department subpoena of records from the White House. But most of the questions were about the INR report. They wanted to know where I got it and what I knew about it. Of course, as a journalist there wasn't much I could say without revealing my sources. I'm sure they were not satisfied, but it made me wonder why they were so interested in a document the CIA said was false.

Note that he doesn't say he was subpoenaed. Nor does he actually say he really did "have it," only that the FBI wanted to know where he got it. (By the way, his date is wrong in the above. The FBI could not have come to his home in March 2003. That's when the war started, whem he was fresh on the scene as Talon's big man at the WH. Plame wasn't outed until July. He meant March 2004.)

[seventythree]

116. true,

I was remembering from the transcript of the interview and the way he put the question to Wilson -- he doesn't say INR but intelligence report -- it's of little matter because I believe you are right and that he just made it appear that he had seen it or had access to one who had. I think the words were, according to an intelligence report... or something like that.

[tsuki]

24. Is the memo he say a public document?

[bpilgrim]

31. he's a LIAR and he WON'T reveal his source...

so everyone's just guessing at this point.

would love to watch him and novak pleading the 5th and having scooty asked DAILY about it... kinda like a jacko trial of neoCONs :evilgrin:

peace

[BurtWorm]

38. Exactly.

We're having a speculating party. :beer:

[FreedomAngel82]

69. Is there going to be any

fingerfoods? :) I love a good party. ;)

[Walt Starr]

120. A "reporter" for Talon News named "Jim Hauser" reported Gannon was on list

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1093819/posts

[peacetalksforall]

14. Yes, Burtworm, we'll acknowledge an error when we know there

is an error.

[BurtWorm]

18. Who is working to corroborate that he was subpoenaed?

It's up to you all who believe he was to prove he was. Until you have, you should stop taking it as fact that he was.

[hector459]

15. Do not erase. Just change to "Gannon claims to have seen..."

He started the rumor.

[seventythree]

26. Yes he did!

He started it on the doc and on the subpoena -- let him live with his duplicity. Let him say he was a big liar.
Since he is a born again, he needs to repent and come clean -- with all of it --his connections and his lovers. Anything less sends him to hell -- and they believe in hell.

[WilliamPitt]

25. Questions

1. Why is his name on Fitzgerald's subpoena list?

2. If he did not see the CIA memo, how was he able to reference it's contents regarding Valerie Plame in his October 2003 interview with Joe Wilson?

I'm not ready to take Corn's word, and sure as fuck I'm not taking The Guckinator's word for it.

[BurtWorm]

28. 1. Where is Fitzgerald's subpoena list?

Are you talking about the one that circulated last March on commondreams.org? Is that the actual Fitzgerald list? Can we get a corroboration of that?

2. He didn't reference a CIA memo but a State Dept. one, from what I understand. And he didn't say he saw it. According to SusanG's timeline at dailykos (http://dailykos.com/story/2005/2/9/191334/0754), that memo is first mentioned in a WSJ story on Oct. 7, 2003, by a journalist SusanG admits doesn't seem to have seen the memo himself (but had it described to him). Gannon's interview with Wilson was October 28. And here is what he wrote about it:

A memo written by an INR (Intelligence and Research) analyst who made notes of the meeting at which Wilson was asked to go to Niger sensed that something fishy was going on. That report made it to the outside world courtesy of some patriotic whistleblower that realized that a bag job was underway.

....

The classified document that slipped out sometime after the meeting put her name before the public, albeit a small group of inside-the-beltway types, but effectively ended the notion that she was still covert.

....

I raised all of these questions with Wilson in October 2003 in an interview for Talon News. Since I was aware of the INR report, I confronted him about it.

What is difficult to understand is the reason that the CIA would want to discredit this report. The first clue came when the agents from the FBI came to my home in March 2003 to question me in connection to the leak probe. I was flattered to think that I was important enough to be included among the luminaries like Andrea Mitchell, Tim Russert and Chris Matthews who were also named in a Justice Department subpoena of records from the White House. But most of the questions were about the INR report. They wanted to know where I got it and what I knew about it. Of course, as a journalist there wasn't much I could say without revealing my sources. I'm sure they were not satisfied, but it made me wonder why they were so interested in a document the CIA said was false.


Read these words very carefully and you will have to conclude that Gannon a) never says he actually saw the memo or even had it described to him as the WSJ journalist did; b) was questioned by the FBI in March 2003 but does not say flat out that he was subpoenaed, only that he was included (by the FBI) in a list of such luminaries who were subpoenaed. Read it carefully. He's trying to puff himself up into being one of the big boys. But is he? I doubt it.

[WilliamPitt]

34. Good points

Bears serious digging. Thanks.

[BurtWorm]

35. By the way, Gannon's dates are wrong. He was not questioned in 2003

but in 2004. Just a little point of correction of the record.

[merh]

44. When you say he was questioned, do you mean by the FBI?

If he was questioned by the FBI and told them his name was Jeff Gannon and not Jim Guckert or Jeff Gannon aka Jim Guckert, was he telling a lie? Isn't telling a lie to the FBI a felony? Hmmm, where's Martha, let's ask her.

The bottom line is the sick little prick did not belong in the WH, he was feed the line by the admin and he repeated it and he probably did see the document, but he is a liar and who the f can believe a word he says?

[BurtWorm]

48. Yes he was questioned by the FBI.

He would have to be pretty stupid not to have told them his real name.

As for whether he "belongs in the WH," if Bush "belongs there" the bar has been forever lowered for everyone else.

[merh]

53. Bull crap - Gannon is a prostitute - for security reasons the SS

would not allow a prostitute access to the WH press corps. What if he was blackmailed by a terrorists organization or some enemy of the nation with photos of himself performing some act on another? What if the holder of the photos told him that they would release the photos to the WH (assuming they did not know he was a prostitute) or to the press and thus ruin his career? What would he do to keep that information concealed, would he spy for the blackmailers, would he try to plant a bomb or attack the prez? National security concerns would not allow a prostitute, male or female, into the WH or near the president for fear of what it would do to their security and the WH's image. Bullshit on your defense of the liar.

He admits in the Talons article from March 2004 that he was a target of the investigation and that he had seen the memo.

You are trying too damned hard to discredit the story and to protect him.

Why?

[BurtWorm]

60. Where is it in the code that no gay hustlers are allowed

in WH press briefings? I'd like to see that language myself.

Now why am I trying to discredit the story? I would say I'm trying to present a skeptical alternative to the received notion that has developed here about Gannon, because I believe some DUers may want a path of breadcrumbs left out for them so they can find there way back home if the Gannon story turns out to be too good to be true, which I fear it is.

Why do you think I'm trying to discredit the story? ;)

[merh]

61. Because you are adopting his spin as your own.

I don't have the Secret Services regulations to be able to prove to you in writing the obvious. That you are asking for the code is just ridiculous.

Could it be too good to be true? Yes, but it could also be that the bunch in the WH are just so full of themselves that they know they can spin away every story that is negative. Hell, they are using our soldiers to fight an illegal and immoral war based on their lies and they have not been stopped. Why would a boy toy in the WH bother them. They own it, they control it.

[BurtWorm]

66. Look, you're asserting something as fact that I don't believe is fact.

I think you're appealing to "common sense," but in this case, I'm sorry, but "common sense" isn't good enough. Give me hard evidence that the WH ever worried about whether any reporter was gay "because of security concerns." Common sense tells you that what they say in press briefings is on the record anyway. They don't leak during press briefings. Why would they worry if a reporter would be blackmailed for what he heard during a press briefing when all you'd have to do is watch CSPAN to get the same information?

[merh]

76. Gay is not the issue, prostitution is.

Quite twisting the issues. It is not what a member of the press leaks, it is what he brings with him to the press briefings. What chemical, what explosive, how can he wrangle himself into parts of the WH that he shouldn't.

National Security -- do you think they would allow a former Taliban or Al Qeada member into the WH, even for a press briefing? Spies use all sorts of tactics to get access to the WH. How naive are you or are you just pretending?

[BurtWorm]

77. Do you have evidence that prostitutes are more likely to blow up

a press secretary than just an average media whore?

[merh]

83. Stop being so ridiculous.

If a prostitute made or makes her living illegally and by the standards of our admin and the fundies, immorally and sinfully, and then is given access to the WH, said prostitute is more vulnerable to being used by spies or terrorists. Said prostitute would do what they asked rather than risk the chance of having their credibility destroyed and the life ruined. Because no one would think that a press correspondent would be trying to harm the pres, they are a great tool to be used by spies or terrorists.

You really haven't a clue about security clearances do you?

[BurtWorm]

90. And you do?

;)

[Lone_Star_Dem]

101. Burt, I know a little about non-sensitive positions clearance.

If it's not changed, two things that they require that might be suspect here are a check into your past five years of employment and if you hold any federal debt.

I think he owes some back taxes, does he not? I have no idea if his sex industry job would keep him from qualifying.

I don't know if this applies to a press pass. This is just a couple of the things I recall from the form.

I do agree with a healthy dose of skepticism. I just feel that there's a way to expose him for the ringer he was. If only I could find it.

[BurtWorm]

107. Thanks, Lone_Star.

I have been to the Capitol as part of my job as an editor of a nonprofit association newsmagazine to cover lobbying events. Anybody is able to wander around the Congressional office buildings, enter hearing rooms, even come into contact with members of Congress. All you have to do is go through a security screening, similar to one at any airport.

There is, in other words, a wall of security you come to but that is not all that taxing for someone without violent intent to pass through to gain access to Congress. I'm just wondering if the wall of security to gain access to the White House press briefings is similarly low-threshold, to screen out people who present a clear danger (of violent behavior) in their records and allow as much access as possible for people who do not present that kind of danger. A rational society would not view a possessors of a tax bill as a sign of potentially violent behavior, would they? Or would they? I don't know.

I think a democracy should have as much access to government as is reasonably possible. I don't think it's a bad thing that a representative of a lowly Internet psuedo news agency was able to access these briefings, just as I appreciate that Russ Mokhiber, who writes those hilariously disturbing Scott & Me columns, has access to them despite being the sole employee of his publication.

[me b zola]

121. Do you remember what happened in Fargo last week?

The pResident went there to speak and a black-balled list was leaked.

He, **, doesn't want anyone around that will ask him difficult questions or any one who would point out any of his lies or misrepresentations.

I can't believe that *everyone* in that press room is not screened to the hilt, particularly if they just appear without a career track record.

[BurtWorm]

122. Well, you should try to make yourself believe it

because it's true.

[ultraist]

85. There is no fucking way Gannon passed the SS check legitimately

Let's not be naive. They can pull massive amounts of info on anyone QUICKLY. We are not talking a small local police dept that has limited databases. Get real. They knew everything about this guy.

[BurtWorm]

91. So why did they let a guy like Guckert in there if they knew everything?

Hmm?

[AuntiBush]

99. I agree merh!

Exactly my question... why?

[merh]

105. What are they hiding?

What are they afraid of? :shrug:

[merh]

54. Be sure you check out post 50 and the FR link in that post

The blog is very entertaining as is the March 2004 Talon article that reports Gannon is a subject of a subpoena before the Plame Grand Jury.

[bpilgrim]

36. "was questioned by the FBI in March 2003"

sounds like he was in on it EARLY to me... if your goin by his words (not to mention the birth of his website)

has the FBI said anything about it? :shrug:

peace

[BurtWorm]

37. As I said in other places, he was clearly wrong about the dates.

Plame wasn't outed until July 2003.

[bpilgrim]

40. so he was just repeating what was already reported?

he certainly has a history of that...

but if it has to do with PLAME i say it must be investigated even if it turns out to be false... maybe it will be the ONLY way to get him to TALK about his other ties to the WH.

the more 'BIMBO' eruptions on the face of the WH the better.

:hi:

peace

[BurtWorm]

43. I think he was.

I think he's a small fry. He's not going to get us to the Plame outer, I don't think. We all kind of know who the Plame outer is, anyway. I think Miller and Cooper are going to be squeezed into spilling the beans. I hope so anyway. If there's any justice they will realize that they have to. There's no heroism in protecting the government from committing a crime against a critic of it. No heroism at all.

[hootinholler]

79. Will see 70 re question 1 nt

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v3.0
==================



This week is our first quarter 2005 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend almost entirely
on donations from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for
your support.

[Stephanie]

39. There was an interview with Joseph Wilson at Daily KOS last week

and it was mentioned. SusanG did the interview.

*edit* here it is:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/2/9/94615/61143

<snip>
Plame & Propagannon: Joe Wilson Speaks Out
by SusanG
Wed Feb 9th, 2005 at 08:45:52 PST

(From the diaries -- kos )

###

Why do you think he was on the subpoena list with such other prominent media players when he was so small time?

I have never seen the list. Didn't even know it was public information. Remember that the case is between the USG and whoever leaked Valerie's name. Although our names are tied to it, we are not victims, the government is.

===

That said, if we allow ourselves to be intimidated and silenced by the liars, our democracy will not survive. We have to continue to confront them.

===

Now that there are a lot of questions about Gannon's identity and the legitimacy of Talon News, in retrospect, do you think you were being set up?

I frankly have not followed him more than what I occasionally see in the blogs. It is possible the interview was a setup. I don't believe I spoke to him more than twice at most by phone, by the way. I don't know who all knew about the so-called memo. I heard of its supposed existence from only one other reporter. I doubt he was repeating hearsay, since only one other journalist mentioned it to me.

====

Approximately when did Chris Matthews contact you to say, "Rove says your wife is fair game?" Was it before or after Novak's July 14, 2003, article?

It was after. I think the date was July 21, 2003. The date is in my book, The Politics of Truth, which I recommend to everybody. It describes my career in American diplomacy as well as the way in which the 16 words and the subsequent leak played out.

#

[oasis]

42. What was mentioned in regards to the subpeona?

[Stephanie]

58. posted link above

it's a long interview - lots was said

[BurtWorm]

47. I've been looking for that interview. Do you have a link handy?

Meanwhile, read her timeline of the Gannon references to Plame. She undoes her case that he was in on it, in my opinion.

http://dailykos.com/story/2005/2/9/191334/0754

[Stephanie]

57. I just edited to add link ^

[merh]

46. Common Dreams March 2004

Subpoena list

A federal grand jury has subpoenaed White House records on administration contacts with more than two dozen journalists and news media outlets in a special investigation into the improper leak of a covert CIA official's identity to columnist Robert Novak last July. They include:

Robert Novak, "Crossfire," "Capital Gang" and the Chicago Sun-Times

Knut Royce and Timothy M. Phelps, Newsday

Walter Pincus, Richard Leiby, Mike Allen, Dana Priest and Glenn Kessler, The Washington Post

Matthew Cooper, John Dickerson, Massimo Calabresi, Michael Duffy and James Carney, Time magazine

Evan Thomas, Newsweek

Andrea Mitchell, "Meet the Press," NBC

Chris Matthews, "Hardball,"

MSNBC

Tim Russert, Campbell Brown, NBC

Nicholas D. Kristof, David E. Sanger and Judith Miller, The New York Times

Greg Hitt and Paul Gigot, The Wall Street Journal

John Solomon, The Associated Press

Jeff Gannon, Talon News

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0306-02.htm

[BurtWorm]

49. I'd like to see this corroborated elsewhere.

I'd like to know how Newsday got the list.

[merh]

50. How about Talon's article

Federal Grand Jury Could Subpoena Talon News Correspondent (and RighTalk host)
Talon News ^ | 3/9/2004 | Jim Hauser

Posted on 03/09/2004 6:48:38 AM PST by ConservativeMajority

WASHINGTON (Talon News) -- A federal grand jury has subpoenaed White House records on administration contacts with more than two dozen journalists and news media outlets in a special investigation into the alleged improper leak of a covert CIA official's identity to columnist Robert Novak last July.

Talon News has learned that one of the journalists being targeted is Jeff Gannon, Washington Bureau Chief and White House correspondent for Talon News.

In July of 2003, syndicated columnist, Robert Novak wrote a piece entitled "Mission to Niger" in which he discussed retired diplomat Joseph C. Wilson's investigation into possible Iraqi purchases of uranium from Niger. In the article, Novak disclosed that he was told by two administration officials that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, suggested sending him to Niger to investigate claims outlined in an Italian report regarding the attempted uranium purchases by Iraq.

Novak also identified Plame as a " operative on weapons of mass destruction," although in a follow-up column, Novak said that according to unofficial sources, Plame was an analyst and not involved in covert operations. Novak also stressed that her name and occupation were already well known.

(snip)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1093819/posts#comment

[BurtWorm]

55. " one of the journalists being targeted is Jeff Gannon"

is a funny way of putting it. Why not just say "Jeff Gannon is among those who has been subpoenaed?" Why all the caginess with language? Is it just sloppiness? Or are they trying to create an impression of something happening that isn't really happening? Why did Gannon later say, after he himself was outed as a poseur, that he wasn't targeted by the grand jury after all?

[merh]

63. They were trying to make him a victim of the liberal witch hunt!

To give credibility to his reporting and bolster him in the eyes of the conservative audiences.

[BurtWorm]

67. Exactly! Now you're getting it!

If he was on that subpoena list, he looks like a real player, doesn't he? But you and I know he's full of shit, don't we?

[merh]

78. He was a player for the WH - he did their bidding and he was

probably given access to the memo just so that he could report it was common knowledge. WHY WAS HE ALLOWED in the WH in the first place? What did he have on someone in the admin? Was it so big that he could get access to the memo and other privileged communications?

[BurtWorm]

82. I guess you don't get it.

He did the WH's bidding because he had something on the WH? I don't get that. If he had something on the WH, why didn't he get more out of them than a nonpaying gig at TalonNews.com that required him to turn tricks to pay his bills? Why didn't he wrangle an Arsmtrong Williams deal out of them? Or why didn't Rove just off the useless motherfucker?

[merh]

92. Well, we will just see how he did or didn't get paid.

There is alot that an investigation will uncover. That is why so many are trying to prevent an investigation. So very many ....

You are accusing me of assuming too much, yet you are assuming that he didn't get paid and had to turn tricks to survive. He was a damned operative for the WH, given a cush job, access to the WH and a RW radio show, yet he had no journalistic experience and 2 days of "education".

Again, I have to wonder why you are defending him so and why you are trying to persuade others that this is story is not worthy of further investigation.

What are they afraid of? What are they hiding?

[BurtWorm]

94. I don't care if other people investigate it or not.

Honestly. But I see what happens when everyone is all hot and bothered like a frenzied mob. All sorts of wild theories come spinning out, with lots of dark insinuating and absolutely no concrete connection with anything real. Everyone speculates, and then the speculations become pseudo facts. Like you going around asserting with certainty that the White House wouldn't allow a hooker into the news room for security purposes, but you can't point to anything other than common sense about security, and someone else saying they had to have known every last drop of information about Guckert because only the naive don't know that the government knows all because it sees all.

You all need someone on the ground to rein you in. Really you do.

[merh]

98. You just let me know what prostitute was allowed to have

WH press credentials. You won't be able to because IT HAS NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE. Prior to this administration a journalist had to have experience, work for a legitimate news source and be considered credible. No John, Jeff or Jim with only 2 days "education" from a "new source" that had been in existence for only 6 days prior to his admission could ever gain access to the WH press corps. Hell, Congress would not give him a press pass, he could not pass their standards and you would think the WH had higher standards.

Your ignorance, whether real or pretend, is quite annoying.

I don't need to be reined in - you need to move on to another topic since this one is so over your head.

What are they hiding? What are they afraid of?

[BurtWorm]

111. How do you KNOW it has never happened before?

Do you know that the WH looks for evidence of prostitution when digging into the background of the media whores who try to get a fornt row seat at the Big Show?

[merh]

114. Because if a prostitute was allowed into the press corp,

that fact would have been used as a tool against the admin in power at that time. The only time an admin has has total control of the media and no standards regarding the WH press is this admin! Go read Wilson's interview - he echoes what I have been telling you.

No one ever said G/G was the leak, but his access to the WH and sensitive materials is what causes concern and questions his motives and leverage and the vulnerability of the WH.

[BurtWorm]

112. I'm presuming innocence in this case.

Because there's no hard evidence that the WH was involved in anything criminal as far as Gannon is concerned. As far as Novack and Miller and Cooper and Williams etc. are concerned it's a TOTALLY different matter. There I'm presuming guilt to the core.

[merh]

51. How about Gannon's own words from that article

In December of last year, Gannon reported on continuing pressure by Senate Democrats on the Justice Department to "pursue the investigation into the alleged leak of a CIA officer's identity earlier in the year." Gannon also identified Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) and Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI), ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee as the two prominent figures leading the push.

At the same time, the Washington Post claimed that "according to their sources, the Central Intelligence Agency believes people in the Bush administration are continuing to release classified information to damage figures at the center of the Niger 'yellowcake' controversy."

According to a subsequent Talon News story by Bobby Eberle regarding the Washington Post piece, "The Washington Post cites an unnamed source who says, 'The CIA is angry about the circulation of a still-classified document to conservative news outlets.' They point to a memo referenced in a Talon News interview of Wilson that suggests his wife was instrumental in his selection for the fact-finding trip to Africa."

Talon News was the only service identified by the Washington Post as having knowledge of the memo's existence.

"I will tell you that the information did not come from inside the administration," Gannon told Talon News. "For something that is supposed to be classified, it seems that this document is easily accessible."

[BurtWorm]

56. See how the memo was referenced by Gannon in that article.

He does not say he actually saw it.

[merh]

59. Read that blog

he plays the game, what memo, does the memo exist? You wanted to know that he was on the subpoena list and he admits he was.

Here he discusses it again in another blog from FR
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1092073/posts

It depends on what it is! Does the memo exist?

[BurtWorm]

64. So can you say for sure whether he saw the memo or not?

Can you say for sure whether he was on the list?

Newsday/Commondreams.org says he was on the list, but Gannon now denies being on it and Joe Wilson says he never saw the list and didn't know it was public knowledge. Can you say for sure he was on it? Do you think there's enough evidence to say for sure that he actually ever saw the memo?

[merh]

72. I betcha Fitzpatrick will be asking him these same questions

He saw the memo, he had the memo - will he admit to it? Who the heck knows, he is a liar and at this point in his life he is probably sleeping with smith and wesson and not flying on small planes.

Depressed Gay Journalist Takes Own Life is a headline he knows they can make happen.

[BurtWorm]

74. I personally don't think Fitzgerald is going to waste his time on

a waste of space like Jimmy D. Guckert.

[merh]

80. And I bet he will be asking him, face to face, whether before

the grand jury or in his office. You want the weakest link and he is the weakest link. Why did he get access to the WH? Fitzpatrick will want to know why he was given access and what he was privy too.

[merh]

52. Does that ease your concerns?

:shrug:

Be sure you read the FR blog, he doesn't deny being subpoenaed, he just says that no one confirms that a memo exists! Yet, he admits to referring to the memo.

[hootinholler]

70. Merh, please read what you just posted...

I don't think he was subpoenaed. I haven't seen it reported.

Post 46:

Subpoena list

A federal grand jury has subpoenaed White House records on administration contacts with more than two dozen journalists and news media outlets

and then post 50:

Federal Grand Jury Could Subpoena Talon News Correspondent (and RighTalk host)
Talon News ^ | 3/9/2004 | Jim Hauser

Posted on 03/09/2004 6:48:38 AM PST by ConservativeMajority

WASHINGTON (Talon News) -- A federal grand jury has subpoenaed White House records on administration contacts with more than two dozen journalists and news media outlets

Let's be real here, ok? I'd love to see him on under oath, but this isn't yet the case.

-Hoot

[BurtWorm]

73. Excellent catch, Hoot!

I'm just catching on to what you and H20 are on about. :toast:

[merh]

75. Common Dreams list him on the list they had.

He admits to it in the blogs.

Was he actually subpoenaed or did the WH block the subpoena, I don't know. He is familar with the memo, he discusses it and dismisses it because no one admits it exists and then that it is so readily available.

[hootinholler]

81. You claim your post 46 was from common dreams, and...

Please provide a link anywhere that Gannon states he was subpoenaed, I couldn't find it.

-Hoot

[merh]

86. Check out this thread

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1092073/posts

[hootinholler]

102. Nope, not in there...

I visited every occurrence of 'subp' and every occurrence of 'Jeff' in that thread. They are referring to the corespondence being subpoened not Gannon. A few poster's seem to have made the same claims you have, but they are not supported.

Edit: Gannon certainly didn't claim to have been subpoenaed.

-Hoot

[merh]

104. Well guess what, grand jury proceedings are secret, so you will

probably not know if he has previously testified before the grand jury until an indictment is returned. That being said, I think the prosecutor will subpoena him.

Go off on your tangent about "no proof of being subpoenaed" if you like, Gannon put himself in the position of being involved in the Plame matter. In all actuality, he probably wasn't subpoenaed because of the admin's interference, not because he is not involved.

Gannon did not deny being subpoenaed and his comments give one the impression (including the bloggers on that forum, that he did. He did not correct them. It would be fun to cross examine him in open court on this and give the jury the chance to see him weasel around the issue. It depends on what it is, you know!

[BurtWorm]

71. By the way, I did read the FR blog.

The dialog between Gannon and a very skeptical "John Galt," I presume you mean. That's when I started finding it odd that he wouldn't just come out and say he had real information the grand jury might be interested in. He was acting a little too cutesy about it all, and Galt was calling him on it.

[merh]

87. He doesn't come out and say he has the info

because at that point in time the existence of the memo and the info was in question.

For that matter, to come out and admit that he was part of the outing of Plame is an admission of a crime, he is a liar, but he is not stupid.

[BurtWorm]

113. He was not involved in the outing of Plame. That much should be clear.

Right?

[tsuki]

84. Burt, the subpoena may be from this source. I have tried to post

it, but my computer keeps rebooting. It is old, like me. Notice the headline.

mediamatters.org

March 9, 2004, a Talon News article (no longer available on TalonNews.com) reported that its own reporter, Gannon, had been "targeted" by the Justice Department's investigation of the leak of Plame's clandestine identity in July 2003.

<Document below>

Republican Journalist Target of White House Subpoena

Written by Talon News

Tuesday March 9, 2004



By Jim Hauser
Talon News
March 9, 2004

WASHINGTON (Talon News) -- A federal grand jury has subpoenaed White House records on administration contacts with more than two dozen journalists and news media outlets in a special investigation into the alleged improper leak of a covert CIA official's identity to columnist Robert Novak last July.

Talon News has learned that one of the journalists being targeted is Jeff Gannon, Washington Bureau Chief and White House correspondent for Talon News.

<snip>

http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:huthlGucb-0J:www.navyseals.com/community/articles/article.cfm%3Fid%3D2827+I+have+been+an+outspoken+critic+of+the+leak+probe+and+an+aggressive+questioner+of+the+motives+behind+it.+That+seems+to+have+drawn+the+attention+of+someone+with+the+authority+to+issue+subpoenas.%22&hl=en

[BurtWorm]

88. Thanks, tsuki. Hootinholler has pointed out

that the exact wording is "A federal grand jury has subpoenaed White House records on administration contacts with more than two dozen journalists and news media outlets."

If this is accurate, the story linking Gannon with the subpoena actually isn't about *his* being subpoenaed but the White House *records of contacts* with him and other journalists being subpoenaed. This supports my conclusion that Gannon was a blowhard who wanted people to think he was more of an insider than he actually was. Why was he on the list of contacts the grand jury was interested in in March 2004? It was because of his interview with Joseph Wilson in late October 2003, when he referred to a document that had already been mentioned in a WSJ story in early October 2003.

[hootinholler]

103. I think he was a spook plant...

In addition to being a blowhard, but I have nothing but intuition to base that on.

-Hoot

[tsuki]

118. But the title to the article may have confused people. I had to read the

article before I understood what was being subpoenaed.

[BurtWorm]

123. That, I believe, is how blowhard Guckert wanted you to read it.

He wanted you to think he was important enough to be subpoenaed, and lo and behold, that's what a lot of people are believing! ;)

[ultraist]

89. So! No one has yet to CONFIRM OR DENY Gannon was subpoenaed

Why the push to mimimize Gannon's role? The guy was very likely a paid propaganda operative. He didn't end up getting called on, by his fake name, by accident. It wasn't his good luck that got him a pass. Get real. The WH now has a history of this.

Those conferences are choregraphed in advance. This is common knowledge. Reporters are not called on randomly. Who put his name on the list? Who got him a pass? Who wrote his questions up for him?

These are reasonable questions and I don't have any desire to consider the WH innocent until proven guilty. Fuck them, they have lost all creditability.

[BurtWorm]

93. Okay, let's make Gannon the center of the conspiracy.

Now what?

[ultraist]

95. I didn't say make him the center, I said stop justifying & minimizing

He obviously has a role and the WH has once again broken the law. Why let them off the hook so easily?

[BurtWorm]

108. What law did they break in this instance?

Specifically with respect to Gannon. (I know they've taken dumps on all sorts of laws in other instances.)

[AuntiBush]

96. Here's my opinion and it's worth some "thing!"

Though I'm merely a stand-by, not actually a blogger, just because I'm out here posting, and responding to news-feeds does not make me an actual blogger. Now, I am entitled to my opinions and if posting my opinions makes me a blogger so be it, but maybe we need to separate the "news bloggers" from the regular-folk bloggers.

My point: I was watching that news-brief given by the Chimp. Yes, the chimp. I can think of plenty of well-deserving names I could call him, as I didn't vote for the Oaf, but needless to say he's controlling my life right now and I for one am not happy about it and for more then enough good reasons to back up that claim.

But everyone is missing the point here. That the one person that holds the highest position in this land, and for that controls most of what happens around around globe, or at least heavily influences it, like leading us into war, etc., etc... is using people like Guckert/Gannon to promote his mandate from the most respected, most highest chair this country has to offer. Should you're own children and grandchildren ever be so fortunate to even come near the dream. It's bad enough our television media has been bought and paid-off. How dare we ever accuse another country of using propaganda on their own countrymen and women when I'm seeing it right here before my very eyes and I was watching that day, the day Gannon, or whatever his name is ask that hardball (it certainly didn't feel soft going by me) question and was not amused one bit, rather insulted and sickened by the stench of corruption as I watched knowing he was a paid rat to lie for the pack.

As a plain-old American I'd like to believe my voice is still being counted, even when we know our votes are not, but besides that point my point is that if our Prez was clueless (please, not for a minute) when addressing ole "Jeff" for those obvious pre-determined questions that just furthered his agenda, then you're telling me that it's "OK" to allow just anyone ole' body in those briefings and someone such as myself should just shut-up about it 'cause it just goes with the media whore lies to boost Bush's wants and needs.

Sorry, but this American isn't buying it any longer. I seriously want this issue kept alive. And I want answers straight from the top. I'm tired and weary of the lies coming from the one office I use to trust. And I'm even more tired of the media pushing their own agendas as well. I want my country back in the form of decency, honestly, dignity, and above all justice, and freedom for each of us, including the freedom of knowing that if the media is asking questions of the Prez I can at least count on them to be as unbiased as they possibly can. And if it's a paid-questionaire hired-in to push a President's agenda, it should be announced as such. After all, if there is nothing wrong with this, why lie about it.

And come to think of it, where are all of those holier-then-thous now? I don't hear the tabernacle evangelical choir and their faithless leaders like Falwell or the 700 Club screaming about Gannon's triple XXX censorship damnation to hell. So please, don't take me wrong but everyone is missing the point here.

Sorry, just very angry about this entire mess. If it were a Democrat, they'd had him or her hung-out and tarred & feathered by now. And the nerve of the right-wing neocons, thinking we'd just pass this along as another minor event worthless of reporting. It all sickens this American!

Mad and not afraid to admit it!

[oasis]

100. Nice post. Gannon's a genie that's not going back into the bottle. Don't

worry.

[BurtWorm]

109. You're right about that.

This genie is going to be draining a lot more lefties' attention away from vastly more urgent outrages and crimes, because he's just so easy compared to those more complicated ones. You don't even have to put two and two together and create a coherent conspiracy theory to be permanently entertained pumping ole Jeff up into Bush's "Lewinsky."

[merh]

106. Thank you for this post!

I agree with oasis, he is a genie that they can't get back into the bottle.

[Stephanie]

110. There's this from the WaPo yesterday >

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27730-2005Feb15.html?sub=AR

Gannon is also embroiled in the Valerie Plame story. In 2003 he interviewed Plame's husband, former ambassador Joe Wilson, after unnamed administration officials leaked her role as a CIA operative to columnist Robert Novak. According to his Talon News story, Gannon asked Wilson about "an internal government memo prepared by U.S. intelligence personnel a meeting in early 2002 where your wife, a member of the agency for clandestine service working on Iraqi weapons issues, suggested that you could be sent to investigate the reports."

House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) this week questioned how Gannon got access to the documents and asked the special prosecutor investigating the Plame leak to include Gannon in his probe.

[BurtWorm]

115. The problem I have with that is that the memo was referred to

weeks before Gannon's interview in a WSJ story, meaning he could easily have taken his info from there. Why does everyone assume Gannon actually saw a memo. He himself is very cagey about whether such a memo even exists, and as SusanG at dailykos.com noted about the original story, the WSJ reporter (Cloud, I think?) apparently never saw the memo but had it described to him. In the three weeks between the WSJ story where the memo makes its first appearance and Gannon's interview with Wilson, isn't it possible that the memo would have become legend in freeperland and wingerville in general? We know that Gannon is a plagiarist and regurgitator of winger legend. It seems very likely to me that he was being true to form in the Wilson interview, just regurgitating freeper legend about a memo that may not even have existed.

[ElaineinIN]

117. Thanks for being a voice of reason.

Folks, I really think that the line of inquiry needs to be as follows:

1. What kind of pass did J/J have?
2. What are the standards for issuing that pass?
2a. Do those standards include a security clearance check?
3. Were those standards applied to J/J?
4. If not, why?

Now, I think that most of us believe (hope) that there are standards that need to be met over and above going through a metal detector to get that close to the president, regardless of what kind of pass it is. But I don't know that -- given that the WH controls the process, they may let in whomever they damn well please, at which points its crappy journalism and political manipulation of the media, but we knew that.

I personally would hope that there is some kind of security clearnance. I would also hope that having open and notorious violations of the law (ie prostitution) would not clear that bar. But again, I don't know that.

If so, then it seems to me that either (1) someone did a crap job, as bloggers using the internet were able to find out this stuff, so we have incompetnece in the Bush WH... again, we knew that, or (2) someone greased the skids (so to speak), and the question is why.

The problem is that there are a lot if ifs in that statement. If we willy nilly jump from question 0 to question 4 without answering the issues inbetween, we look like rabid, tinfoil hatters. If we do our homework and do it right, then it cant be dismissed as the revengeful rantings of ultra lib bloggers.

I'm not saying there aren't legitimate questions, it all stinks to high heaven, and the hypocrasy is nauseating. I'd love the irony of this being the scandal that takes Bushco down, but lets not count our chickens or something like that until all the research is done, and done propertly.

[Walt Starr]

119. Hmmmm, Talon News reported "Gannon" on list to be subpoenaed

March 9, 2004 as still exists on Freakerland with commentary from Guckert himself:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1093819/posts