MSNBC: Gannon/Guckert (David Shuster)

[sabra]

<<SNIP>>
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5445086/

Gannon/Guckert (David Shuster)


Many of you have been following the intriguing story of man who claimed to be a reporter and who covered the white house using a fake name. James Guckert, previously known as Jeff Gannon, sat down for an interview with NBC's Campbell Brown. And for those of you who missed the "Today Show," we are going to repackage some of the clips tonight on Hardball (7pm & 11pm ET).

During the interview, Guckert said his White House access was not a conspiracy but rather the result of a simple request. "I asked to come— they allowed me to come," said Guckert, "and apparently there isn't a very high threshold as far as somebody's personal life."
That, of course, is an understatement. If the White House had done the kind of FBI background check required of regular reporters, the press office would have discovered that Guckert is linked to several pornographic web sites. uckert confirmed these links in his NBC interview. But when asked about advertising himself on the web as a $200/hour gay male escort, Guckert said, "I can not go into those specifics."

As far as using an alias, Guckert said his real name is "difficult to pronounce." Huh? I heard him say "Guckert" several times during Campbell's interview and it didn't sound particularly challenging to me.

....

The problem is, Talon News (a collection of Web sites run by Texas Republicans) wasn't formed and didn't start publishing until after Guckert had already started attending White House press briefings two years ago. So, this story is not over yet. Stay tuned.

<</SNIP>>

[Kingshakabobo]

1. Did you see him sweat during the interview??

He reminded me of that Martin Short- slimy, sleazy, sweaty fidgety lawyer character.

Oh, here he is.

[elehhhhna]

4. "Is it him or is it me?" That was a doozy.

[Dhalgren]

I loved Short's character -when he would look at the camera

and say, "Is it me? It's him, right?" Hillarious. Gannon is some kind of dopey stooge. I am having a hard time figuring this thing out. He is just too stupid to be real. So that leaves us with "what the fuck is going on?" Which is sort of where we started...

[Poppyseedman]

2. David Corn (The Nation) writes about Gannongate

http://www.davidcorn.com/2005/02/problems_with_g.php

http://www.thenation.com/capitalgames/index.mhtml?bid=3&pid=2219

He has a different take on it. I'm not sure where his bias is coming from, but he does make sense.

[trumad]

6. Corn's a fucking idiot.

He mentions Talon like that gives Gannon credibility.. Prob with that Dave is that Gannon got in before Talon even existed.

[Poppyseedman]

7. He points that out , states it needs to be answered.

His main point about access to the whitehouse via the daily pass is on the money

Bloggers should think hard when they complain about standards for passes for White House press briefings. Last year, political bloggers--many of whom have their own biases and sometimes function as activists--sought credentials to the Democratic and Republican conventions. That was a good thing. Why shouldn't Josh Marshall, Glenn Reynolds, John Aravosis, or Markos Moulitsas (DailyKos) be allowed to question Scott McClellan or George W. Bush? Do we want only the MSMers to have this privilege?


Since the MSM is bought and paid for, we better have the same privileges as them to ask the real questions to whomever.

Sometimes, you better be careful what you wish for, it may get it with unintended consequences

[Dhalgren]

10. This WH would never allow a left-leaning "blogger" into the

WH for any reason. His (and your) statement is a false condition. The assumption is that the WH just lets anyone come in and doesn't try to screen who is who - do you really believe that? Bush won't even go out in public without having anyone and everyone he might come into contact with screened - so this is not an issue.

[trumad]

14. Yeah..but he says this....

"But his pursuers ought to be careful on this point. Talon News was a fly-by-night (or phony) news operation with a political agenda".

When Gannon first entered the White House he was not working for Talon news because Talon did not exist. So...can any Joe Shmoe walk in and start asking questions?

[Poppyseedman]

19. I think David Corn piece leaves a lot of unanswered questions on the table

But his main point is: The bloggers start pushing this too hard, it will hurt them in the long run. Then the press briefing will be a real echo chamber.

The focus here at DU seems to be Gannongate will bring the Bushco administration down, I seriously doubt it will.

In the words of Gannon/Gurket or whatever his name really is "that thinking is divorced from reality"

Bushco needs to be exposed, but Gannongate isn't going to be the vehicle. It has no legs exactly because the MSM doesn't like the spotlight pointed anywhere near it direction.

[Dhalgren]

9. "I'm not sure where his bias is coming from"

Really? You can't read his article and tell "where his bias is coming from"? What if instead of a hooker, this guy ran a website for bomb making? Would Corn still say that the WH shouldn't look into the backgrounds and private lives of people who are allowed within ten feet of the President? He said he didn't care if Helen Thomas was a "female dominatrix" in her spare time; Dave Corn couldn't carry Helen Thomas' sports bra. He is an apologist for the WH and is saying "move on, nothing to see here, just a gay hooker with a missing past getting access to the President. Move along..." Sheeesh...

[Poppyseedman]

12. You make a good point

but since Gannon gained access via a daily pass and the background check is cursory for one, just about anyone with a criminal clean record can in theory get one.

His point is, once you start limiting daily access because of people like Gannon, with shady but not criminal backgrounds, the bloggers will have cut off their own noses.

Corn is an apologist for Bush WH ? I think he might disagree

[Dhalgren]

15. (From post #10)

The assumption is that the WH just lets anyone come in and doesn't try to screen who is who - do you really believe that? Bush won't even go out in public without having anyone and everyone he might come into contact with screened - so this is not an issue. The WH house won't even let Helen Thomas ask a question any more. Do you really think that there is any access for any unscreened non-Republican bloggers now or at any time in the past for this WH?

[Carni]

20. To my knowledge Helen T isn't even called on anymore

Gannon was with regularity.

I have nothing but disdain for Corn.

He talks a big game and writes a lot of long winded columns and that's about it IMO

[Roland99]

21. Helen was traditionally the first one called upon.

:(

[Al-CIAda]

23. ..with inside info on at least 8 notable stories of the past few years

and out of nowhere -he had a direct line to Oz.

A $50 two day propaganda course never bought so much.

[Ilsa]

3. He has such poor writing/speaking skills that

what he should have said was, "My name tends to be frequently mispronounced when read." I might have accepted that as plausible, but not changing his first name. No, the whole thing about his name was a cover-up.

This guy is such a poser. But we'll be lucky to ever get to the bottom of this story. I keep thinking something proactive has to happen to make the details of this story come to light.

[arwalden]

5. Difficult To Pronounce?

>> Guckert said his real name is "difficult to pronounce." Huh? <<

Not as difficult to pronounce as "Jim Miklaszewski" ... and that doesn't seem to have hurt his journalistic career.

[Virginian]

8. This story is a portal, don't let it die.

Let me start with my meme:
His orientation is not the issue, but sex is the reason for the treason.

First of all Who is his connection inside the White House? Someone had to have brought him in. If Maureen Dowd or World Net Daily ( http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42974 ) can't get a pass, how did he?

Who is feeding him classified information? He doesn't have proper clearance to have access to that kind of information, that's treason.

What connection does he have with the Valerie Plame outing?

Follow the money to see who is financing him. Supposedly he was getting half his pay from Talon and other reporters were working for free.

This administration has paid other reporters, thus breaking the anti-propaganda laws (I didn't know they existed), what keeps us from thinking they were paying him, too?

What other reporters are on the Republican payroll to promote the Bush agenda?

[Dhalgren]

13. I don't believe "Guckert" is his "real" name, either.

This whole thing is just so bizarre. I can simply not credit anyone saying this does not warrant investigation. The fact that it won't be officially investigated just points up how far into fascism this country has gone. Even Democratic Senators won't sign on to ask for an investigation; why not? What is the down side of investigating this thing? Let the Republicans (and some Democrats) answer that question. What is the harm in looking into this?

[peacetalksforall]

16. And don't let the lie die. Gannon said he was asked, now he is saying

he asked. This is important. I prefer to believe the former. This is clean up 'dis-reality'. Don't let them get away with it.

Who asked him to be a reporter. That is an important question.

Not even in Hollywood would you take a man who makes a living as an 'escort' and ask him to be a reporter and run a website news agency and call him the Washington Bureau Chief of an overnight news outlet. How ridiculous can this nation get? This nation is a living lie.

[Dhalgren]

18. You've hit it, dead on!

This is so off the hook, so out of bounds, so beyond the pale that even the stupidest of Freepers would have to say (and be honest) that this is worth investigating. If for no other reason than to find out who in the WH or Repub power org is this freaking stupid!

[in_cog_ni_to]

11. Yeah, "Gannon" is SOOOOOOOOOOOOO much easier to say than

Guckert! Hahahahahaha! GEEZUSKRIST! How stupid does he think we are? Bad excuse, Jeffy!

[kiraboo]

17. 51% of us voted for Bush.

He knows exactly how stupid we are.

[trudyco]

22. No. 51% BELIEVE we voted for bush. Totally different.

Probably 90% don't know who's counting the votes.

So what is with Corn. Isn't he the same one that wrote a lame piece about "There was no election Fraud. Move along." awhile back?

Then the Nation did a short piece, hiding under "editorial" so you don't know who was backing it, saying essentially the same thing.

But in both cases they didn't offer any proof as to why they thought that? Basically you should just believe it because - by Gawd- The Nation said it!

[in_cog_ni_to]

24. I canceled my subscription to The Nation during the Primaries.

They did a huge hit piece on Wes Clark. I canceled it immediately as did many other DUers. They had to lose hundreds of subscritions over that one article. I see they didn't learn anything. That's too bad.