Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why James Guckert?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
jpgray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:28 PM
Original message
Why James Guckert?
Edited on Thu Feb-17-05 09:28 PM by jpgray
Seriously. Why a guy with such a shady background and such a palpable lack of experience and credentials? If you're going to stack the press deck, why use someone so easily exposed--who would bring down humiliation and accusations in his ruin? What's the Occam's razor take on this question?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
theorist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. A distraction.
They probably figured he'd need to be outed shortly after he arrived. The press never picked up on any of the big scandals, so they just let him stick around. They did like his questions, y'know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chico Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. Diversion?
They know this is going to all out consume the left for a long time? What if there is no connection? Or they muddy the waters so much that nothing will ever really come of this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
concord Donating Member (296 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #2
19. It certainly has consumed DU's home page!
My vote is for the distraction theory - a device used by this gang time and time again. This shallow country can't resist a sex scandal.
Can we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #19
25. exactly. MSM and mainstream people will be aghast awhile
Hopefully they'll get moved off sex and on to the larger picture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:32 PM
Response to Original message
3. Maybe...
It wasn't whether he had secrets, but whether he could KEEP secrets. If being dirty bothered BushCo, Eliot Abrams wouldn't be working.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. That might just be it.... eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpgray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. Abrams is their kind of dirty--corrupt, lied to Congress, &c
Being a male prostitute is a whole other ball of wax. I'm not sure they wanted to be caught (they almost weren't), but I'm not sure WHY someone let Guckert be there. Did he know someone? Was it just a favor for Texas-based GOPUSA that should have been vetted but wasn't?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #8
26. No, no, no -- you guys are missing it
Edited on Thu Feb-17-05 11:49 PM by Eloriel
See this --

GANNON / ROVE / RATHER connection
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1603949#

and then I'll add my theory on the direct question of this thread, why Guckert? I think it's because (1) he could be so thoroughly discredited via his past -- HOWEVER, why he would potentially NEED to be discredited isn't clear to me. But the M.O. is and this (plus the other thread) is the only thing that makes sense to me.

Edited to add: None of which precludes that Gucker may have something on someone, may be "special friends" with someone in power, and/or may be involved in blackmail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:36 PM
Response to Original message
4. They got the person & only then sent him to 'journalism school' of their
own making. Seems to me they needed journalists who didn't follow the old journalistic 'assumptions' and rules. Which puts Rumsfield or some neocon/rovbot in the room - since they are the ones obsessed with redoing 'assumptions' at the base of every body of knowledge
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
drdon326 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:36 PM
Response to Original message
6. Guckert or someone MUST have had something on someone...
in the White House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rican1 Donating Member (144 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:37 PM
Response to Original message
7. Remember - this is a group that didn't do its homework or ignored
the red flags on Chalabi and Kerik.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpgray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Ignored, or thought they could get away with
Incompetence, however, is a crucial possibility, I must admit. Chalabi, though, I note is within reach of being Iraqi Prime Minister.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 03:47 AM
Response to Reply #10
36. The decision-makers are evil and clever
...but they just are not as tech-savvy as the kids doing the investigative work (AmericaBlog and Kos, e.g.). The Roves and Cards are still working under the old "dirty tricks" rules. They need to co-opt some young punks who have computer skills if they want to stay out of trouble and properly cover their tracks!

Of course, the younger kids they recruit might be put off by that kind of info--just the act of having them scrubbing websites and covering up damaging information might make them rethink their loyalties, because they haven't been invested for decades in the party groupthink.

But I agree, I wouldn't rule out plain incompetence, either. Chalabi and Kerik were stunning--it was as though they didn't even try, not even a little, to check them out.

Or they just didn't care, figuring they owned the media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carpediem Donating Member (700 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
9. they knew he was willing to prostitute himself
and was self-described as discreet. He is actually the perfect guy. I just can't believe they didn't ask him to take down his websites. Or maybe they only knew about the escort services from non-web sources and weren't aware of his website.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BuyingThyme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
11. Take another look at Oliver Stone's JFK.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roguevalley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:44 PM
Response to Original message
12. because its personal. he's someone's boy friend. this is the sort
of stunt a person does for their lover. The wankers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpgray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. That seems to me one of the likelier possibilities, actually (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. You BEAT me to it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #12
22. that's exactly
what I've been thinking and someone who's pretty close to Bush too...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bunny planet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 11:56 PM
Response to Reply #22
29. Little Scottie McClellan sure was smiling alot at Gannon/Guckert when
he asked him a question. It could be him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zann725 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #12
23. That's why I think they didn't plan it. It was the lure of hot sex,
plus the arrogant illusion they'd never get caught...that they owned the media, and it'd never get out.

They sure must be shocked...and ticked at blogs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #23
31. Exactly
They weren't counting on people finding out his hidden secret. I'm surprised he didn't take down his site's either. But then again looking at his profiles and whatnot he was very self-abosrbed and thought a lot of himself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Geek_Girl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #12
28. Bingo!!
If Gannon was a beautiful woman with no education, no experience and mysteriously got a daily press pass to shill for the white house only to be discovered that she was promiscuous and posed nude on websites everyone would know how she got the job.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:50 PM
Response to Original message
14. This is a really good question. 4 possible answers
Why not use a nice white boy who f*s one female at a time and avoid having this blow up as a sex thing.

1.bushites had something on him so he could never come above ground and say who he was, what he did, ensuring they'd never get caught.
2. bushites are so arrogant they thought they would never get caught.
3 bushites are so stupid they just have no idea wtf they're doing.
4. If the story came out, bushites can distract from the lying and propaganda manipulation by focusing on sex.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:50 PM
Response to Original message
15. Free sex...making your baby happy?
I give you money, a cool public job, you become a "right wing hero" and you give me the old manly quid pro quo.

Never underestimate what one does for sex/passion/love/need. Whatever it's called. I know they could just pay him-but people-yes even Republican hacks and neo-cons-fall in "love."

Also, they think they can get away with anything. They almost have. It worked for two plus years, afterall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jayster84 Donating Member (84 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
16. They believe they create their own reality.
That's what insiders have been saying. They are so arrogant that they think they can do anything. They're just getting sloppy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zann725 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #16
24. Read History. Happens EVERY time Power gets too greedy,
and thinks they're infallible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
18. Well, obviously, it wasn't the mainstream media that worried them.
I mean, this bogus shrill was seated with them for 2 years and not one of them thought there was a story there? Says more about the state of our independent media than almost anything else.

I'll bet they could have put James Wayne Gacy, dressed up in his clown suit pitching softballs, and there'd be nary a peep out of these people.

And look at Howard Kurz today, warning the rest of the corporate media about jumping on this story.....they all have personal lives that can be investigated, too. Covering the news...or covering it up?

Believe me, the real story is going to be....how will the corporate media and the corrupt Republican Party react to the growing 'problem' of Open Source journalism? How can they muzzle it, or better, do away with it altogether? Can you imagine our lives, unconnected? We'd all be looking at the TV set wondering, "WTF...am I the only one that can't believe this BS"? Imagine how much easier it would be to fix elections without an internet. Imagine, indeed.....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 10:02 PM
Response to Original message
20. The purpose wasn't to have a shill, that was gravy.
If you were going to *know* that you could kill a story what would you need? Some dirt to plug the dike.

How can you get dirt on reporters? We'll leave that as an exercise for the reader.

He was a honeypot, a tarbaby.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Exit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 01:42 AM
Response to Reply #20
32. Yup! CIA tactics used by a guy whose own rotten family is as wrapped
up and tangled with the CIA as... a pretzel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kk897 Donating Member (829 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 10:17 PM
Response to Original message
21. my pet theory, not that anyone asked...
I think he's a CIA plant, put there to be discovered by someone, anyone, really, in order to discredit the FBI. It's the intelligence agency wars. He's meant to show that the FBI is not doing its task in security (although they may be doing a fine job--it's just the message we're meant to get from this).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bouncy Ball Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 11:52 PM
Response to Original message
27. Occam's Razor?
They are cocky and smug and didn't think anyone would ever find out.

When you have the mainstream media in your back pocket (or I could make a more vulgar analogy), you tend to get pretty cock-sure.

Sorry about all the horrible unintended puns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
30. Like everything else
I think it was some sort of payback. Just like what they do everybody else. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU GrovelBot  Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 01:42 AM
Response to Original message
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.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 03:04 AM
Response to Original message
34. bush is spending some of that "political capitol" of his
yee-haw!
they're probably all in bed with each other. and condi's their little dominatrix, cracking the whip.

and they're doing their damnedest to keep the rest of us out of bed with each other (thanks to all that added funding for the useless abstinence programs)

plus, when you turn into the "king of the world" you start getting sloppy. just when you think you're infallible a liberal blogger comes along and spoils everything by finding the lewd pictures of your butt boy posted on the web!

waaaaahhhh. what'cha gonna do??? i know! Terror Alert! We could get hit at any time!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 03:16 AM
Response to Reply #34
35. The simplest explanation.
None of them bothered to check him out. He was available when they were looking for a shill for the press and they placed him. Sometimes these people are just plain incompetent. I am betting that this story will fade out by next week.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 04:05 AM
Response to Original message
37. Because they think they can get away with it,
since they pretty much own the media.
It still remains to be seen wether or not they can get away with this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 04:08 AM
Response to Original message
38. Occam's Razor is the simplest scandal for the simplest minds. /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marcologico Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 04:16 AM
Response to Original message
39. It's the salami stupid :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kipepeo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 05:04 AM
Response to Original message
40. I think it's just laziness
I don't think they picked him *because* of his shady background, but in spite of it. They were so arrogant they didn't think it would ever matter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC