Couric Caught On Tape: ‘Democrats Took Money From Abramoff Too, Mr. Dean’
Couric Caught On Tape: ‘Democrats Took Money From Abramoff Too, Mr. Dean’
On this morning’s Today Show, Katie Couric falsely claimed that Democrats took money from Jack Abramoff. Howard Dean tried to set her straight, but she stuck to the right-wing talking points:
COURIC: Hey, wait a second. Democrats took — Democrats took money from Abramoff too, Mr. Dean.
DEAN: That is absolutely false. That did not happen. Not one dime of money from Jack Abramoff went to any Democrat at any time.
Katie then cited a Center for Responsive Politics study as her evidence, but a look at CRP’s website (here and here) show that Democrats accepted no money from Abramoff.
(HT: CarolynC967)
Full transcript below:
COURIC: Hey, wait a second. Democrats took — Democrats took money from Abramoff too, Mr. Dean.
DEAN: That is absolutely false. That did not happen. Not one dime of money from Jack Abramoff went to any Democrat at any time.
COURIC: Let me just tell you — According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Abramoff and his associates gave $3 million to Republicans and $1.5 million to Democrats, including Sen. Minority Leader Harry Reid.
DEAN: Not one dime of Jack Abramoff money ever went to any Democrat. We can show you the FEC reports, we’d be very happy to do it. There’s a lot of stuff in the press that the Republican National Committee’s been spinning that this is a bipartisan scandal. It is a Republican-financed scandal. Not one dime of money from Jack Abramoff ever went to any Democrat, not one dime.
COURIC: Well, we’ll obviously have to look into that and clarify that for our viewers at a later date. Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Mr. Dean, Governor Dean, thanks so much for talking with us.
DEAN: Thanks very much.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Matthews, Russert, now Katie (who is routinely villified as a chirpy liberal by the RW): What the HELL is happening at NBC? Polaroids of Tom Brokaw waterboarding WW II vets?
January 26th, 2006 at 10:49 amIgnorant little snot and CBS is going to pay her $20 million to jump ship?
January 26th, 2006 at 10:49 amIs it any wonder that I’ve pulled the plug on the teevee (except to watch the occasional video)? The raw sewage that spews forth from the corporate-owned networks simply ain’t “news”.
Just quit watching it.
January 26th, 2006 at 10:51 amIt’s the infamous what the definition of “is” is defense for the Democrats. Naive or hypocritial…
January 26th, 2006 at 10:54 amI suppose a “later date” will be… oh, a few decades from now. Why inform their viewers what the truth is now?
Where’s the news? If real TV reporting existed, blogs like this one wouldn’t be so useful.
January 26th, 2006 at 10:56 am“COURIC: Well, we’ll obviously have to look into that and clarify that for our viewers at a later date. Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Mr. Dean, Governor Dean, thanks so much for talking with us.”
Uh, aren’t you supposed to “look into that” BEFORE YOU MAKE DUMBASS ASSERTIONS? Does anybody know how I can contact this vapid b**ch and her producer??
Does anyone here really think they will “clarify at a later date”?
Dean does it again! I am so glad I worked for his campaign (but not the outcome, obviously).
January 26th, 2006 at 10:56 amI agree wholeheartedly–just quit watching it. I did a long time ago after I got disgusted with “news” that consisted of #%*^ like Couric asking the parents of some kid who was raped and murdered, how they felt about it. I usually do not make judgments about our culture, but the morning programs and Couric in particular are evidence of a very sick society
January 26th, 2006 at 10:56 amTracy–show me where the dems have taken any money from Abramoff.
Note: I am not a democrat. But I’m sick of the repubs trying to sling their excrement.
January 26th, 2006 at 10:57 amShe’s a Republican spokesmodel.
January 26th, 2006 at 10:59 amJoin fellow Democrats at the Today Show tommorrow to protest Katy. Please bring signs that say “Katie Lied”.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:02 amThe Washington Post cited some emails from Abramoff that they say “proves” that “Abramoff directed money to Democrats too.” Here is a link:
Abramoff emails
Is this evidence of taint? Are we all wet on this?
January 26th, 2006 at 11:02 amTerry,
I am with you 100% in regards to the morning talking head shows, it simply is a vehicle to brag, preen and lavish praise on one another.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:02 amIf it’s TV vs. Internets, TV will win. We should be concerned about this trend. I personally find it EXTREMELY disturbing that a morning shows will talk about cooking tips one moment and lobbying reform the next. Couric needs to just get another anal cleansing.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:10 amWide awake and sleeping…
January 26th, 2006 at 11:12 am#11–could be that “we” are all wet. Looks like Abramoff suggested that he wanted the tribes to “write checks” to certain organizations and politicians, including dems. But whether or not it actually happened…
Personally, I’m only slightly less sick of the democrats than I am of the republicans. They are both corporate enablers and when it comes down to it, the DLC brand of “neoliberals” like Lieberman & even Hillary just aren’t a whole lot different than republicans, at least the more moderate variety.
I don’t fit neatly into the “liberal” or “conservative” categories; I’m kind of an “Eisenhower republican” in many ways. But it’s too bad the republicans have moved so far to the rabid, Christo-fascist right and want to control everyone’s lifestyle (not to mention their desire to loosen all oversight on corporations while eliminating their responsibilities to society). And too bad the democrats have become so soggy & corporate-dominated as well.
I’m a man without a party, it seems.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:13 ami saw this also – i can’t …well, yes i can…beiieve that after weeks “they” are still trying to throw that lie out there…howard was great, but i don’t know how he kept his cool, relatively…
about katie’s 20mil to go to CBS – did anyone read andy roony’s column, jan9-ish, about this? it was great…in part: “…(what) a good guy like my boss, Les Moonves, will do…he’ll abandon the idea of getting Katie Kouric for $20 million and take that money and instead add it to the “Cbs Evening News” budget. that would bring the money they have to spend collecting news up closer to what it used to be when Walter Cronkite was the anchor 25 years ago…
“the CBS audience will be vastly better informed…and she’ll be proud of herself for staying where she is for a piddling little $14 million…viewers will be a better-educated group, and we can all hope these better-informed American voters will go to the polls in 2008 and elect a brilliant president who will lead us out of trouble.”
Andy’s the greatest.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:15 amI doubt very much that Kouric knows where her “TAINT” is.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:16 amcontact the producers here: today@nbc.com
here’s what I wrote:
Katie Couric’s statements this morning about Abramhoff and the democratic party were patently false, and need to be corrected, on the air. Democrats received money from Native American tribes that were clients of Mr. Abramhoff, but no money went to Democratic coffers directly from Abramhoff, or his corporations. There is an enormous difference between the two. Couric is wrong and she needs to correct her statements.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:19 amshe’s got another camera up her ass, apparently…
January 26th, 2006 at 11:23 amShe’s been spouting the right-wing talking points for the last few months, I’ve noticed.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:23 am#11 Adrift on the Cosmis Sea. Check out Firedoglake to see the WaPo’s “proof” of direct money from Abramoff to Democrats. It seems that after hours of saying they were going to post it, they haven’t been able to get around to it yet.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:24 am11-I read somewhere that what Abramoff did was tell his tribal clients to give less to dems than they did in the past. He directed no new money to dems and he made sure they got less than the tribes had given in the past.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:27 amDean rocked.
Pelosi, Reid, Kerry, Biden take note.
This is how it is done.
Concise, quick and hard.
Where do I send money to support this guy!!!
yes!
…
January 26th, 2006 at 11:28 amThe ‘definition of is’ is the claim that Abramoff money went to Dems. He consistently steered money away from Dems. There is no direct evidence anywhere of Abramoff giving or directing money to be given to Dems in exchange for legislative favors. Once all the indictments come down, all against Republicans, we’ll see this point used to criticize the unfairness of the proceedings, even though it’s based purely on thin air, amplified by the magic of the media. Oh, and the lame unsupported opinions of weak seeds like #4.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:29 amRELEASE THE HOUNDS!
This seems to be a pattern with Couric these days. Its time to mount a campaign on her irresponsible reporting.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:29 am#11 and #15…
As that was head “Coushatta requests” and without any evidence of where the document originated, it could be that the Coushatta tribe asked for money to be disbursed to these people. I have heard people commenting that Abramoff never gave any money to Democrats but that some of the clients of Abramoff also gave money to Democrats.
Given that the point of the K street project was in part to starve the Democrats of funds, Abramoff would have either played along, or had to go home empty handed.
This is not to say that Democrats are free from corruption, just that this scandal is a mostly (completely) Republican scandal.
Ideally none of our politicians would be corrupt… I’m not holding my breath.
Z.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:29 amHave not watched any of the morning talk shows, pretend new’s programs for years. I’m on C-span in the background while on my computer. They have nothing but style shows, cooking and radical right wing wanna bees showing off. Katy is in many ways like Coulter. Many of the women on these shows act like they are in shouting matches with the men. The son of barbra was on again this morning with more spin and lies….Gees why watch any of it…..Blessings
January 26th, 2006 at 11:30 amWho else saw the Daily Show’s clip about taint last week. Was that hillarious or what?
Those of us who read, have known for over a week that Abramoff gave no money to any Democrats. What is up with all these newscasters from the supposubly “liberal media”.
We don’t deny that some Indian Gaming interests gave money to Democrats. We’ll take their money. We’re legal about it though. That is completely different from the vote buying that republinazi’s engaged in with Abramoff.
Let’s see, Duke Cunningham, Tom DeLay, Ney, Pombo, even dumbya himself.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:30 amTo #11, can you tell me what these redacted images prove and how? All I see is fodder for handwaving.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:30 amIn answer to the question, did Abramoff try to get the tribes to give money to Democrats, too, the simple fact is that after he was hired his tribal clients gave less money to Dems than they were giving before hiring Jack.
Anyway, giving money isn’t the crime. Giving money in exchange for specific favors and stealing money from the tribes – they are victims here, not coconspirators with Abramoff – is what the crime is. Every time the question of Dems getting money too comes up it entirely misses the point.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:30 amThe press has been deliberately sloppy with this. Note Couric’s implicit equivalence of “Democrats took money from Abramoff” with “Abramoff and his associates gave… to Democrats.” Dean is careful to clarify the Abramoff part, but I wish he would follow up “Not one dime of Jack Abramoff money ever went to any Democrat” with “and contributions to Democrats from Abramoff’s clients actually decreased once Abramoff started representing them.”
January 26th, 2006 at 11:31 amI think THAT should be our battle cry.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:32 am“NOT ONE DIME!”
Peachy, don’t forget Wolf from CNN’s situation room too!
January 26th, 2006 at 11:33 amThe Dems take the bait every time. Be it Swift Boaters, Abramoff, etc. They spend all their energy in attempting to correct the lies rather than focusing on the issue. The issue, I believe, is the corruption of the political process by lobbying interests and politicians, be they repubs or dems. The dems need to focus on getting rid of corrupt politicians regardless of party and then changing system so it allows all Americans access to the political process. If the dems are clean, then the “cleaning” process will not harm them. But, spending time, money, energy on “we’re not like them” efforts will only confuse the issue.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:34 amEvery time the question of Dems getting money too comes up it entirely misses the point.
But, every time it comes up, especially in the conservative media (they sure aren’t liberal), someone is making a point. A BS point, but, still a point. Divert, obfuscate, spin, repeat.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:36 amI’ve already sent an e-mail to MSNBC about Couric’s false claim. I really want to send them one about Chris Matthews’ distortion of a Democrat ad, on last night’s Hardball. But as trblmkr notes, it’s good to do one’s homework first. So, does anyone have a link to the ad? (voice-over pic of Abramoff: Bribery; voice-over pic of Delay: Money laundering) Matthews claimed the word ‘bribery’ accompanied Delay’s pic, and insinuated that the dems are spinning the truth.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:36 amThat is the same e-mail the wapo tried to use, look at the bottom DeLays name on the left is missing(can we say white out) but the trools forgot to white out his name on the right, and Gail Norton’s PAC gets $100,000, why is the right not asking why hasn’t bush called her on the carpet?
Or the MSM even commented on the fact that Jack is giving money to a cabinet officer of the Bush Adminstration in charge of the programs that he wants action on.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:38 amYou’re right, Southwest Bob. The Democrats waste so much time being the anti-Republicans that they never bother to be their own entity. They’re set to prove it once again by not actively resisting Alito’s nomination. They are a waste of space right now. Our political party system is completely broken.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:38 amSatan’s grasp takes hold of even the seemingly incorruptible.
Et tu Katie?
how sad…
January 26th, 2006 at 11:38 amMy “feeling all the love of a democracy in tatters and the media ain’t worth the cost of cable” letter to Katie: Why do you still pretend to let Katie do news? You obviously didn’t even give her a staff to do research and fact checks. Indian tribes historically have given money to Democrats. Indian tribes who became Abramoff clients started giving less money to Democrats than before they became Abramoff’s victims. And oodles of the tribes’ money were funneled to Republicans after the tribes became Abramoff’s victims. And, yes, in court, the tribes are termed victims. Gee, Katie’s almost as accurate as Debbie Howell, running a close second to Judy Miller. Btw, did they ever find those WMDs in Iraq? Do you people enjoy appearing incompetent?
January 26th, 2006 at 11:39 amThe thing that really gets my goad is that were Bushiva any other gender or race, he’d be in prison right now!
Presidency be dam*ed…
January 26th, 2006 at 11:40 amHooray for the Republicans, President Bush, all of their talking points and their ability to stick it to the average joe out there in murka.
tar and feathers soon to follow.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:41 amIs this the price NBC pays for “The Book of Daniel”??
January 26th, 2006 at 11:41 amAnyone promoting the literally false statement that “Democrats took money from Abramoff” at this point has to be considered deceitful or uninformed. Ms. Couric should really clarify which attribute applies.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:42 amMatt,
The pictures ARE important. There’s one pic of Bush with Abramoff, and a group of his clients, all meeting together nice and cozy. The members of that tribe say they paid $25,000 grand just for that meeting with Bush! That’s proves he’s involved.
Now let me ask you this… if the pictures WEREN’T damning, why in the world would the administration go to such lengths as to make sure they never see the light of day??
I just think it’s HILARIOUS Abramoff is the one shopping these pictures around to papers! I guess it’s all for the love of money.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:42 amFrom the way she phrased it, and the way she looked, seemed like she was happy to have given Dean a chance to make that case.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:42 am[...] Katie Couric on today’s Today Show: [...]
January 26th, 2006 at 11:43 amHow about an Open Letter to Katie Couric: “It’s Day xxx, and you still haven’t clarified the Abramoff donations for your viewers.”
January 26th, 2006 at 11:43 am#11
Is this all you got? You trolls are really reaching.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:43 amYes – the democrats never do anything wrong. Of course they took no money from Abhramoff. Please, just how stupid do you think we are. Tell me then, why is Jim Traficant in jail? You’ll probably tell me he was framed or part of some rightwing conspiracy, but none-the-less there is corruption on both sides of the aisle and it needs to be cleaned up.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5161722
January 26th, 2006 at 11:44 amKatie, Katie… all tits and ass… and no substance… I might watch if you did your show topless… or not… you’re probably sagging by this age in life…
I gotta say: I like Dean. He would have made a fine President. Much much better than the bozo we have now. Fine job, Dean!
January 26th, 2006 at 11:44 am50- Yes, there is corruption on both sides, but what does that have to do with the topic, or with whom Abramoff gave money? Bueller?
January 26th, 2006 at 11:45 amI think it’s absolutely pathetic that so many Americans in this country know more of the facts than the “stars” of the “news” shows.
It’s exemplary of the state of the current “news” in this country.
They’re either all completely uninformed morons, or they’re purposely shilling for the GOP.
While many will claim the latter, I’m beginning to believe that it’s the former…and thus, they refuse to retract their ill-informed statements for fear of admitting their complete ignorance of the facts.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:45 amgeneral electric’s news outlets are in full prop up the regime mode. afterall, bush’s policies, while disastrous for millions, are putting billions in g.e.’s coffers. do you think jeff immelt would be sitting down to lunch with the indian prime minister and bush, celebrating india’s push for nuclear power, if g.e. wasn’t giving something back to bush.
deceiving the public is what couricrussertmatthews’ they get paid to do.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:46 amKatie is such a twit, but people just love her — go figure.
Kindness, I saw the “taint” sketch on the Daily Show and laughed myself silly. I especially loved the graphic.
Also kindness, from a few threads back, I was a Navy brat and graduated high school in Alameda, moved around some more on my own, then left a bad marriage in Oregon and landed in Idaho with my two sons. Lived in Orofino (Sharon Cox, you might know where that is) for a few years, and now am in Moscow. Think I’m pretty much settled now, although Montana calls to me.
Sorry, everyone else, don’t know many libs who used to live in Idaho!
January 26th, 2006 at 11:46 amTell a lie often enough, Ms. Couric, and you’ll eventually be believed.
This is more misdirection by the radical-right-wing to try and spread the blame. No taking of personal responsibility for the Republicans, no sir! Can’t do it! Wouldn’t be prudent! Not at this juncture!
Unfortunately for the taking heads, this lie is easily discovered by the “Open Secrets†.org website. All you have to do is put in the name of the donor “Abramoff†and you’ll see that he never gave money to Democrats. Not once.
Too bad, so sad, for the Republicans. Take responsibility for your actions and lack of ethics, GOP’ers!
January 26th, 2006 at 11:48 am“…Abramoff and his associates gave $3 million to Republicans and $1.5 million to Democrats.”
That’s the same as, “Didn’t Bush and your mother raise you as a child?” Two completely different entities. Opposite ends of the spectrum, thank you very much.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:48 amOh, and I’m absolutely sure Katie will go on-air and clear up this whole misunderstanding, after she does the research she should have done before she put her stupid face on television. Not.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:48 amIt’s not that Couric is simply incorrect, it is that she is purposely using language to obfuscate the issue. To say that Democrats received money from “Abramoff and his associates”, in my opinion, is being purposely misleading. She knows exactly what she is doing, and what pisses me off is that Democrats like Dean don’t call her on it.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:49 amFrom the way she phrased it, and the way she looked, seemed like she was happy…
One would hope she enjoys her work…
January 26th, 2006 at 11:49 amSee, now I thought that I had heard that in fact Hillary and Reid as well as others had recieved 3k and would not return those monies? See, now I dont know what the truth is? Well one thing is for sure Mr Dean and Mz Couric are at opposite ends of the matter and we’ll see how this one plays out?
January 26th, 2006 at 11:50 amSince the 1970’s, 11 congressmen have served time in jail for corruption and other charges. Ten were democrats. Now, tell me again, who is known as the party with a culture of corruption?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/725590/posts
January 26th, 2006 at 11:50 amIn response to a few posts above… Please, do NOT stop watching TV. You people here are the sane, and the intellegent. America needs people like you to keep an eye on shows like this so you are aware of what is being said. This way you can counter their arguments. You can step up and make sure that for every lie spewed from the TV, you guys here can come back with truth. That is one of the reasons I love News Hounds (http://www.newshounds.us/) and Media Matters (http://mediamatters.org/). SOMEONE has to watch to know what battle we have to fight next.
If we ignore what is being said on TV, we are simply allowing this crap to enter the minds of countless Americans who may not know any better. I don’t want that to happen. We can watch, and we can write in and express anger and convern.
If we weren’t watching the filth, the Chris Matthews open letter blog (http://openlettertochrismatthews.blogspot.com/) would never have happened.
Part of the fight for us is to keep watching these shows.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:51 am#11 and the responses. I agree that those redacted emails indicate very little. And as posted on firedoglake, the evidence the Post was going to post never got posted. The link that I posted in #11 came from an on-line interview with one of the Washington Post editors (here’s the link).
There is clearly not enough public info for either side to make definitive claims. And yet, repubs and traditional media continue to do it. And that puts us on the defensive, which is a bad place to be! Hell, the other day the Newshour with Jim Lehrer had a story about the Washington Post getting flooded with comments–the protesting commenters became the story, rather than Howell’s misleading words! I don’t see how the public debate will change until more info is released.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:51 am#50 – We are not saying the Democrats are pure as the driven snow, just that it’s only the Republicans who got money from Abramoff.
Don’t take my word for it, prove it to yourself if you’re man enough to face facts!
http://www.opensecrets.org/
After you’re done, I’m sure you’ll come back here and say “Oh, I was wrong. Abramoff didn’t give money to the Democrats like I claimed.” It’s the only correct thing for the so-called party of “personal responsibility” to do, right?
January 26th, 2006 at 11:52 am[...] Think Progress [...]
January 26th, 2006 at 11:55 am#65 Reid and other democrats are every bit as guilty as Republicans when it comes to taking money. They will all go down once this investigation gets underway. Be careful of what you wish for next time.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1557626/posts
January 26th, 2006 at 11:59 amJesus bill, update you’re timeframe. Why don’t you tell us about the last 5 years?
Cause they’re 99% republicans then. Douchebag.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:59 amThe establishment media is very, very lazy. It has become a national disgrace.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:59 am#62 – Intersting that you choose a non-partisan web site to back up your claims. (I just laughed myself sore from that one!)
In the interests of fair information, why don’t you take a look at these web sites to see how “pure” the Republicans aren’t:
http://liberalslikechrist.org/about/gopcorruption.html
http://www.badgerblues.org/category/republican-corruption/
http://www.watchblog.com/democrats/archives/002781.html
Don’t be fooled by the Democrats who have been jailed as prrof of corruption. Ask yourself: How many people were ‘pardoned’ by Republican presidents so as not to have to serve time in jail? Oliver North is a name that comes to mind. So is Richard Nixon.
Don’t get on your high horse if you’re not ready to take a tumble! I’m sure you’ll survive this fall, try again!
January 26th, 2006 at 12:00 pm#68 – Please, Don’t expect William to impartially hold both parties to the same standard. It wouldn’t be ‘hypocrisy’ if he didn’t!
Don’t forget, the so-called party of “personal responsibility” won’t take personal responsibility for their actions!
January 26th, 2006 at 12:02 pmWell I checked and in 2002 Dashpac received a $5,000 donation from a Greenberg Truarig partner… But that doesn’t mean that it was bribe from Abramoff but instead that the lobbying firm were doing their part. I thought that the line below was much more revealing…
$5,000 for DASHPAC
$20,000 (5,000 hard/15,000 soft) DeLay’s Leadership PAC
We also have
$100,000 to the “Council for Republican Advocacy (Norton)”
and
$25,000 (5,000 hard/20,000 soft) for Conrad Burns (R MT)
In fact out of that list the only democrats are
DASHPAC ($5,000), Jean Carnahan ($2,000) and Max Cleland ($2,000)
So $155,000 to $9,000. Yup, that seems like an unbiassed set of donations. Particularly given that $35,000 of that was soft money earmarked for specific candidates (Delay and Burns).
Of course there is nothing illegal in any of this… It’s only illegal if it was in breach of ethics rules, or if the contribution was a specific bribe. Given that the Democrats received a tiny fraction, and received more funding from elsewhere, this seems less like a potential bribe than some of the Republican donations.
Z.
January 26th, 2006 at 12:02 pmOops #62, your obfuscation is showing. Now let’s see, what’s the topic again? Oh yeah, Katie Couric framed a half true question to the DNC leader by repeating a known lie on national television that mimics the RNC talking points. And your response is “The Dems are just as bad as us”? I can dig it.
January 26th, 2006 at 12:02 pmI think it’s naive to believe that by ignoring the big media distortions, the pain will go away. This is what most people watch and if they’re distorting, then we must speak out to correct them. We can’t do that if we simply stick our head in the sand and don’t watch.
That’s why I don’t think it’s right to tell complainers to stop watching this swill…It’s real and it’s there, whether we watch or not, just like the world is still here even though the ostrich sticks it’s head in the sand and to the ostrich, it appears the world has “gone away.”
January 26th, 2006 at 12:08 pmDIE YOU ZOMBIES!
January 26th, 2006 at 12:13 pmMedia celebrities spouting Republican talking points can only be killed if you shoot them in the head.
Or in Katie Couric’s case, shove another camera up her ass to find her brains.
#8
The Democrats that take money from lobbyists know or should know where the money is comming from and how it was obtained in order to keep their noses clean. The information is avaliable to them before they accept donations. Due dilligence…
I agree that the Republican’s are mostly the ones at fault here but for the Democrats to attempt to act like saints is pathetic.
January 26th, 2006 at 12:14 pmI’m just watching & listening to:
NPR – online
PBS (The News Hour, NOW, Frontline)
AirAmerica – online
that’s it… they are the only ones I think are really giving me the actual NEWS.
& forgive me … Keith Olbermann on MSNBC & The Daily Show
January 26th, 2006 at 12:19 pm#48
What’s up with you guys in this blog signing other people’s name to something they didn’t write?..which is exactly what the person who wrote #48 did. Why?
January 26th, 2006 at 12:19 pmChris, comment # 18, thanks for spurring me to respond to NBC as well. I used your email as a template and added a few points.
Here is what I sent:
Katie Couric’s statements this morning about Jack Abramoff and the Democratic Party were patently false, and need to be corrected, on the air, in this evening’s Nightly News, and on tomorrow morning’s Today show. Failure to state such a correction will demonstrate to me that your once-proud news network of Huntley-Brinkley and the Four Horsemen has become nothing but an entertainment machine serving the Bush administration’s political agenda.
If your network is going to have Ms. Couric performing anything that remotely resembles true journalism, she must get her facts straight—and not straight from the Republican talking points—before going on the air and making accusations.
Democrats received money from Native American tribes that were clients of Mr. Abramoff, but no money went to Democratic coffers directly from Abramoff or from his corporations. Some of those Democrats who received money from Native American tribes had already been receiving it legally before the involvement of Jack Abramoff and his cronies.
Receiving money from Abramoff directly differs vastly from receiving money from organizations that Abramoff may or may not have directed to send money – in far smaller amounts – to Democratic members of Congress. If you don’t believe there is an important distinction here, please contact the ombudsman at the Washington Post, Deborah Howell, about the firestorm of protest she encountered after carelessly making the same false assertion.
Couric is wrong and she needs to correct her statements.
William Warner, Ph.D.
January 26th, 2006 at 12:20 pmPortland, Oregon
#76:
January 26th, 2006 at 12:20 pmDIE YOU ZOMBIE!
Why every Dem, including Dean isn’t saying the following is beyond me:
The Abramoff scandal is unquestionably a Republican scandal. Beyond the red herring of client contributions, it is beyond doubt that the whole raison d’etre of the Abramoff/Rove/Delay/Reed/Norquist axis was to destroy the Democrats (while making a few bucks in the process). Just to name a few:
Indian money was directed to NH for phone jamming to kill Democratic chances.
Corporations were told by the K Street Project to fire their Democratic lobbyists.
Choctaw money was donated to TRM PAC for Texas redistricting to kill Democratic seats.
HOW CAN A SCANDAL BE BIPARTISAN WHEN THE POINT OF THE SCANDAL IS TO KILL ONE OF THE PARTIES?
January 26th, 2006 at 12:25 pmHey ThinkProgress, why not include contact info for the Today Show?
All postings should have relevant contact information to the media establishment so we can reach them easily and correct their misinformation.
January 26th, 2006 at 12:26 pmKaty “the Joker” Couric is part of the establishment and just a little applied leverage will have the desired result. Her God is the greenback and the right knows where she and her kind live. The elite left will jump ship (back and forth)pretty easily.
January 26th, 2006 at 12:27 pmLook, i think it’s wrong of us to say “Democrats took no money from Jack Abrahamoff.” That is of course technically true, because Jack didn’t, as the man, give money to Democrats, people in association did . Of course, there are reasonable arguments to kill that argument as well, but to just say “Jack Abramoff didn’t give any money to Democrats” doesn’t really address the issue.
January 26th, 2006 at 12:27 pm[...] See it here. [...]
January 26th, 2006 at 12:28 pmGive Colbert Report a shot, he’s right up there with
January 26th, 2006 at 12:28 pmKeith Olbermann & the Daily Show.
#70
So does Mark Rich
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1172766.stm
And others…
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/20/clinton.pardon/
Don’t make us laugh!
January 26th, 2006 at 12:30 pm#86 – True re Colbert Report. I love it when he cracks himself up — doesn’t happen often, but it’s great when he does.
January 26th, 2006 at 12:33 pmtrolls + drool = trools
me likey.
January 26th, 2006 at 12:36 pm#76: Are you really that stupid? Where are any Dems acting as if they are saints? Simply by pointing out that they are not involved in THIS scandal makes them evil in your pea-brained head? Should they be required to list all their sins every time they list Bush’s?
January 26th, 2006 at 12:38 pmThe BIG difference I’ve seen between dems and pugs online in reacting to the whole corruption issue is that pugs say “Well you’re dirty, too. Be careful what you wish for.” and the dems generally say “If they’re dirty, boot ‘em, regardless of party”.
January 26th, 2006 at 12:43 pmNot only is it bad business for the media to get stories consistently wrong, but when the media reports stories that are false, which rarely get corrected immediately, or not at all, Americans are left with a false impression of the story, and therefore misinformed. They ultimately take this misinformation into the voting booth with them, which disturbs me immensely. I strongly believe, this has a horrific and negative effect, on the way one would vote, and on Democracy itself. The media need to realize the influential power they have on society, and the reasoning behind our outrage. How does a voter make a proper decison in the voting booth, based on misinformation?
The Jack Abramoff corruption scandal, is a perfect example, of why getting the story correct, is so important, as opposed to reporting incorrectly, on matters of no consequence, that have no effect on which direction our country moves politically. The majority of the media, gave the impression by guilt of association, that the Democrats were involved in the corruption scandal, by reporting that Abramoff, and/or his clients, gave many Democrats campaign contributions. The blogosphere went ballistic, and refuted the story with government documents, clearly showing, that Abramoff had not donated any money, to any Democrat. Only Republicans received money from Abramoff. If this was a Demorat only scandal, and not the Republican scandal that this is, I would be saying the exact same thing. Corruption is a breach of the public trust, and I would like to believe, that most people would denounce this, regardless of political affiliation.
January 26th, 2006 at 12:43 pmThese people are disgraceful. Is it that difficult to fact-check this case?
Couric makes $10 million per year. For doing what?
January 26th, 2006 at 12:46 pmCouric makes $10 million per year. For doing what?
For making White America believe she’s really cute.
January 26th, 2006 at 12:51 pmContact her show, and let them have it.
TODAY
NBC News, RM 1022 W
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY 10112
NBC News Phone: (212) 664-4444
NBC News Fax: (212) 664-5705;
Today Show Phone: (212) 664-4249 or (202) 885-4231
Today Show Fax: (212) 664-4426
Email: today@nbc.com
January 26th, 2006 at 12:54 pmMargaret Pergler Today Show Producer
30 Rockefeller Plaza, Room 568E-2
New York, NY 10112
She’s a hottie too!
January 26th, 2006 at 1:01 pm40 of 45 Democratic senators received gifts, tickets, skybox tickets and money from Abramoff. To deny it, as Howard Dean has is simply dishonest. So are those who keep repeating his lies.
January 26th, 2006 at 1:01 pm#90
LOL!
January 26th, 2006 at 1:02 pmTurn off the teevee; it’s bad for you physically and mentally. It takes about a month to break the adddiction.
Use the time to read interesting books to the whole family (not just kiddy books). Your little ones will acquire the love of reading and books early. School will be easier.
One subtle advantage of not watching teevee is that everyone will sleep better. Teevee is bad for your brain waves. Look it up.
Try it….
January 26th, 2006 at 1:03 pmPerhaps I am missing something, but this site itself lists “The House that Jack Built” with three Democratic congressmen??
For example:
Just wondering how all of that squares with what Dean is saying and what this post apparently finds objectionable. Let’s be honest at least…
January 26th, 2006 at 1:06 pm…That’s right, Libby was trying to get Mark Rich ‘off’ through a plea bargain. The Republican machine was directly involved. Of course it might have something to do with the fact that they had their own illegal backroom deals with Iran that were made treasonously while Carter was still president…
This, in part, involved three containers of F14 parts. The ReichWingNutWackJobs promised the Ayatollah he could fly his Grumman F14s again if they held on to the “hostages” until after the election.
It was such a sweet deal for the Iranians. The Republicans were able to use the “hostage” issue along side a huge economic inflation issue (due to the costs incurred during the Vietnam war) to drive Dr. Carter from office.
Two weeks after the election, three container’s filled with F14 parts were airlifted out of Riverhead, Long Island from Grumman’s F14/A6 test facility. Several months later, a diplomat (sorry, I can’t recall who) was quite surprised to look out his window and see Iranian owned F14’s shadowing his aircraft through Iranian airspace.
Not that it matters to this dicussion, but it was the same Long Island facility that the Shah of Iran flew into when he and his family were airlifted out of Iran when the Ayatollah took over.
Of course the Repigs have no defense for their work with the Ayatollah, except to claim the Democrats are weak on defense. Sad, really.
January 26th, 2006 at 1:07 pmIt’s just a sexed-up smear campaign against the Democrats because the Republicans can’t shake the the scandal.
They’ve gots to do something to smear the Democrats before the selections this fall.
Be sure to cast your vote come November so it won’t be counted again.
January 26th, 2006 at 1:10 pmHere’s the automated response I just received from NBC Today:
Thank you for contacting TODAY with Katie Couric and Matt Lauer.
We receive hundreds of E-mail messages a day, and while we read them
January 26th, 2006 at 1:10 pmall, we might not be able to reply to each one directly. We do want
you to know that we appreciate the mail you have sent and the
comments you are making about our show. We created this automated
response to answer many of the frequently-asked-questions as quickly
as possible. We will try to answer all other questions directly when
we can. For immediate help you can always call us at (212) 664-4249.
For information regarding the WEEKEND TODAY show, please call (212)
664-2937.
he got caught and she is right wing … must be LOL
January 26th, 2006 at 1:13 pmTrolls, I have two questions for you.
1. Did the Dems break the law by accepting money from Indian Tribes.
2. Did Repubs break the law for accepting money from Abramoff.
January 26th, 2006 at 1:18 pmKudos to Dean for trying to set the record straight and for being informed on this subject.
January 26th, 2006 at 1:21 pm#99
I guess you have the facts to back it up, please show us were we can get this info.
#102
January 26th, 2006 at 1:22 pmlast time I check, it is not illegal to accpet money from cilents, it is illegal to accept money from someone who lobbys. Show us were they broke the law.
Abramoff’s clients gave money to Dems. Yet, they gave more money to dems before they became Abramoff’s clients. So if anything, he directed his client’s to give less than they previously did.
Abramoff himself didn’t give any money. This isn’t an “is” definition argument. That would be the AG’s use of half the 4th Amendment to justify his plans…what happened to the second half of the 4th Amendment? Did that get thrown away with personal responsibility and accountability?
January 26th, 2006 at 1:22 pmI never liked her, she always seemed like a tool which is most of the press to me now days.
January 26th, 2006 at 1:23 pmThis is just sad. Next Republicans will be claiming that Democrats are just as guilty because they took donations from someone who once passed Abramoff on the street or shared an elevator with him for two floors.
January 26th, 2006 at 1:36 pmWho needs a state owned media when the media does what they are told to do?
January 26th, 2006 at 1:39 pmOh Boy, a New talking ‘Head on a Stick’ the ‘Colonies of Blogger’ ants can set their pincers into.
January 26th, 2006 at 1:45 pmCouric is just a highly paid script reader with personality. If one forgets that General Electric Owns NBC and MSNBC one misses that a major defense contractor ( one of the top ten) has control of major media markets) war is profitable to them on two levels cheap news and lots of heavy duty government contracts.
Judith
January 26th, 2006 at 1:46 pmPrior to her Abramoff comments, Couric also characterized the debate over Bush’s illegal, domestic spying as partisan mudslinging & questioned Democrats commitment to fighting terrorism. In fact, it was during Dean’s response to those comments that he mentioned the Republican corruption. Frankly, Couric’s dismissal of the spying issue bothered me far more than the Abramoff exchange. I wish a clip of that segment would be posted as well.
January 26th, 2006 at 1:51 pm#110 – The Republicans turned their back on taking personal responsibility for their actions years ago, so I would have to say: Yes, the idea of taking “personal responsibility” has been ignored by the current administration and the elected Republicans.
January 26th, 2006 at 1:52 pmBy the way, Pres. Bush must love drug dealers!
http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2005/12/a_new_round_of_.html
January 26th, 2006 at 1:54 pm#102 Go to this TP Post and scroll down to comment #52.
Read the list…Find the (D) and get back to us. That is “how it squares” with what Dean was saying.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:00 pmthe pictures are probably of bush and abramoff in bed with their hands busy…
January 26th, 2006 at 2:03 pmTrying to falsely claim current Democrats share equally in this revolting behavior doesn’t change the fact that Republicans have taken traditional corruption to fantastic, convoluted, undreamed of depths.
Who wouldn’t lie and mislead for 20 mill a year?
Representatives of voters should represent voters.
Is that so obvious as to be redundant?
That is their sole purpose for being there.
Washington is now a sick, criminal, lobbying cesspit.
Lobbyists should be outlawed from anything other than sending/mailing accurate and not-misleading fact sheets to representatives.
Tradition should not stop the outlawing of corruption.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:08 pmMatthews, Russert, Couric. They do it because Democrats are too spineless to fight back the way they should.
Why hasn’t ONE Democrat turn the question back to them, viz: Did your bosses at GE suggest you use these Republican talking points to spread lies about the Democrats?
How about THAT, Mr. Fung?
January 26th, 2006 at 2:10 pmDumbsh*t Katie apparently was in the bathroom when Wolf Blitzer tried to pin the same claim on Dean. Wat asses these million dollar corporate RW stenographers make of themselves when they open their pieholes.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:12 pm#7
I agree wholeheartedly–just quit watching it. I did a long time ago after I got disgusted with “news†that consisted of #%*^ like Couric asking the parents of some kid who was raped and murdered, how they felt about it.
Comment by Terry — January 26, 2006 @ 10:56 am
She’s been known to ask that kind of question before when interviewing someone who has lost a loved one. It was asked of some elderly gentlman (I think he was a composer or author) whose wife had recently died.
Same type of asinine questions goes for Wolfie Blitzer’s interview several weeks ago of John Kerry. The interview was rather short, but all Wolfie wanted to focus on was Kerry’s failed presidential bid and what he would have done differently. He then asked Kerry if he was running in 2008, and Kerry said it was too early to make a decision. What did Wolfie ask next? “Why is it too early?” And I thought, “My God, man. The last election was only 14 months ago. Do you really expect him to make a decision now?”
January 26th, 2006 at 2:17 pmOh, and #7, I love these talking heads who have a double standard. Was watching Fox and Friends one morning years ago and they showed a clip of actor Tim Robbins, and were talking about some political comments he made in public against the War in Iraq. Their reaction was like “He’s an actor. Who does he think he is to give an opinion on politics?”
A few days, or weeks, later, they interviewed, I believe, Charlie Daniels who had written a song that supported the War on Terror. What was one of the first questions they asked? “So, what do you think about the war?”
January 26th, 2006 at 2:22 pmwhat’s up with katie calling Gov. Dean “Mr” Dean? She’s not even extending him the courtesy of calling him “Dr Dean.” weak reporting by a talentless hack-katie should not be on the air.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:23 pmNBC equals GE equals big military contracts. GE “brings good things to life”……
January 26th, 2006 at 2:26 pm#97
“That’s right, Libby was trying to get Mark Rich ‘off’ through a plea bargain.
Old news dude. Any comment on Clinton pardoning Rich or is that irrelevant to you?
“The Republican machine was directly involved.”
How do you figure?
“Just remember that wherever there’s corruption or criminality there’s likely to be a rightwing republican nearby”
Same for Democrats especially when the Clintons are around.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:35 pmOh looky, its Katie “Navy seals rock” Couric.
Dean talks the talk! We need a muscular democrat, and Dean is it.
If the damn Democrats (thats right, damnded Democrats) would just get behind their leader, we would have a single unified voice.
We would knock the repubs socks off. But instead everyone wants to worry about their own agendas, and ignore the true leader of the Democratic party, Howard Dean.
If Dean runs again, hes got my vote.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:37 pmGoddammit, Jack Abramoff was a REPUBLICAN OPERATIVE. He had been since his days as a College REPUBLICAN, along with Norquist and Reed. THESE ARE FACTS. What is so damn hard to understand about that?
-
January 26th, 2006 at 2:37 pmIt’s unacceptable to let this just pass by and hope things just magically get better tomorrow.
It’s takes about 5 minutes or less to write a simple letter, telling the “Today Show” and NBC that regurgitating misinformation and outright right-wing talking points, especially on a situation where cold, hard factual evidence is easy enough for anyone to find with Internet access, is unacceptable.
If this behavior by the “news readers” continues to go unpunished, it will only get worse. It’s called hectoring the limits, seeing what they can get away with to help the republican power grab, and then going a little bit farther next time, until every single news outlet is Fox News Lite.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:45 pm[...] It doesn’t matter if Katie’s interviewing someone about a pair of shoes, or about heart disease, or about criminal corporate lobbyists (thanks, Mike) – I can pretty much bet my morning Diet Coke that she’s going to do any or all of the following: [...]
January 26th, 2006 at 2:47 pmshe’ll tell you ’bout a plane crash, with a gleam in her eye
January 26th, 2006 at 2:51 pmit’s interesting when people die
give us dirty laundry
would you really expect a dumb ass like this not to be a tool of the shrubs?
get real and please wake up
Dean finally experienced what all conservatives experience on the Today Show. Networks moved from reporting news to making news.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:53 pmDean is careful to clarify the Abramoff part, but I wish he would follow up “Not one dime of Jack Abramoff money ever went to any Democrat†with “and contributions to Democrats from Abramoff’s clients actually decreased once Abramoff started representing them.â€
Dean also needed to ask Couric — “given that what you say the CRP study says and what it actually says are so different, may I ask you did you actually read the CRP study? And if you did not, who told you what that study said?”
January 26th, 2006 at 2:54 pmActually there is real news available on TV. You can watch Democracy Now and INN report. Just check out Free Speech TV and Link TV. You can get both on Dish but only Link on Direct TV. Rupert Murdoch won’t allow Free Speech TV
January 26th, 2006 at 2:55 pmI know you aren’t typically interested in reality and the truth but:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20060110-112524-8296r.htm
January 26th, 2006 at 2:56 pmAn exerpt from Me’s “reality and truth”: But Mr. Noble said Abramoff may have had a hand in who received money from the tribes he represented.
“We assume that Abramoff gave the tribes a list of names of members [of Congress] who should receive contributions,” Mr. Noble said.
“May have”
“We assume?
So this is your proof? Try harder.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:04 pmTO:
January 26th, 2006 at 3:07 pmMargaret Pergler Today Show Producer
30 Rockefeller Plaza, Room 568E-2
New York, NY 10112
Email: today@nbc.com
Dear Ms. Pergler:
In re the DNC Chair Howard Dean’s appearance this a.m. on “Today Show.” Specifically:
COURIC: Hey, wait a second. Democrats took — Democrats took money from Abramoff too, Mr. Dean.
DEAN: That is absolutely false. That did not happen. Not one dime of money from Jack Abramoff went to any Democrat at any time.
COURIC: Let me just tell you — According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Abramoff and his associates gave $3 million to Republicans and $1.5 million to Democrats, including Sen. Minority Leader Harry Reid.
DEAN: Not one dime of Jack Abramoff money ever went to any Democrat. We can show you the FEC reports, we’d be very happy to do it. There’s a lot of stuff in the press that the Republican National Committee’s been spinning that this is a bipartisan scandal. It is a Republican-financed scandal. Not one dime of money from Jack Abramoff ever went to any Democrat, not one dime.
COURIC: Well, we’ll obviously have to look into that and clarify that for our viewers at a later date. Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Mr. Dean, Governor Dean, thanks so much for talking with us.
I trust we will see a timely follow up to Ms. Couric on the air promise to viewers, as her assertion (who does her research?) that Democrats “took money” from Republican, as in GOP activist, Jack Abramoff , has been universally debunked all day by bloggers everywhere. NBC has a responsibility to give its “viewers” more than just talking points from the opposing party in question, please. Is that too much to ask these days? Does GE really control your News content?
If yes, then DISCLOSE IT TO THE VIEWING PUBLIC WHICH PAYS FOR YOUR ACCESS TO THE AIRWAVES!!!
Sincerely,
James B. Kane
Cc: Federal Communications Commission
NYS Attorney General Elliot Spitzer
I stopped watching anything but BBC news for more than a few minutes at a time because the level of inanity and duplicity is Nixonian.
As for Today? This is merely infotainment, only a bit more substantial than Bungee Jumping with The Stars. Matt Lauer is one of the worst interviewers in the business (nice manicure and suits, though). Hostile and sneering, he treated Kitty Kelly as if he were a Bush-appointed prosecutor. He’s just a faux-tougher version of witless Katie Couric who once leaned forward to a shrink and said, “Now, schizophrenia, that’s a pretty serious disease, isn’t it?” as if talking to and for morons.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:08 pmPerky Katie (looking a lot less perky) is correct, over a dozen Democrats took Abramoff money according to their own FEC filings. This generally was in the $1,000 to $2,500 range, but Sen. Clinton and Reid took large amounts. As one would expect, the vast bulk of the bribes, er’ donations, went to the Republicans who are in charge of all three branches of government. Denial just defeats your credibility. Dean is being Dean. The Democrats should have a cake walk in 2006. Instead, it is interesting to watch them blow it … the gutless weasels.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:09 pmThis is why ALL of NBC, and not just MSNBC must be boycotted.
In response to Powell Gammill: you are 100% incorrect and probably lying. There is ZERO evidence that any Democrat received any money from Abramoff. TO date, only Republicans have been shown to have received Abramoff money. Abramoff = Republican. Abramoff scandal = Republican scandal. End of story.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:13 pm#18 and #79, I followed your lead and I, too, wrote a letter to NBC/Today regarding Couric.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:33 pmWe will continue to monitor the news media and we will launch our own letter-writing campaigns to them, in our effort to force them to do their jobs as journalists, rather than continue as parrots.
Katie is nothing close to a journalist, but unfortunatly every morning before work millions of people grab their information from her and that yutz, the “glib” matt lauer.
They are paid to do the job of manipulating information, or manufacturing a news story, and thats what these millions of dollars are for, people trust her, and lauer. they are the perfect TOOLS. Every program on television, is there to deliver the cash to the network, its all about money.
no one will on TV will dispute these outright lies, and
NBC, MSNBC, FOX, and CNN, are not to be trusted.
TV viewing should be treated as a form of entertainment.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:39 pm#137
The “truth” from the Moonie paper? From the man who declared himself a monarch (moonarch bwahahahahaha). A paper that wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for the millions thrown at it be right wing zealots?
THAT TRUTH?
That is sooooo funny.
You’re a passenger on the troll train, aren’t you.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:45 pmI find it amazing that the right and left can’t come together to agree to disagree to form a coalition to protest the US Corporate State Controlled Media! THEY ARE IN GLASS HOUSES! LIVE 24/7! They should be surrounded by millions of pissed of American Citizens, Nevermind, USA! USA! USA!
The Today Show 1-212-664-4602
January 26th, 2006 at 3:46 pmNBC Nightly News 1-212-664-4971
Can someone point me to the information that shows Dean is correct? Is the distinction that Abramoff’s clients donated to Dems, but not Abramoff/his wife/his company/etc.? Because the WP has been reporting both Dems and Republicans have been returning money received from him. I admit I read the stories quickly, and it was awhile ago…
January 26th, 2006 at 3:49 pm[...] Today Howard Dean told Katie Couric (video here ) that she was wrong about the Dems getting money from Jack Abramoff. [...]
January 26th, 2006 at 4:02 pmCouric vs Dean…
Some days you just HAVE to wonder. Did you watch the Today Show this morning? The bloggers caught Katie trying to get Howard Dean to buy into some GOP talking points….
January 26th, 2006 at 4:07 pmCouric is such a mental lightweight. It’s like watching Ali take down a school nurse. It’s really sad to watch. Poor thing, she really needs to get a career that’s more suited to her rather limited school set. Maybe a housecleaner or personal shopper would be a more appropriate career for her. If she were the journalist she ‘claimed’ at the end of this exchanged, she would have done the simple fact checking necessary not to embarrass herself. Poor thing.
January 26th, 2006 at 4:20 pmI friggin hate Katie Couric, I don’t care if she is supposedly liberal, I think today showed that. I just think she is a ho. Friggin Matt “I cut my hair because I’m losing it” L….Loser sucks too. I can’t put my finger on why I hate katie, maybe cause I was raised on Jane Pauley and never adjusted to the perked up perkyness of KC, I just think she’s bitchy, probably because she is a bitch…hrmph….that’s probably why….
January 26th, 2006 at 4:22 pmDean is the best gift the Democratic Party ever gave to the Republicans. He’s nothing if not consistent (consistently wrong). He mumbles because he constantly has his foot in his mouth, and he will eat his words spoken today on the Today Show. You can cheer all you want, but the more Dean speaks the better off the Republicans are.
A DEMOCRATIC SOUP SANDWICH!!
January 26th, 2006 at 4:24 pmDean got beaned in the head by an inside fastball and started babbling like an idiot. Katie grew a pair and played hardball. ABOUT TIME!
January 26th, 2006 at 4:31 pmDon’t care much for either side of the aisle and didn’t see The Daily Show…Mr. Show with Bob and Dave was the trailblazer in explaining “The Taint.”
January 26th, 2006 at 4:33 pmFrom 141
Perky Katie (looking a lot less perky) is correct, over a dozen Democrats took Abramoff money according to their own FEC filings. This generally was in the $1,000 to $2,500 range, but Sen. Clinton and Reid took large amounts.
Did the FEC filings say from Abramoff or Indian Tribes, or clients of Abramoff? Please repond!! Stupid troll
January 26th, 2006 at 4:35 pm# 147, see the links in the original post to the Center for Responsive Politics study.
Any Dems returning money, or rather giving equitable sums to charities, are doing that with money from Abramoff clients because, once again: Abramoff never gave any money to Democrats.
January 26th, 2006 at 4:37 pmfrom Stuart
Dean is the best gift the Democratic Party ever gave to the Republicans. He’s nothing if not consistent (consistently wrong). Wrong about what? Please provide any info you have to back up you statement. The trolls keep saying that Dems took Abramoff’s money but nevercan back it up. Put up are shut up loser.
January 26th, 2006 at 4:40 pmI think we are all looking foward to the day when Katie takes over as Anchor for the CBS Nightly News, following in the footsteps of Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather, not to mention the network of Edward R. Murrow. We get all of our news from the Progress Report. Everything else is just window dressing.
January 26th, 2006 at 4:49 pmThe fact is that Jack Abramoff gave no money to Democrats. He is the one under indictment.
Did organizations with ties to Abramoff give money to Dems? Yes. And that may include employees of companies who supported Abramoff’s Republican officials. My employer may give money to Repubs, but that doesn’t mean that I haven’t given money to Dems. The two are tied together only by company name.
http://drewlbucket.blogspot.com
January 26th, 2006 at 4:52 pmMissy Couric; always the loyal GOP shill. After all, GE (heavily invested in the military industrial complex) signs her multi-million dollar paychecks.
January 26th, 2006 at 4:53 pmThey took money from the Indian tribes Abramoff was associated with.
You can delude yourself all you want, Jackie doesn’t have legs. The culture of corruption charge will boomerang against Harry Reid and Nancy liar Pelosi.
But thanks for playing. After Alito is seated and Ginsburg kicks off, the games begin. The fascist left will be taken to the kiln.
January 26th, 2006 at 4:59 pm#161
“They took money from the Indian tribes Abramoff was associated with”.
Is this against the law?
“The culture of corruption charge will boomerang against Harry Reid and Nancy liar Pelosi”.
Please provide the proof that Nancy and Harry will be caught up in the culture of curruption. If you can not, then this is just your opinion, and we all know what opinions are.
January 26th, 2006 at 5:13 pmKatie Couric is a prop; your typical career cheerleader bimbo thinly veiling elitist spitefulness and ignorance behind cutesiness, reading glasses, high-heels and lipstick.
January 26th, 2006 at 5:14 pmWhile I like Dean he, like many other Democrats who appear on television always allow themselves to get sandbagged with these loaded questions that are completely rediculous and dishonest. The questioner must be called out on this tactic and told categorically that the jig is up. They need to inform the Russerts, Courics, and Matthews of the media, that they are spinning for the Republicans by purposely misinforming the public with loaded and falsely premised questions. They need show anger when being questioned like this and quit treating the questions as though they are sincere and honest questions. Don’t the Democrats realize by now, the mainstream media is not on their or the American people’s side. They are republicans and shills for the corporations they work for.
January 26th, 2006 at 5:19 pmDid Katie Couric swallow a bitch pill this morning? Maybe she needs a few more days off to recuperate from her recent illness.
Bring back Campbell Brown. At least she doesn’t throw her high and mighty attitude around when interviewing people.
Lose the rhetoric, Katie and get your facts straight before you start spitting venom. It’s waaayyy to early in the morning for verbal Right-wing vomit.
Just a concerned viewer . . . and citizen.
January 26th, 2006 at 5:32 pm#55 Zookeeper, Yep! know where it is. After moving from Hayden Lake, Idaho lived several years just out side of Bayview on Cape Horn. Hunted and climed Packsaddle mountain one year and have wonderful memories of the people and country there. I to miss Montana, the Bitterroot valey the most.Great people and wide open spaces. Not likely to get back there this year but soon I hope. Some one posted we all should watch TV. Well I do a little. But have become selective and the morning shows are like soap opras with more tripe.I catch a little local news and weather, the Daily show when I remember, C-span, some Cnn and an occasional Bush Bull S*** speech like today. I also read the daily paper, listen to NPR and spend a few hours a day on the computer. All in all I am as informed as one old lady can be. My response to TV people is quick and harsh when I see it and that has been often of late, the same for politicians. I average 25 to 30 alerts and responses every morning, not counting signing patitions to Impeach……..Keep up the good work, boot the bas***** out of office…Blessings
January 26th, 2006 at 5:41 pmKatie Couric is another one of those ignorant so-called news people, who really are not news people..just celebrity wanna-be’s. She’s really an idiot who has no idea how to interview people.
January 26th, 2006 at 5:53 pmEveryone, by now, should know that Couric is simply a media whore,with faux cuteness and sweetness that’s enough to make you puke.The only thing that gets her wet is the almighty buck, whoever’s waving it. Well, maybe if Bill O’Reilly called her from his shower.She’s vapid, out of the loop
January 26th, 2006 at 6:34 pm#161 – ‘fascist left’ – now there’s an oxymoron. Look up the definition of fascism and then look up social democracy and see what you get. And while you are at it why don’t you answer my question from three days ago Innocent Lite:
Are you morally treasonous, unpatriotic or servile – or some combo of all three?
January 26th, 2006 at 6:40 pmI agree with the person who pulled the plug on TV. I get worked up enough reading the daily political news on a variety of internet news and blog sites without putting myself through the pain of watching it on TV. The only thing is the raised eyebrows of my co-workers as I curse and mutter at my computer screen. I used to like Katie, way back when, and have admired her as a powerful woman in the newsertainment industry. That respect is now gone.
January 26th, 2006 at 6:45 pmWhy is NBC doing this? Two words.
January 26th, 2006 at 6:52 pmJack Welch
Well, she’s obviously been bribed. This looks like the typical Repub strategy of repeating a lie enough to make it the truth. The weird thing is I though Couric was far more liberal. Guess I’m off the grid.
January 26th, 2006 at 7:01 pmEmail the Today Show and let them know what you think about Katie Whoric promulgating an already discredited lie about the Democrats and Abramoff. She’s so stupid she even uses a source which directly contradicts her.
January 26th, 2006 at 7:04 pmcouric is just a rubublican shill,she shuold take he 20 millionand go back to school.it’s 1984 folks and talking heads like her just prove the point.
January 26th, 2006 at 7:08 pmMy search suggests that no one here offered Katie the help she clearly needs.
Here it is:
Clarify THIS, Katie.
She should go back to reading parking meters.
January 26th, 2006 at 7:09 pm“They took money from the Indian tribes Abramoff was associated with.”
The indians have given to Democrats for a VERY long time. Lot of good it’s done them, but those are legal donations.
Abramoff ripped them off royally, while expressing a bigotry that would make Hitler’s heart melt.
Yours too.
January 26th, 2006 at 7:13 pmHere’s a link to Media Maters for America, who are very good at providing email links to offenders;
http://mediamatters.org/items/200601260003
Here is the text of the email I sent;
Dear Ms. Couric,
I am writing to express my concern at the content of your interview with Dr. Dean, specifically your assertion that members of the Democratic Party received funds from Jack Abramoff’s lobbying firm. I have attached a pdf listing all of Mr. Abramoff’s political donations from 9/30/92 to 8/17/05. The information was provided by the F.E.C. on 1/2/06. Close examination of this list will show that Mr. Abramoff made no donations to any Democratic member of Congress.
There has been a concerted campaign by the White House to paint this affair as a bi-partisan scandal. Some of the Native American tribes who hired Mr. Abramoff’s lobbying firm did make donations to Democrats, including Senate minority leader Harry Reid. This is not the same as a direct political donation, as much as the White House would wish us to think so.
Recently, there has been an alarming tendency in NBC’s journalism to parrot RNC talking points. I’m sure you are aware of the controversy surrounding Chris Matthew’s recent remarks, which were echoed by Tucker Carlson and Joe Scarborough, (who, incidentally, accepted a donation from Jack Abramoff on 7/15/97, via the Preston Gates law firm, although it’s doubtful we’ll hear about it on NBC). When a news organization unquestioningly repeats the contents of a political party’s daily talking points blast faxes, it loses credibility, and so does its journalists. No thinking person takes Fox News’ reporting seriously. If NBC continues this downward trend, it will lose a significant portion of its high-earning demographic to its competitors, ultimately affecting its bottom line.
I trust you will clarify this point for your viewers at the earliest possible opportunity, as you stated at the end of your interview with Dr. Dean. Failure to do so will be another nail in the coffin of NBC’s credibility as a quality news organization, and your credibility as a journalist.
Yours faithfully,
It always feels good to click “send”.
January 26th, 2006 at 7:19 pminnocent lite says:
that’s very open-minded of you. you’re talking about taking “the fascist left…to the kiln”, so it obviously hasn’t actually dawned upon you that the last people to take anyone “to the kiln” were fascists themselves. i’m sure you would bristle at being called a fascist, but with statements like that, what else should i call you? you advocate the mass-murder of those who don’t agree with your opinions.
i’ll bet you also call yourself a christian. i can see it now- the new christian outreach program: “gas chambers for jesus”.
you are really an idiot if you don’t realize why independents and moderates no longer trust republicans. you hate, you persecute, you destroy america. good thing you’ve got your fear to keep you warm.
January 26th, 2006 at 7:20 pmRhe Fascist Left? Geezuz h christ! What kind of shit do we have out there in America. No wonder this country’s stench is beginning to leak into the stratosphere!
January 26th, 2006 at 7:32 pmquite personally I would love to see open warfare between the left and the right if things came down to it. We have seen what cowards Rightwingers are. My favorite picture is that of some of those Rightwing bastards being grabbed by blacks in South Africa. They were worse than screaming children as the blacks tore their genitals off on live television.
January 26th, 2006 at 7:35 pmI haven’t read all 179 comments, but I hope that someone posited this idea, and if they haven’t it is that perhaps Dean wanted her to pose that question so that he could get his statement out. How else could he have said it as forcefully as he did. I was in the radio business for over 25 years and many a time the interviewee would ask us to ask them certain questions so that they could lay the real facts on the line.
January 26th, 2006 at 7:41 pm#161
January 26th, 2006 at 7:45 pmFYI,
Fascist left is an oxymoron.
Fascism is far more suited to the Republican party.
Exclusivity. Nationalism. Militarism. Corporatism. Authoritarianism. Suppression of opposition.
Sounds like Bush&Co to me.
LOL, “fascist left”
Fascism is inherently anti-left. I know that person is trying to sound cool and provocative and smart, but it just points out the inherent stupidty required to be a conservative these days.
Bush isn’t even conservative!
January 26th, 2006 at 8:41 pmPS: But he is stupid.
January 26th, 2006 at 8:42 pmI guess inherent stupidity is taught at those stench filled rooms of Republican Think Tanks. I notice that whenever a Rightwinger Posts here there is some form of cowardly stench that permeates the entire blog. why is that?
January 26th, 2006 at 8:59 pmtoday@nbc.com
Dear Katie Couric:
When can we expect you to get back with us – the viewers – about the facts of the Gov. Howard Dean comment that not one dime of Abromoff money went to Democrats?
Sincerely,
January 26th, 2006 at 9:44 pmPresnit_Douchbag:
January 26th, 2006 at 9:54 pmWhat’s this douchbag thing ? Why don’t you stick that word up your uneducated ass ? You think that’s entertaining, what’s wrong with you, lousy upbringing ? Your writing is public, you have no manners ? You hate women ? You’re a fucking moron.
crazybekki@hotmail.com hey i love u Katie
add me people i love talkin dirty and love sex
im good hoe babys hehe
add me crazybekki@hotmail.com
January 26th, 2006 at 9:59 pmI sent my, er, feedback to Ms. Couric.
January 26th, 2006 at 10:43 pmCouric is a Bush apologist and is PAID to defend him too!
She needs to come clean about it, or should be fired from her news position!
Democrats like Dean have to realize that most TV news interviewers, like Couric, all work for Bush now, so expect them to mislead and obscure facts!
January 26th, 2006 at 11:09 pmEverybody please contact CNN to have Wolf Blitzer fired, because he is the worst Bush apologist!!!
January 26th, 2006 at 11:12 pmI was recently discussing, for the umphteenth time, my reasons for having turned off the TV. O’Reilly, on cable, dissing Walter Cronkite a couple of years ago, just got me to turn off the Fox affiliate in NYC (WNYC Channel 5). I switched to the Today Show. Then I saw the Matt Lauer interview of Kitty Kelly. Could not believe it–he was complaining that Kitty Kelly wrote a critical book. She pointed out that she was a Republican, as a way of showing that she was fair.
Excuse me?
I’m really disappointed in Katie Couric.
There’s no reason for me to resume watching the morning “news” shows, as they’ve devolved into such crap. It’s a pity that so many Americans get their information from television “news”, when the major media are controlled by all of five conglomerates.
So, now it’s one-stop ignoring: I won’t watch Katie on the same network where I don’t watch Bob Schieffer.
I really do miss Andy Rooney, except when I visit my parents, who watch 60 Minutes, and I sometimes catch Rooney’s minute.
I’m better informed than I was before I turned the tube off.
btw–(off topic)the freedoms the terrorists supposedly hate the U.S. for are just about over the cliff, now. Apparently there is someone who hates America ‘way more than Bin Laden does, and he’s spying on Americans without a warrant. Maybe these guys are really on the same payroll.
January 26th, 2006 at 11:26 pmPlease keep in mind I am a Dem….Howard was not being totally honest in his statements.
In Local State and Federal elections the Dems normally have the people who would donate thru an org or a pac write the checks directly to the politician instead of the org, pac or corp who is doing the actual fund raising.
I know, I have done this many times.
This way you get a list of individuals instead of special interest groups, but each politician is aware of who raised what and where the individual checks come from.
Yes the Dems did get that amount of money via Abramoff thru each group he represents, and yes the politician does know who is gathering those funds….This is actually a much slyer way of getting funds….The Repubs do not normally do this, they have a different policy.
So yes Dean is correct in saying No Dem has taken money from Abramoff, but he is being really dishonest in not disclosing the second half.
This system is also used to keep the books clean, you don’t list the actual group, instead individuals only show up and it is impossible to tell what groups they are with…….
January 27th, 2006 at 12:15 amKatie has been ever the corporate gal.
January 27th, 2006 at 12:19 amIf you haven’t noticed this for the past 5-10 years , welcome to the world..
oh she’ll jab here and there..but she has long agao traded her soul for the huge salary she gets. and with those perks comes responsibility to her big daddy.
does anyone remember her obscenely idioic commentary during the opening ceremonies of the 2004 olympics? “the ladies on the greek team are all carrying leather bags. greece is known for it’s leather goods.” yes and democracy and all that other stuff comes maybe third or fourth in the list of contributions to the world.
My, oh my.
The comments that have been published!
Katie Couric, that well-known right winger!
It is so silly.
The democratic political organization is so squeaky clean. Only grandly aged women and unoffensively feminine men provide donations.
A teacher out of Rhinebeck, NY explained to me over dinner one night that a referendum on clean air in New York was important. She decried the fact that as she managed a polling station most of the people who came in to vote didn’t understand it so she had to tell them to vote in favor of it. Yes, she was a democrat. When I mentioned that as a polling official she had broken the elections law, she got all indignant and pouty. Proclaimed her innocence all the while defending her actions.
Is your hatred for W so great that any lie, any denial, any way to avoid an intellectually honest appraisal of your own house is ethically justified? Look in the mirror and view the visage of that which you hate so much.
Shame on you.
January 27th, 2006 at 12:57 ampost 196 > Shame on you Jeff for defending the putrid Bush Regime! Yes, lots of DC Democrats are bad too, but Bush is the worst a-hole this nation has ever had to endure!
January 27th, 2006 at 1:17 amLaundering the Truth…
What happens when Howard Dean gets challenged on his talking points, and Katie Couric brings up uncomfortable facts that liberal bloggers would rather their readers not know read about? The word laundering comes to mind. Scrub, scrub….
January 27th, 2006 at 1:34 amThis is what happens when you let plutocrats run the news programs. Katie, Bryan, whoever they have at CBS, all the rest of them: all millionaires many times over.
If only Dean had asked “which Democrats, Katie?” that would have put an end to it. But alas…
January 27th, 2006 at 2:11 amJeff…
It’s no so much that Katie is a right wing shill…
The problem is that she’s, at best, an uninformed idiot – as opposed to a journalist or reporter. She reads the script that is given to her.
In this case, the script is pretty much a production of the Republican National Committee, et. al.
The fact is no Democrat ever recieved any money from Abramoff. Not one, not ever, not one dime. The only money the Dems recieved was from Indian tribes who’ve pretty much always donated to the Dems anyway…
The ‘pitch’ being presented by the media prostitutes is the one they got from the biggest pimps on the block…
They’re either too lazy to get out of bed and check the sources, or they’re paid too well.
I suspect Katie is prolly just one of the lazy ones…
January 27th, 2006 at 3:00 am*shakes head* Honestly-it’s the same damned thing all the time these days–Whenever the Repugs are embroiled in YET ANOTHER in an unending series of TRUE-LIFE revelations of malfeasance, even with the help of the meat puppets of the media noise machine, who try to out shout any criticism of their precious regime, the first move is to trot out any bad thing that the Democrats have done. Then harp on it.
The media does its utmost to downplay and, whenever possible, ignore any story that won’t put a positive spin on this administration.
If Democrats raise money, the media in this country will make as much of a deal about it as they wish, with the blessings of this administration. The fact is that Abramoff did his lobbying in strictly partisan terms, with the Republican party as the designated beneficiary.
SEIXON has liberal bloggers confused with the FORMER House Majority Leader, Tom DeLay, who made money laundering a specialty, and who has expressed SUCH indignation at being asked about it.
Apparently, the peasants (Democrats, progressives, liberals, etc) aren’t to be permitted to question anything the aristocracy (Neocons, Republicans, corporatists, etc) chooses to do. Next thing ya know, there’ll be sumptuary laws.
The fact remains that this is a Republican corruption scandal. A congressman from my own state received money from both Abramoff and a good deal more from DeLay. He voted with DeLay about 89% of the time. This Representative is deeply hooked up with big Pharma, and voted against stem-cell research. Another Republican representative in my small but densely-populated state, who’d also received money from DeLay’s PAC, voted with DeLay about 90% of the time as well, and was one of 14 Republicans in the House who voted AGAINST emergency relief for the region devastated by Katrina.
Interesting, how the wingers get all abstract and precious when concrete reality hits them in the head. Reality? Put it on the taxpayers’ tab.
January 27th, 2006 at 3:06 am“Laundering the Truth…
What happens when Howard Dean gets challenged on his talking points, and Katie Couric brings up uncomfortable facts that liberal bloggers would rather their readers not know read about? The word laundering comes to mind. Scrub, scrub….”
Trackback by SEIXON — January 27, 2006 @ 1:34
What happens when someone’s rickety conservative blog is so worthless they actually troll progressive sites for blowback? Introducing . . . SEIXON!
In the immortal words of John Candy, “Here’s a quarter, go downtown and have a rat knaw that thing off yer face!”
January 27th, 2006 at 4:33 ammake no doubt about it the bush Pimps hungrily devour this blog site. The problem is there has yet to be a pimp I ever heard of who did not have a severe case of brain herpes.
January 27th, 2006 at 6:06 amIt doesn’t matter what the truth is; the bottom line is that middle America listens to Katie Couric, and they will believe what she says. How the heck do you fight this?
January 27th, 2006 at 7:20 amKatie then cited a Center for Responsive Politics study as her evidence, but a look at CRP’s website (here and here) show that Democrats accepted no money from Abramoff.
And if you stick his name into google with CRP you get this…
http://www.google.com/search?q=Center+for+Responsive+Politics+Abramoff
The first result there is this…
http://www.capitaleye.org/abramoff_recips.asp?sort=N
Which shows lots of democrats. So what’s the idea here ? That if you spend enough time constructing links so long they dont fit on my WXGA screen you can find a page with the word “Amramoff” but not “Democrat” ?
Well hooray. Here’s 10 million of them…
http://www.google.com/search?&q=Abramoff+-democrat
Meanwhile you REALLY do have to try hard to keep playing dumb about Democrats taking money from his lobbying. And then calling people partisan hacks for referring to it.
Pull your head out alread FFS. Since when has the greed of rich people been a partisan issue you retards.
January 27th, 2006 at 8:17 amI downloaded a 17 page document from a website called Newmeat.com. It is a Federal Election Commission report on ALL of Casino Jack’s political contributions dating all the way back to 1995! There isn’t one Democratic politician or Democratic PAC on it! But you should see how many times Tom Delay’s name appears and how many times TRMPAC and ARMPAC are cited! This is Republican weaseling at it’s worst. Newt Gingrich promised to clean up 40 years of alleged Democratic corruption and cronyism in his “Contract With America”. What a misnomer that was, it should have been more accurately calledContract ON America”, because that’s exactly what these second-hand political mafiosi have given us. If it took Dems in Congress 40 years to become a corrupt cesspool of greed and avarice, then the Republicans should be especially proud of the fact that it’s taken them about one fourth of that time to become even more corrupt with much deadlier results. But of course the Rethugs want to play this up as a “bi-partisan” scandal because they don’t want to lose the stranglehold on “our” government they’ve enjoyed for the last 5 years! They say that the Dems don’t have a message or a vision for our country and yet they rabidly defend the failed policies of our “Campaigner-In-Chief” by attacking critics, bullying the so-called “Liberal Media” into spewing their neo-con talking points (such as this one about Pirate Jack’s political contributions) and resorting to outright lies and stonewalling that never seems to stir a fraction of the outrage that the lie told by Bill Clinton caused! For those of you keeping score at home: Bill Clinton’s lie about a blow job from an intern didn’t result in any American casualties or the historic increase in the deficit and it certainly didn’t leave any innocent Americans stranded and left to die after a natural disaster. Now, what’s happened to our country since these self-styled, born again chickenhawks have been in charge? Their style of governing is the ultimate parlor trick, it’s all smoke and mirrors and deceit wrapped up in catchy slogans and macho rhetoric. And the citizens of this country are catching on. I just wonder how long it will take before the “mainstream media” finally clues in to what a majority of us already know.
January 27th, 2006 at 9:09 amI downloaded a 17 page document from a website called Newmeat.com. It is a Federal Election Commission report on ALL of Casino Jack’s political contributions dating all the way back to 1995!
Did it at any point mention the fact he’s a lobbyist ?
Or when you were reading a 17 page document about some random guy you remembered it was because he is involved in a lobbying scandal ?
If so you look like a bit of a retard referring to him as “casino Jack” while still pretending he is no different that John Q Citizen who can only make political contributions in his own name.
January 27th, 2006 at 9:42 amso, did she “clarigy that for our viewers” this morning???
January 27th, 2006 at 10:21 amif so, i missed it…
but caught the end of this segment,with katie and matt, at 20 past the hour:
oprah’s 180 opinion of the writer’s ficionalizing his story “million little pieces”…
said oprah to frey on her show, “the truth will set you free”…
uh huh…how ’bout that, katie? …the truth, that is…
ugh – always proofread…
January 27th, 2006 at 10:23 am“clarify” of course…
There is a difference between Jack Abramoff gave and peopel associated with Jack Abramoff gave.
This link shows that Jack and Wife PAmela’s own money WENT ENTIRErY TO REPUBLICANS.
http://www.capitaleye.org/abramoff_donor.asp?Name=Abramoff%2C+Jack+A+%26+Pamela
Did he direct money of his clienst or through shell or front charities or committees? maybe.
There is a high double standard at work here around what is the boundary of Jack. When Couric wants to say it was Jack who gave money, she sees him as the center of a large network of money and influence. But when it comes to whether the President or The Congressional Republicans are involved, the right wing noise machine wants to say Jack is a single individual and we can’t be guilty by association. And the media follow along. For Dems, the boundary around Jack is wide, for Repubs its narrow.
January 27th, 2006 at 10:41 amWhat happens when someone’s rickety conservative blog is so worthless they actually troll progressive sites for blowback? Introducing . . . SEIXON!
Yes, my rickety blog having gotten numerous links from Instapundit, Power Line, Roger Simon, LGF, Christopher Hitchens Web, Wizbang… Whatever.
Obviously the Republicans are not all that into talking about Abramoff on their blogs, so why would I try to feed this to them? They don’t want to go near talking about Abramoff. I will, because I’m not a worthless partisan.
ThinkProgress, and other liberal blogs, are trying to fool all of you, as I just proved once again. Katie Couric’s figures, although off by a bit, were close to what she said they were. ThinkProgress and liberal blogs claim that CRS never even mentioned those amounts – when they did.
I’m trying to engage Democrats in honest debate, to lure them away from the cesspools of left-wing filth that has so completely destroyed what was once the Democratic Party.
So, dano, if you’re not going to address any of the points I made, which debunked ThinkProgress, why say anything at all?
SEIXON has liberal bloggers confused with the FORMER House Majority Leader, Tom DeLay, who made money laundering a specialty, and who has expressed SUCH indignation at being asked about it.
What does Tom DeLay’s actions have to do with liberal bloggers pulling the wool over their readers eyes? If DeLay violated the law, punish him to the fullest extent of the law. I don’t care, I’m not a Republican. Check out my blog, if you will, I have never written a single word about DeLay. He’ll get what’s coming to him.
Liberal bloggers on the other hand…
Jane Hamsher of firedoglake banned me from her site for “trolling”, which in LiberalSpeak means “confronting me with facts and the truth to debunk an entire blog post of mine”. Now she deleted my trackback to the post I trackbacked here. Hats off to ThinkProgress for not being so completely anti-truth as firedoglake.
I really worry about you guys.
January 27th, 2006 at 10:57 am[...] Yesterday, Today show anchor Katie Couric falsely claimed that “Democrats took money from Jack Abramoff.” Challenged on her facts, Couric said she “would look into that and clarify that for our viewers.” [...]
January 27th, 2006 at 11:42 amTV is bad for your brain an all, so I don’t watch very much, outside of the Today! Show with Katie Couric.
January 27th, 2006 at 11:55 amShe’s cute. But she should show some more leg now an’ again. A lot more, in fact.
As some big producer or agent guy said to Doris Day, according to some documentary on NPR: “You have a fantastic ass, Doris, and you should show it!”
I think that’s how it went. Anyway, the same advice holds good for Katie Couric.
Big money follows Reps. They may all take money but the news media likes to paint a rosie pitchure for reps why they take money The news media is not fair reporting the news .See what happen to Ford and G.M. Iheard they are not going to get help. So think of all the small people gettingf hurt in all of this. And Ithink it will be all swept under the rug.
January 27th, 2006 at 12:17 pmTell me then, why is Jim Traficant in jail?
Comment by Bill #50
Bile,
1) He had a bad hair day…
2) He’s from Ohio (and stupid)
3) He wanted his house refurbished for free
…but it wasn’t because he took money from Abramofff
January 27th, 2006 at 12:58 pmEverything tha Bush says about the wonderful job his administration is doing or has done is just plain wrong. Robust economy. Grew at 1.1%. Welcomed as liberators in Iraq. Mission accomplished May 1, 2003. War will cost $7 billion, Wolfowitz 2003. Everything in Iraq is going great. Finally, when posed the question “have you made any mistakes” Bush looked befuddled and sail no. Scary part is that Bush meant it.
January 27th, 2006 at 1:03 pmSeixon, you only show up here to exercise your windy condescension. Type up the names of any Democrats that you are certain have taken money from Abramoff. Otherwise, you’re just one more chimp-prez suck-up, same as that corporate punchboard Couric, who has pawned off true journalism for reading glasses, high heels and leg shots.
January 27th, 2006 at 1:18 pmBlitzer, Couric, Laur, Matthews and Russert are all political hacks. I dont watch them anymore. I hope the American people realize that there are alternative news available via the internet and other mediums.
Thank You.
January 27th, 2006 at 2:32 pm[...] Now Tim Russert and NBC News are in the firing line. This sample from Think Progress is representative: Yesterday, Today show anchor Katie Couric falsely claimed that “Democrats took money from Jack Abramoff.†Challenged on her facts, Couric said she “would look into that and clarify that for our viewers.†[...]
January 27th, 2006 at 3:43 pmSeixon, in your non-partisan zeal you overlook the main point of the outrage directed at Couric and Howell (and earlier Blitzer). Their mistake, and thus the fact that allows Dean to truthfully state that no Democrat received
Abramoff money is that the media speakpeople always confuse Abramoff money with Abramoff-related money.
Now Abramoff-related money can presumably come from anyone who was associated with Abramoff in any way, as opposed to Abramoff money that came out of Jack Abramoff’s pocket. Abramoff-related money has about the same relation to Abramoff money that weapons of mass destruction-related program activities have to weapons of mass destruction.
The US invaded Iraq to rid it of weapons of mass destruction but 2200 dead Americans and God knows (literally, because no one else does) how many dead Iraqis all that has been found is weapons of mass destruction-related program activities.
Thus, when Republican shills say that Democrats received Abramoff money, it is like saying that weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq when what was found was weapons of mass destruction-related program activities and what Democrats received was Abramoff-related money which may or may not have had any actual connection with Abramoff.
January 27th, 2006 at 4:18 pmIt disturbs me that so many of the comments about Katie Couric and other female journalists focus on looks, age, sexiness, etc.
I’m no great fan of Katie but let’s focus on what she says and does instead of what she looks like.
There’s a lot being written about Chris Matthews these days but so far I haven’t seen any comments about the fact that he’s an overweight, blowsy bleached blond. Certainly, no one has mentioned his legs.
I won’t even get into Tim Russert’s jowls…and neither should anyone else.
But if we’re going to talk about looks, the guys should be getting equal time.
January 27th, 2006 at 7:57 pmnainam, thank you for the post on Russert and Matthews. You are on the mark and I agree with you wholeheartedly. They’re a couple of old fat fuckers that are hard on the eyes and ears. Not even all the designer reading glasses in the world can help these two.
January 27th, 2006 at 8:45 pmPlease keep in mind I am a Dem….Howard was not being totally honest in his statements.
In Local State and Federal elections the Dems normally have the people who would donate thru an org or a pac write the checks directly to the politician instead of the org, pac or corp who is doing the actual fund raising.
I know, I have done this many times.
This way you get a list of individuals instead of special interest groups, but each politician is aware of who raised what and where the individual checks come from.
Yes the Dems did get that amount of money via Abramoff thru each group he represents, and yes the politician does know who is gathering those funds….This is actually a much slyer way of getting funds….The Repubs do not normally do this, they have a different policy.
So yes Dean is correct in saying No Dem has taken money from Abramoff, but he is being really dishonest in not disclosing the second half.
This system is also used to keep the books clean, you don’t list the actual group, instead individuals only show up and it is impossible to tell what groups they are with…….
January 27th, 2006 at 11:20 pmI don’t like Katie Couric but would rather have the sexist comments left off as well. I have written to the Today show many times previous to this to complain about her. She doesn’t have the chops to do anything but fluff. And why is it that Chris Matthews keeps trying to maintain that he is a Democrat? Anyone listen to Randi Rhodes on Air America radio. Her show is great at debunking all the RNC talking point crud and she is very entertaining. Al Franken’s show is good as well as Ed Schultz. These folks keep me informed about all the misinformation being floated by the RNC and right wing pundits so I don’t have to watch the drivel on TV. Watching that stuff is just an exercise in frustration. Also Media Matters.org is great for debunking a lot of stuff from anyone who spews it.
January 27th, 2006 at 11:44 pmComment well taken Lisa. Thank you!
January 28th, 2006 at 10:01 amBlitzer, Couric, Laur, Matthews and Russert are all political hacks. I dont watch them anymore. I hope the American people realize that there are alternative news available via the internet and other mediums.
Thank You.
Comment by Cecil Graham #218
Ditto!
January 28th, 2006 at 11:41 am[...] Dumb, lying, or a heapin’ helpin’ of both? You make the call: COURIC: Let me just tell you — According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Abramoff and his associates gave $3 million to Republicans and $1.5 million to Democrats, including Sen. Minority Leader Harry Reid. [...]
January 28th, 2006 at 11:52 amAll you many Democrats who are finally waking up need to join the Green Party. Watching the Democrats and Republicans is like watching a wrestling match (fake fight).
I’m going to be nominated to run for the 4th District, CT Congressional seat against Chris Shays and Dem. Diane Farrell as the Green Party candidate. Last election I gave Diane Farrell very damaging letters that Shays had written. Farrell never used them, protecting Shays.
My story exposes actual criminal acts by Federal District Judge Alan H. Nevas who jury tampered (no joke), violated the Court Reporter Act by intimidating his court reporter to delete part of the transcript, and obstructed justice. The case went to the Supreme Court and lost. So much for checks and balances.
You can read the entire story titled JUST CAUSE JUST FACTS available on Amazon.com.
January 28th, 2006 at 5:09 pmSeixon, you only show up here to exercise your windy condescension. Type up the names of any Democrats that you are certain have taken money from Abramoff. Otherwise, you’re just one more chimp-prez suck-up, same as that corporate punchboard Couric, who has pawned off true journalism for reading glasses, high heels and leg shots.
I guess you didn’t care to actually read what I wrote, and went for the knee-jerk reaction instead. I’ve never said that any Democrats took any money from Abramoff, because I think it is quite clear that didn’t happen. Resting on a hope that none of his clients did, though, I think is a bit naive and run by partisanship.
Seixon, in your non-partisan zeal you overlook the main point of the outrage directed at Couric and Howell (and earlier Blitzer). Their mistake, and thus the fact that allows Dean to truthfully state that no Democrat received
Abramoff money is that the media speakpeople always confuse Abramoff money with Abramoff-related money.
I only “overlooked” that because it is quite obvious that Couric made that mistake because she has no idea what she is talking about, like many of the talking heads on TV (Chris Matthews comes to mind…). However, when Couric actually did hone in on something that was correct, talking about the millions of dollars that were directed at Republicans and Democrats from Abramoff’s clients, Dean jumped right back into talking point mode and basically kept clear of talking about the tribes’ role in all of this.
The reason for that, of course, is what managed to weasel its way into your last statement: “what Democrats received was Abramoff-related money which may or may not have had any actual connection with Abramoff”
Ah, so there is a possibility that Abramoff directed some of his clients to give money to Democrats? Gee, someone tell Howard Dean, ThinkProgress, and the rest of the partisan goons who are commenting here.
Partisans will quash any such possibility, for after all, it is a rule in the Democratic Party that Republicans are evil money-whores, while they are nothing of the sort. Thus any possibility that Democrats may have been tainted in this scandal must be erased immediately.
Just looking at the numbers of the amount of money going from the tribes to Democrats and Republicans, non-partisans such as myself wonder how the Democrats be so sure of themselves that their own didn’t take part in this. It’s almost as if they believe that the tribes magically became much more supportive of them, tribes who had connections to Abramoff, a lobbyist. Amazingly, both Democrats and Republicans were suddenly buried with money from the tribes.
Quite amazing. Shall I close my eyes now and pretend I don’t see any strange coincidences?
Here’s something to think about: if the Republicans knew that Abramoff was a crook, why in the world would they want him to show up in FEC records as having donated directly to them?
No. Those who knew he was a crook opted for the money-laundering operation through the tribes. Did those include Democrats as well?
Time will tell, and I hope I won’t have to say “I told you so” a couple months from now, but you should all at least get off your partisan horses and ponder the possibility.
January 29th, 2006 at 12:48 amWheeeee. This is such a cute little game of who can say the most unrelated comment!
RE: Post 197… Are you sure I’m defending a man I never voted for? Would that make you feel better? Ignoring the issue of corruption and it’s pervasiveness in Washington regardless of political party?
RE: Post 200… I might not be from Seattle, but the news reporting I’ve been seeing has Abramoff shifting money through people and bank accounts like he was playing a video game. But I guess it’s more important to attack the Republicans than clean up Washington.
RE: Post 202… Ooooh.. do my websites now!!! Please!!! Will I finally find true love?
RE: Post 203… You lost me with all that medical lingo. Well, that, and the fact you prefer to insult rather than discuss.
RE: Post 222… On the one hand, Couric is being attacked for being just a pretty faced shill… On the other hand, someone is attacked for being an ugly, fat, old shill. Never did understand where looks became the point. Besides, my momma said I’m pretty.
Ad hominem attacks, my fellow Americans, do nothing more than take up space. Poo poo heads.
And the song said, do dah doo…
January 29th, 2006 at 6:48 pmSo Katie Couric is now a Republican shill. And you guys still claim to be in touch with reality?
For what it’s worth, Dean is trying to play a game of semantics, claiming that if Abramoff never physically handed a Democrat a check, it means they never engaged in corruption with him.
But… senate Minority Leader Harry Reid accepted thousands of dollars from an Abramoff client — the Coushatta Indian tribe.
The Coushattas sent a $5,000 check to Reid’s tax-exempt political group, the Searchlight Leadership Fund, the day after Reid interceded via letter with Interior Secretary Gale Norton over a casino dispute with a rival tribe. A second tribe represented by Abramoff sent an additional $5,000 to Reid’s group. Reid in total received more than $66,000 in Abramoff-related contributions between 2001 and 2004.
You gotta love the sad irony that Democrats have made this such a huge issue considering their own involvement in it.
January 31st, 2006 at 4:30 pmthey should have clarified it before telling the “lie”? you mean like the liberal media checked into and clarified the story about bush’s military service records? funny. some of these democrats that you worship are as dirty as the day is long. they have no real solutions to problems, just criticisms and hyperbole. can’t have a discussion without name calling and out and out lies. that’s why they can’t win an election that matters.
February 25th, 2006 at 2:27 amReid Aided Ambramoff Clients, Records Show
Feb 09 2:32 PM US/Eastern
Email this story
By JOHN SOLOMON and SHARON THEIMER
Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON
Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid wrote at least four letters helpful to Indian tribes represented by Jack Abramoff, and the senator’s staff regularly had contact with the disgraced lobbyist’s team about legislation affecting other clients.
The activities _ detailed in billing records and correspondence obtained by The Associated Press _ are far more extensive than previously disclosed. They occurred over three years as Reid collected nearly $68,000 in donations from Abramoff’s firm, lobbying partners and clients.
Reid’s office acknowledged Thursday having “routine contacts” with Abramoff’s lobbying partners and intervening on some government matters _ such as blocking some tribal casinos _ in ways Abramoff’s clients might have deemed helpful. But it said none of his actions were affected by donations or done for Abramoff.
“All the actions that Senator Reid took were consistent with his long- held beliefs, such as not letting tribal casinos expand beyond reservations, and were taken to defend the interests of Nevada constituents,” spokesman Jim Manley said.
Reid, D-Nev., has led the Democratic Party’s attacks portraying Abramoff’s lobbying and fundraising as a Republican scandal.
But Abramoff’s records show his lobbying partners billed for nearly two dozen phone contacts or meetings with Reid’s office in 2001 alone.
March 7th, 2006 at 2:04 amKatie For President!!
March 9th, 2006 at 7:55 amthe Democratic Party, lead by Howard Dean should split up into all the individual groups they represent and start about 156 independent political parties. They are bankrupt of ideas, except to take money out of the taxpayer pockets which all politic parties do, excepting the Libertarian party.
April 7th, 2006 at 5:28 pm[...] Chicago Real Estate Agents – Rising Realty – Chicago Real Estate … Your Chicago Real Estate Agency. The Chicago real estate market is constantly changing. As your full service real estate company, Rising Realty is here to provide solutions to all of your … 1 Additional Chicago Real Estate agency Resources can be found here [...]
July 23rd, 2006 at 8:09 am…Real Estate Blog…Couric Caught On Tape: Democrats Took Money From Abramoff Too, Mr. Dean……
…Couric Caught On Tape: Democrats Took Money From Abramoff Too, Mr. Dean…Real Estate Blog……
July 23rd, 2006 at 8:10 amI think THAT should be our battle cry.
July 23rd, 2006 at 8:12 am“NOT ONE DIME!â€
Long line of bbbsss from lots of folks. When will Lefties and Righties get the hint that most poli’s are in deep with someone. Abromoff was just a small example.
As for those lefties thinking “No dem ever accepted a dime from Abromoff…” Like one comment indicated.. ya, like DIRECTLY. But there’s a two page list of just dems that got money. But to really prove this, and why no one ever asked the question, why has Hilary and dozens of others said, “yes, but I’m sending the money back after hearing of this scandal.” Mr. Dean, how can you send “back” something you never received.. oh ya, that was “directly received in my hand”, I forgot.
Just one of a million daggers between the left and right that keep splitting this country in two. The biggest one has Osama Bin Ladens name on it and we’ll never be the same. It will take centuries to recover from this one.. Righties to intrenched to admit their mistakes, and Lefties to freakin angry to get behind any good idea, news or anything… let alone come up with a good idea themselves. Give me something to vote FOR, not against.
PS.. don’t ignore Fox, CNN, CBS, NY Times, Wall Street.. either take it all in, believe NONE of it, and come to your own conclusions, or ignore all of it and just be happy with yourself. But DO NOT just listen to one media source and believe EVERYTHING they say… then you’re just an idiot.
Someone in the middle where the air is a little cleaner….
September 8th, 2006 at 3:01 amHow can I email Jack Abramoff?
Susan DeMuro
November 9th, 2006 at 9:31 pmmommydoll@msn.com