Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Important KoKo01 thread on blatant lie by Mehlman, ignored by M$M

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:00 PM
Original message
Important KoKo01 thread on blatant lie by Mehlman, ignored by M$M
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Note: In article, Ed Gillespi also repeated the same lie)

Why isn't the Ken Mehlman lie a bigger story?
I want to return to what I think is an extremely important incident that occurred late in the day last Friday, when events typically get lost in the news cycle. As Think Progress documented, at some point during the day on Friday, the GOP decided to go on television and tell an outright lie -- namely, that when Denny Hastert learned the previous Friday about the IMs exchanged between Mark Foley and Congressional pages (as a result of the ABC story), Hastert delivered an ultimatum to Foley: either resign or be expelled. Thereafter, so the new GOP mythology claimed, Foley resigned.

This story is complete fiction. It never happened. It was just made up by Republican operatives in order to defend Denny Hastert and make him look like some sort of hard-nosed, no-nonsense tough guy who took extraordinary steps against Mark Foley. But there is no doubt that this never happened, and anyone who is saying that it did is, by definition, lying -- and is lying clearly and demonstrably.

It wasn't just some obscure pundit or GOP backbencher who told this lie. The Chairman of the Republican National Committee, Ken Mehlman, went on national television and claimed that Hastert did this:


more at......

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com /

this needs somebody's attention. isn't there anybody in the M$M who'll cover this?

KO, have you seen this? who has an in to his office?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Hav Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. .
You can't count on them to do the investigations or ask the tough questions.
Email them and hopefully it will be revealed as yet another lie from the Repubs in their desperate attempts to avoid taking responsibility for anything at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. sorry, MSM obsessing over possible nuke right now
no time for fact checking other stories
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. yeah...and they lie all the time, so what's the big deal?
pretty sad

amazing how they were able to cover every aspect of the Clinton wrongdoings, though, isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. no time to fact check Clinton Story, either, apparently
especially not even the acquittal. That would have required going back and admitting they were wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. which acquittal are you talking about? if you mean Whitewater, they
Edited on Mon Oct-09-06 04:33 PM by Gabi Hayes
were never charged, only WITNESSES, and the Fed prosecutor's closing statement DELCARED them to be VICTIMS of Hale, Tucker, and McDougal

something the Wash Post and NY Times didn't report for a LONG time, and BURIED deep in the paper, just as they did the Pilsbury report, which COMPLETELY exonerated them
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Clinton cleared in every instance including WW, Paula and Monica
those acquittals that were whispered about in the back pages for a day or two after the slime was lallowed to swish around for years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. he himself was never tried for anything, except the impeachment.
he lost his license to practice, but that was an administrative thing, I think, and he copped to that

other people were tried by Starr, and a few were convicted, like Hillary's law partner, but neither he nor Hillary were ever charged with anything by Fiske, Starr, or Ray
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David Zephyr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:38 PM
Response to Original message
6. Kick.
Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellenfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:42 PM
Response to Original message
7. that's odd, reynolds' new mea culpa ad says HE forced foley to resign. eom
Edited on Mon Oct-09-06 04:42 PM by ellenfl
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. yep....there could be some fun in that one: Hastert and Reynolds
arguing over WHO forced him to resign

this argument preferably taking place behind bars, with them sharing a cell for committing perjury
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Oct 21st 2014, 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

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


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

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

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

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC