Did an Old Nixon Dirty Trickster Plant the Memos?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 9/21/04 at 5:39pm

From yesterday's New York Post:

The hot rumor in New York political circles has Roger Stone, the longtime GOP activist, as the source for Dan Rather's dubious Texas Air National Guard "memos."

The irony would be delicious, since Rather became famous confronting President Nixon, in whose service a very young Stone became associated with political "dirty tricks."

Reached at his Florida home, Stone had no comment.
See item at the bottom

[PalJoey]

Posted: 9/21/04 at 5:41pm

Sep 21, 2004
McAuliffe: Will GOP Answer If They Know Whether Stone, Others Had Involvement With CBS Documents?

Washington, D.C. - In response to false Republican accusations regarding the CBS documents, Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe issued this statement:

“In today’s New York Post, Roger Stone, who became associated with political ‘dirty tricks’ while working for Nixon, refused to deny that he was the source the CBS documents.

“Will Ed Gillespie or the White House admit today what they know about Mr. Stone’s relationship with these forged documents? Will they unequivocally rule out Mr. Stone’s involvement? Or for that matter, others with a known history of dirty tricks, such as Karl Rove or Ralph Reed?”
DNC Statement

[PalJoey]

Posted: 9/21/04 at 5:43pm

And the RNC clams up about defending Bush's service:

=====

Sep 21, 2004
Bush Campaign Gets a Case of Camera Shyness

Backs Away From Defending Bush Guard Service, Debating the Facts

Washington, DC— Facing questions about President Bush’s Guard Service and its own possible involvement with the disputed National Guard documents, the Republican National Committee has postponed a call scheduled to discuss the issue this afternoon.

And, in the last several hours, the Bush campaign has also cancelled scheduled appearances by Dan Bartlett on cable networks this evening. These cancellations came as the Bush operatives refused to appear live alongside Kerry campaign official Joe Lockhart.

“It’s clear that even the Bush campaign is having a problem defending the President’s National Guard service,” said Democratic National Committee Spokesman Howard Wolfson. “The Bush campaign has decided to once again duck the tough questions and avoid real debate. Given the President’s National Guard service, I don’t blame them for being camera shy.”

DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe himself held a conference call earlier today where he focused on tough questions on the President’s lack of service, his three different explanations for missing his physical and whether he deserved his honorable discharge.

McAuliffe also highlighted a New York Post article that suggested that GOP operative Roger Stone might be involved with the CBS documents.
Bush Campaign Gets a Case of Camera Shyness

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 9/21/04 at 5:59pm

so i guess the ny post is a reputable paper after all since everyone from punk'd to the dnc are using them as a source. folks, i don't even quote from the post unless it's a blind item on page six or riedel, who as we all know is gospel. it's too delicious...

[PalJoey]

Posted: 9/21/04 at 6:31pm

This story is now up on Drudge.

You heard it here first.

Updated On: 9/21/04 at 06:31 PM

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 9/21/04 at 6:53pm

It's an article in the Post - take it for the disreputable trash it is. If its picked up by a more reputable paper then it might be something. But until then, consider the source.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 9/21/04 at 7:12pm

actually, i heard about it on wonkette.com first, but since she wasn't talking about a** f***ing i paid her little mind. i'm not sure what you mean about drudge, because as of 7:08pm there's nothing there about it. but is this the same drudge about whom you said recently...

...but you shouldn't pay so much attention to what drudge puts on his website. it's just propaganda, garbage he throws up in the air to see how much will stick. most of it lands on his face (not that he cares). drudge is just the latest in the american right wing's parade of pathetically closeted homosexual tools, like roy cohn and edgar hoover before him.

so at this point you have the ny post and maybe drudge if he puts it back up. anything else? anything?

Updated On: 9/21/04 at 07:12 PM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 9/21/04 at 7:14pm

Here's the page Drudge was ordered to take down:
MCAULIFFE POINTS FINGER AT REPUBLICANS OVER CBS FLAP

Updated On: 9/21/04 at 07:14 PM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 9/21/04 at 7:26pm

oh, please share with us who ordered him to take it down, punk'd. did he get a call directly from karl, or was there a buffer?

but even so, it's still all based on frederic u. dicker's column in the monday's ny post.

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 9/21/04 at 7:32pm

It's a shame that this election can't be about issues, and I blame both parties on that. Get over what happened 40 years ago and debate about what affects us now.

Just my small point of view.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 9/21/04 at 7:33pm

That is what Kerry is trying to do. And, to be fair, I think Bush is, too. I think it's everyone else that is obsessed with the past.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 9/21/04 at 7:43pm

i think you're right, jrb. the candidates themselves do talk about the issues everyday out on the stump, but the only ones who hear much of what they say are those who are in attendance and those who watch pbs's newshour which besides being a rankly partisan dem-fest (*wink, wink* jrb) is about the best news broadcast around. last night they showed a good 3 minutes of each of the candidate's stump speeches from that day which gave a pretty good feel for what they are talking about daily.

but, this is not just about the candidates out there giving speeches. it's about the dnc and the rnc, terry mcauliffe and ed gillespie who want to do whatever it takes to put their candidate in a position to win. it's moveon.org and the swfitees pumping out ads that are catered to their specific audiences. it's about the networks and the cable news channels who want controversy and excitement and who'll do darn near anything to get it. it's even about the blogosphere where partisans on the left and right provide space for the worst ideas and most rabid and heinous hate-speech to be left for all mankind to eventually read.

[Plum]

Posted: 9/21/04 at 8:09pm

The Dem primary voters started to make it about the past when they decided that if Dean wouldn't do since he actually had something resembling a personality, they would take the dullest guy with a good military record. Kerry then played that into something bigger, which was his mistake.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 9/21/04 at 8:38pm

dullest guy with a good military record

plum, that is just ridiculous.

you left out tall and with good hair and a deep voice.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 9/22/04 at 8:38am

From today's USAToday:


Parties lob accusations over suspect papers

[Auggie27]

Posted: 9/22/04 at 10:19am

Plum nails it again.

It's time to get painfully honest. Just as many Republicans, behind closed doors, are deeply shaken about the immoral Iraq debacle dragging Bush down now and in the future, many, many Dems, speaking intra-Cathedra, now admit that we too readily pushed forward a medal-bearing stiff, thinking only his bag of old war wounds could topple the flightsuit clad sissy. But the sissy comes off as butch(-er), and we're stuck with the low-energy inaccessible windbag, since the medals and wounds -- the reason for his nomination -- have been discredited. As someone said to me, Kerry's foreign policy is Bush Lite. More of the same, with more "reaching out to allies..." As a father of a teenager I don't want to see drafted, I'm not comforted.

So as we continue to work fervantly, hoping to take down W, I can only speak for myself: I know in my heart he's merely A.B.B. If only "more respect in the world" were enough of a platform. As Iraq wears on, ever uglier and deadly, who knew we'd secretly wish we were running Dean and Kuchinic--a true alternative?

Updated On: 9/22/04 at 10:19 AM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 9/22/04 at 11:14am

interstingly, the usa today article actually spoke to the supposed source, roger stone:

"i have nothing whatsoever to do with this," stone told usa today. "i'm a firm believer in political hardball, but i draw the line at forged documents."

take heart, auggie, jfk2's slowly starting to tack to the left. he realizes that he's got to offer an alternative but the question is will he be credible as an anti-war candidate? when letterman asked him the other night, "if you'd been elected president in 2000, would we be in iraq today?" he answered clearly and concisely, "no." i still think he's got as much of a chance of winning this thing as i have of doing jodie foster doggy-style on the hood of a cab, but by engaging the president on iraq and offering a serious alternative (like when he said that he'd begin withdrawing troops next summer) he'll at least draw a difference between the two on the issue. whether it will work or not is another matter.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 9/22/04 at 11:24am

Don't forget that Roger Stone, the Republican operative who probably planted these memos, signed on as head of the Sharpton campaign during the primaries, just so that he could poison the black vote against Dean. It certainly wasn't because Stone and Sharpton shared ideals! And sure enough the dirty-tricks story he had the Sharpton camp plant against Dean was that Dean didn't hire any black employees. Shharpton caught on too late and fired Roger Stone, but the damage to the Dean's image among blacks had already been done.

This is the same Roger Stone who was fired from the Dole "family values" campaign because the National Enquirer printed the "swinger" ad that he and his wife had placed.

This is the same Roger Stone who is an old friend of Herr Karl Roverer.

So when you lose heart about Kerry being "stiff" (he's not" or a waffler (he's not" or any of those other false accusations being thrown at him by the Republican spin machine ("Repeat it enough and it's BETTER than true!"), just remember who creates Bush strategy. Do you really want themn in the West Wing for another 4 years?

[Auggie27]

Posted: 9/22/04 at 11:46am

Listen, PalJoey, I can't blame you for wanting to beat me up; I called him a stiff, perhaps too glibly--but I'd also vote for him 4 times, if I could finagle my way into 4 different booths. I think Kerry's a decent, honorable, moral man with a truly brilliant mind -- alas, qualities that have little to do with electability these days. My too-honest a post sprang from my at least semi-pacifist heart, still thump-thumping to a 60s beat.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 9/22/04 at 11:49am

there ya go, aug, keep on in the spirit of that great democrat richard daley (no, not this one, his dad), "vote early, vote often."

[Auggie27]

Posted: 9/22/04 at 11:54am

WAAAY OT: Papa, you never let me down -- I'm still kinda sorta with you on your Jodie Foster hood of a car image. (I personally think THE ACCUSED is one of the great porn movies of all time, perhaps for different reasons than you might but that's another subj.)

[PalJoey]

Posted: 9/22/04 at 12:00pm

Auggie27 says: "Kerry's a decent, honorable, moral man with a truly brilliant mind -- alas, qualities that have little to do with electability these days."

My point is that you won't KNOW if he's electable or unelectable until November 3rd. Until then, every time you say it out loud--or type it onto an internet message board--you're simply succumbing to the Orwellian Republican spin control and mind control: IF WE REPEAT A LIE ENOUGH, IT'S BETTER THAN TRUE.

The opera ain't over till Barbara Bush sings, and this election will be decided by the Undecideds.

Updated On: 9/22/04 at 12:00 PM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 9/22/04 at 12:08pm

yeah, auggie, so from now on, realize that no matter what you think you shouldn't ever say it openly or privately or even think it, but especially don't type it. now that's freedom of speech, dnc style, "don't worry, we'll tell you what you think."

[Auggie27]

Posted: 9/22/04 at 12:08pm

I hear you, PJ. It would be nice to honor this sentiment of our founding father:

"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock."

- Thomas Jefferson

Updated On: 9/22/04 at 12:08 PM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 9/22/04 at 12:22pm

he's won every election he's ever ran in.

never lost, punky? never? ever? not even once?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10637-2004Jul24.html

would you like some salt for that foot?