Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Online Nude Photos Are Latest Chapter In Jeff Gannon Saga
Washington Post ^ | Wednesday, February 16, 2005 | Howard Kurtz

Posted on 02/15/2005 11:19:19 PM PST by woofie

The Jeff Gannon story is still bouncing around the Internet, and now there are pictures.

The kind you shouldn't open up in the office.

The X-rated twist has made for a lot of clandestine clicking in a town where Deep Throat conjures images not of a porn star but of a man in a parking garage. But it has also deepened the debate over blogging and the tactics used to drive a conservative reporter from his job as White House correspondent for two Web sites owned by a Republican activist.

In most Beltway melodramas, the resignation ends the story. The problem for Gannon, whose real name is James Dale Guckert, is that he told The Washington Post and CNN's Wolf Blitzer last week that he never launched the Web sites whose provocative names he had registered, such as hotmilitarystud.com. But a Web designer in California said yesterday that he had designed a gay escort site for Gannon and had posted naked pictures of Gannon at the client's request.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: gannon; jeffgannon; kurtz; oops; pervert; queer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 381-392 next last
To: woofie

No, I have no thoughts on that. I have no idea when Talon News started. I do think Gannon starting attending in the spring of 2003 and I'm confident he met whatever standards other entities who got the same type of pass meet.


321 posted on 02/16/2005 7:20:12 PM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]

To: hkg11
Among other posts on this thread giving his name, see my post #223.
322 posted on 02/16/2005 7:22:18 PM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper

Yours is the voice of common sense


323 posted on 02/16/2005 7:24:48 PM PST by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 322 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
They did it to Pete Williams, who was White House press secretary for GHW Bush, after Williams left government and went to NBC. It had to have been just for spite since he did nothing but work or a Republican.

The press/Left is morally bankrupt.

324 posted on 02/16/2005 7:25:42 PM PST by Deb (Beat him, strip him and bring him to my tent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: arasina

The lie bothers every freeper. That you insinuate it doesn't and agree with a poster who falsely accused me of making posts tediously defending McClellan when I am defending truth irritates me.


325 posted on 02/16/2005 7:25:48 PM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 320 | View Replies]

To: woofie

Thank you.


326 posted on 02/16/2005 7:26:21 PM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 323 | View Replies]

To: conserv13

When Bush does what, exactly?...


327 posted on 02/16/2005 7:28:49 PM PST by MEG33 (GOD BLESS OUR ARMED FORCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 305 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz
They have the pictures. Thats him. Yuk!

OK, most fruitcakes believe that the picture of Oswald holding the assassination rifle 42 years ago was a "clever fake that proves the conspiracy" but you don't think that someone with a $300 PC and PhotoShop can fake a picture of someone today?

One word comes to mind... gulli-BULL

Another one crops up, given your sign up date, but I'll leave that to others.

328 posted on 02/16/2005 7:30:54 PM PST by Phsstpok ("When you don't know where you are, but you don't care, you're not lost, you're exploring.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
"However, it has nothing to do with this administration "

Agreed....I in no way blame or hold the WH responsible. I have to wonder why no one at that GOP news site thought to look into who this guy was.

329 posted on 02/16/2005 7:39:40 PM PST by Katya (Homo Nosce Te Ipsum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: Deb

I remember that..ugly. here's his official title and scroll down to the "outer"
http://www.signorile.com/articles/nyp97.html
Back in 1991, I wrote a cover story for the Advocate about Pete Williams, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs in the Bush administration and Pentagon spokesman throughout the Gulf War. Williams was known to be gay by higher-ups in the Pentagon, including then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney and, it appeared, President Bush. Meanwhile the Pentagon was booting gays and lesbians out of the military, claiming they were a security risk because they might have access to classified information and could be blackmailed, while the average cook, private or porter had no access to state secrets. But the truth is, Pete Williams certainly did. "..snip

A great leap in logic to equate gays in the military issue with other departments..



330 posted on 02/16/2005 7:40:05 PM PST by MEG33 (GOD BLESS OUR ARMED FORCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 324 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper; HateBill

Well, you have been doing some serious defending, cyncooper. Lots and lots of posts on this topic. HateBill evidently considers that to be 'tedious' defending. Sorry if my agreeing with his well-stated opinions irritates you.

I did not insinuate that the lie doesn't bother other posters; I said it bothers ME. At least you agree that he lied. So now, where do we go from here? If you were the WH press secretary, how would you handle this tangled mess without appearing hypocritical or offending the hypersensitive leftist journalists?


331 posted on 02/16/2005 7:42:03 PM PST by arasina (So there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 325 | View Replies]

To: MEG33

Good get.


332 posted on 02/16/2005 7:45:15 PM PST by Deb (Beat him, strip him and bring him to my tent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 330 | View Replies]

To: arasina

The majority of posts I've made have been pointing out the flaws in the lefty sites saying Gannon had access to a secret memo based on an interview he did. I have been pointing out the WSJ published an article about that very memo 10 days before Gannon did his interview.

So, no, I have not been making lots of baselessly defensive posts. I have been making fact-based posts correcting the assumptions being made by the left.

And you did insinuate it didn't bother others by talking earlier about blinders.


333 posted on 02/16/2005 7:51:59 PM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 331 | View Replies]

Comment #334 Removed by Moderator

Comment #335 Removed by Moderator

To: hkg11

Yes, I read about it. Are you under some kind of impression I approve of a tax debt or what?

Why are you making weird assumptions?

He was vetted just like any other person who sought access to the briefings. He was granted a day pass, not a hard pass. He did not get a top secret clearance vetting that would have disclosed various and sundry background information such as you point to.

I have no idea what qualifications are used, but that an exception was made has not been demonstrated.


336 posted on 02/16/2005 8:05:57 PM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 334 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper; trumandogz; HateBill
You took it to be an insinuation. Some posters upthread said they weren't about to look at the site to determine if the accusations were true. THOSE are the ones referred to in my comment about wearing blinders. An attorney can't defend even an innocent client without knowing what the adversary is claiming.

I applaud your pointing out the flaws about the supposed access to a secret memo. You are very good at using your research to correct erroneous statements. I'm just a little weary of reading the word 'Troll!' posted immediately after someone gives an opposing opinion. Both trumandogz and HateBill were essentially accused of trolling.

I always...well, at least I attempt to always...admit when I am mistaken or proven wrong. I will wait this one out awhile as more true facts come to light, and if I am wrong in my thinking I promise I'll send you a 'you were right all along' ping. I'm not doing the broken glass crawling thing, though. :o)

337 posted on 02/16/2005 8:11:17 PM PST by arasina (So there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper

BigSkyFreeper,Why, is this personal to them?


338 posted on 02/16/2005 8:12:15 PM PST by fatima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: hkg11

No


339 posted on 02/16/2005 8:18:52 PM PST by MEG33 (GOD BLESS OUR ARMED FORCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 334 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

Who are you?


340 posted on 02/16/2005 8:19:08 PM PST by fatima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 381-392 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson