D.C. Chapter to Hold Demonstration in Support of Jeff Gannon and the First Amendment, 2/18/05

Friday, February 18, 2005 | Kristinn

[kristinn]

All FReepers and lurkers in good standing are invited to join the D.C. Chapter in our demonstration this evening. Details in the following press release:

DEMONSTRATION IN SUPPORT OF JEFF GANNON
&
THE FIRST AMENDMENT

WHEN: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 2005, 6 P.M. TO 8 P.M.
WHERE: THE SIDEWALK BY MONICA’S GATE,
AKA THE NORTHWEST VISITORS ENTRANCE
THE WHITE HOUSE, 1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVE., NW, WASHINGTON, D.C.

(Washington) The D.C. Chapter of Free Republic, an independent grassroots organization, will be holding a demonstration at the White House this evening in support of former Talon News White House Correspondent Jeff Gannon and the rights of other reporters to do their jobs without fear of being destroyed by the political establishment.

The group will also be bringing attention to several First Amendment-related issues pertaining to the current imbroglio. Among them are the unconstitutional efforts of Democratic congressmen to determine who is a reporter and efforts by the establishment media to shut out Internet-based news sites from having access to government press conferences.

Kristinn Taylor, Co-Leader of the D.C. Chapter of Free Republic, issued the following statement: “It is common knowledge that Jeff Gannon was singled out for personal destruction for the crime of asking a question of the President of the United States at a press conference that was insulting to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

“The Clintonista slime machine, led by former Clinton White House Chief of Staff John Podesta’s Media Matters for America, went into high gear and made an example of Mr. Gannon to any reporter who might dare to challenge Sen. Clinton’s credibility in her anticipated 2008 presidential candidacy.

“What was done to Mr. Gannon was the Clinton impeachement era Ellen Romesch strategy played out for all concerned parties to see. The D.C. Chapter of Free Republic will be out demonstrating for the rights of Mr. Gannon and all other reporters to exercise their rights without fear of personal destruction.”

[Darksheare]

His lawyer told him to shut up.
Now why would he do that?
He was in front of the cameras defending himself, on Wolf Blitzer's show, and the moonbats suddenly 'found' supposed pics.

How many times have you heard of someone being told to keep their trap shut pending legal action?
It's happened before.

[Darksheare]

Really.
You followed a link to the supposed Gannono escort sites?

[TheOtherOne]

It is the "Rule Of Making Up Any Excuse To Defend The Gay Prostitute Because I Liked The Questions He Asked."

I get the whole, the enemy of my enemy is my friend deal....and I know JG was a part of FR. He was not attacked for any of that. As I can see it two things happened.

(1) His bona fides as a journalist were called into question. Good...let's find out what criteria is being used. He had every right to be there...as does any other journalist. However, he was never removed from the press corp...He removed himself

(2) After people started asking about his journalistic background . . . his gay/escort/prostition past came to light.

I am not sure what I am fighting for if I were protesting for Gannon?

[BootsOnTheGround]

Gannon's just an appetizer for the libloggers. McClelland and then the President are the real targets.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Unless there's charges being brought against somebody, in which case he cannot say anything even in his own defense.

That's not the law. If there are charges against you, you are entitled to deny them.

Most lawyers advise clients under criminal investigation not to talk too much, but that's purely for tactical reasons: if the client denies the charges and says something that's later proven false, that false denial may be admissible in evidence; and if the client has some strong evidence that the prosecutor doesn't know about, the lawyer may want to surprise the prosecutor at trial. But it is very common to say, at least, something like "I deny these accusations and look forward to clearing my name at trial."

[lugsoul]

"He was in front of the cameras defending himself, on Wolf Blitzer's show"

Find us one - just one - instance prior to Americablog posting the photos where Gannon DENIED being involved with the male escort cites. He WASN'T "defending himself." He was deflecting the allegations, not denying them. He has never denied them.

[Darksheare]

I didn't say it was the law now, did I?

[Darksheare]

Find me proof that you can trust the veracity of Daily Kos, American Blog and DU.

[Lurking Libertarian]

I didn't say it was the law now, did I?

You said, in post #147, "Unless there's charges being brought against somebody, in which case he cannot say anything even in his own defense." I wanted to point out that (a) he can, and (b) most people usually do.

[Darksheare]

You're still sure you followed one of the links?
Read this post:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1345967/posts?page=128#128

[Darksheare]

And before that I said his lawyer told him to shut his trap.
Otehrs said before that his lawyer told him to shut his trap.
Now, where did THEY say it was the law?

[lugsoul]

I don't. And I don't have to trust them. I've seen two of the sites they referenced. I've seen Gannon's interviews. I've seen the pics. I've seen his lack of any denial that the pics are him. And I've seen the interview with the web designer who says he put up the sites.

You don't have to trust them, either. All you have to do is let go of your presumption. There is no doubt - none - that if he were a liberal reporter in the Clinton White House in the same situation, you'd already have him convicted.

[Katya]

Actually web.archive has the old sites....caution adult link.

http://web.archive.org/web/20011104104331/www.usmcpt.com/photogallery.html

[DJ MacWoW]

Originally I was curious, so I followed the link to his escort sites (with pictures of him on it). I won't post it here because it's offensive, but you can find the sites in about 2 minutes elsewhere.

Really? See this post by bad company. He'd like the url: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1345967/posts?page=128#128

[cyncooper]

and favorable treatment in questioning the President

Um, what are you talking about, this fabled "favorable treatment in questioning the President".

LOL

And no, please don't make some inane leaps and bounds tanget. I am specifically addressing this ludicrous allegation of yours, nothing more, nothing less.

[Darksheare]

But you do understand my skepticism.
The only place I've heard this stuff mentioned is places like Kos.
The moonbats at DU are going bananas over this and saying such insane stuff as "this will take down the bush regime", which shows their real agenda behind it.
Honestly, it doesn't matter to them if anything is factual or not, they'll use it.
Just like the 'fake but accurate' Dan Rather memos.

I will personally wait until I hear why his lawyer told him to shut up.
And honestly, I think his lawyer's an idiot for that.

[DJ MacWoW]

Find us one - just one - instance prior to Americablog posting the photos where Gannon DENIED being involved with the male escort cites. He WASN'T "defending himself." He was deflecting the allegations, not denying them. He has never denied them.

So you believe DU, Daily Kos and americanblog. I've watched this from the begining and it's been incremental. If one thing doesn't work, try something else. And if the pics were so easy to find, why didn't DU find them when using cache search engines and Google? I find this all very curious and, as I've said, I'll wait until I hear it from someone reputable.

[cyncooper]

Hardly analogous to this case, where Gannon's "secret life" had nothing at all to do with his presence in the White House briefing room.

We have no idea if that's true.

Sooooooo, you're saying he was there because of his background? Oh, who was his lover...are you going with McClellan or straight to the top DUmmie dream come true of GWB? Do tell us how you come to this learned thought.

Good grief.

I'd say it's a pretty safe bet that his past was completely unknown to anyone in the adminstration.

[DJ MacWoW]

You said, in post #147, "Unless there's charges being brought against somebody, in which case he cannot say anything even in his own defense." I wanted to point out that (a) he can, and (b) most people usually do.

I've been involved in 2 cases that were covered by the press and both times I was told to say "No Comment". I was told NEVER to defend in the press, the place to do it is in court.