So, as far as the so-called "Blagojevich-Obama" scandal: I'll let Jed L. at the Daily Kos take it from here:
What a big disappointment for the cynics.
The Obama transition team's report documenting its contacts
with the Illinois governor's office on the Illinois Senate seat reveals exactly
what we expected: that there was hardly any contact at all between the
transition team and Blago's office, and that it was all appropriate.
There
was no discussion whatsoever relating to any sort of this-for-that, and nobody
on the transition team had any idea of what was going on inside Blago's
mind.
Moreover, it is obvious that the Obama team would have liked to release
this report long ago. It was completed on the 15th, but at the request of the
U.S. Attorney was not made public until today to allow Fitzgerald's office to
complete its interviews, the last of which was conducted on the 20th.
At the
request of the Office, we delayed the release of this report until such time as
the interviews could be completed. The interviews took place over a period of
three days: Thursday, December 18, 2008 (the President-Elect); December 19, 2008
(Valerie Jarrett); and December 20, 2008 (Rahm Emanuel).
Let me emphasize
this point: the reason why the release of the Obama report was delayed was to
allow Fitzgerald to complete his interviews with the transition team. In other
words, everything that Obama's team has said has been true.
So yes, Blagojevich is corrupt and should be removed. But none of this has anything to do with Barack Obama. Nothing to see here.
There is nothing to see here either.
Let's say you're at a bar with a group of people. They've been working
hard while everyone else is having fun, and they look pretty bored.
So you
decide you'll be a mensch and buy 'em a round.
That'd be pretty decent of
you, don't you think?
Ah, but this is our greatly esteemed national media
we're talking about. And the great defenders of the Republic --
specifically, CNN -- have proclaimed it an unacceptable sin that our
President-elect attempted to purchase their affections with a Bud.
That Anonymous Guy's diary ::
::
Beergate began yesterday, with this rather innocuous pool report from Jeff
Zeleny of the New York Times:
He chatted for a moment, telling the
traveling press pool to have a beer and put it on his tab. No one took him up on
the offer.
Now, I read this and thought, "Gee, that Obama sure is a decent
guy. I'd want to strangle these guys if they'd been hounding me throughout
my vacation, and here he's offering to buy them a round!"
CNN's Ed Henry, on
the other hand, had
a stroke.
HONOLULU (CNN) – Many Republicans already believe
President-elect Barack Obama has gotten a free ride from the national media, so
they may not be happy to learn the incoming Commander-in-Chief offered to buy a
round of drinks for reporters covering his working vacation on the sands of
Hawaii's beaches and the greens of its lush golf courses...
[T]he key here is
reporters covering the President-elect are having more fun here in Hawaii than
we had in Crawford, Texas — and 85 degrees in the middle of the afternoon here
is way better than the cold winds blowing through Chicago too. But none of the
journalists were corrupted by free beer — we pay our own tabs.
And just for
the record: your faithful correspondent, while enjoying the wonders of Waikiki
beach, never drinks — at least not on the job.
Ooooooo! Ed Henry buys
his own drinks! He's not about to be corrupted by a Budweiser!
Frickin' second coming of Woodward and Bernstein, you are.
Now, I thought I'd cut Ed some slack... maybe he was just joking around, right?
No, they were trying to manufacture outrage.
Forget it.
No comments:
Post a Comment