Dec 23 2008

The Art Of Lying – Badly Or Baldly

Boy, whatever happened between Team Blagojevich and Team Obama regarding Obama’s old senate seat it must be pretty damning, given the amount of 3rd grade word parsing contained in the Obama Whitewash Report. I mean the damn thing is incoherent and self contradicting! For example:

The President-Elect had no contact or communication with Governor Blagojevich or members of his staff about the Senate seat.

Seems pretty clear, right? Except when you recall that the Chief of Staff of a President represents the president, speaks for the president and can answer for the president. The Chief of Staff is basically the President when the President is not present. It is a unique position across all of government in this matter. Even the VP cannot speak for the President as the President’s Chief of Staff can. Which is why this next paragraph is so juvenile in its faulty logic:

After Ms. Jarrett decided on November 9, 2008 to withdraw her name from consideration as a possible replacement for him in the Senate and to accept the White House job, the President-Elect discussed other qualified candidates with David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel. Those candidates included Representatives Jan Schakowsky and Jesse Jackson, Jr., Dan Hynes and Tammy Duckworth. The President-Elect understood that Rahm Emanuel would relay these names to the Governor’s office as additions to the pool of qualified candidates who might already be under consideration. Mr. Emanuel subsequently confirmed to the President that he had in fact relayed these names. At no time in the discussion of the Senate seat or of possible replacements did the President-Elect hear of a suggestion that the Governor expected a personal benefit in return for making this appointment to the Senate.

Emphasis mine. And this is where Team Obama are exposed as really dumb liars. The ex-Clinton impeachment lawyer Craig is trying to claim Obama had no contact with Team Blagojevich about the senate seat, except all those contacts he directed through his top aids. Are our new leaders really this dumb? Why the tap dancing around? 

Where’s the concrete answers, where’s the clarity, where’s the critical information:

Mr. Emanuel had one or two telephone calls with Governor Blagojevich. Those conversations occurred between November 6 and November 8, 2008. Soon after he decided to accept the President-Elect’s offer to serve as Chief of Staff in the White House, Mr. Emanuel placed a call to the Governor to give him a heads up that he was taking the Chief of Staff’s position in the White House, and to advise him that he would be resigning his seat in the House of Representatives. They spoke about Mr. Emanuel’s House seat, when he would be resigning and potential candidates to replace him. He also had a brief discussion with the Governor about the Senate seat and the merits of various people whom the Governor might consider. Mr. Emanuel and the Governor did not discuss a cabinet position, 501c(4), a private sector position for the Governor or any other personal benefit for the Governor.

Interesting. Does this means Rahm was not one of the DC advisors in on the November 10th telecon when these option were discussed? If Rahm was not one of the DC advisors – who were they and what was their connection to Obama? As I noted in an earlier post, these DC advisors were clearly communicating the Obama Team’s views regarding the topic at hand. For example:

If Emmanuel is “President-Elect Advisor” in the criminal complaint his role in the quid pro quo discussions starts November 13th. And these discussions were not with the Governor!

On November 13, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with JOHN HARRIS. ROD BLAGOJEVICH said he wanted to be able to call “[President-elect Advisor]” and tell President-elect Advisor that “this has nothing to do with anything else we’re working on but the Governor wants to put together a 501(c)(4)” and “can you guys help him. . . raise 10, 15 million.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH said he wanted “[President-elect Advisor] to get the word today,” and that when “he asks me for the Fifth CD thing I want it to be in his head.” (The reference to the “Fifth CD thing” is believed to relate to a seat in the United States House of Representatives from Illinois’ Fifth Congressional District [Emmanuel's Seat].

Later on November 13, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke with Advisor A. ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked Advisor A to call Individual A and have Individual A pitch the idea of the 501(c)(4) to “[President-elect Advisor].”

So, did Advisor A or Individual A contact Rahm about the 501(c)(4) option or not? Any two-bit lawyer who read the complaint would realize that there never was a claim Emmanuel talked with Blagojevich about this specific quid pro quo (involving the SEIU I presume). So why deny this non-issue in the “Obama Whitewash Report” – except to give the impression of addressing the 501(c)(4) kickback plan.

But let’s get back to the incoherent lies in this precisely worded bit of misinformation. Recall the initial claim:

The President-Elect had no contact or communication with Governor Blagojevich or members of his staff about the Senate seat.

But Rahm Emmanuel, represent the President-Elect is another story:

Between the time that Mr. Emanuel decided to accept the position of Chief of Staff in the White House and December 8, 2008, Mr. Emanuel had about four telephone conversations with John Harris, Chief of Staff to the Governor, on the subject of the Senate seat. In these conversations, Mr. Emanuel and Mr. Harris discussed the merits of potential candidates and the strategic benefit that each candidate would bring to the Senate seat. After Ms. Jarrett removed herself from consideration, Mr. Emanuel – with the authorization of the President-Elect – gave Mr. Harris the names of four individuals whom the President-Elect considered to be highly qualified: Dan Hynes, Tammy Duckworth, Congresswoman Schakowsky and Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr. In later telephone conversations [On What Dates?], Mr. Emanuel – also with the President-Elect’s approval – presented other names of qualified candidates to Mr. Harris including Attorney General Lisa Madigan and Ms. Cheryle Jackson. Mr. Harris did not make any effort to extract a personal benefit for the Governor in any of these conversations. There was no discussion of a cabinet position, of 501c(4), of a private sector position or of any other personal benefit to the Governor in exchange for the Senate appointment.

Again, Obama’s Chief of Staff WAS in direct and numerous contacts with Team Blagojevich on the senate seat – contrary to the BS peddled by Obama and his Clinton lawyer. What is really surprising is how Team Obama attempts to exonerate Harris – who was arrested with Blagojevich. Is this a signal to Harris? Who knows.

That’s it for Emmanuel – no comment about discussions with “Individual A”, Advisor A or the DC Advisors listed the criminal complaint. Remember that the ‘individuals’, ‘DC advisors’, ‘emissaries’ and ‘fundraisers’ mentioned all through the criminal complaint are not ‘technically’ part of Team Blagojevich. These are all go betweens who can cover the tracks of discussions legally. I will have more later, but Team Obama is clearly hiding something.

And now I can understand why there was no Q&A. But there will be ones in the future. No ‘professional’ journalist likes to be lied to so blatantly. Even if they want to go along, they don’t want it to be so obvious they are in the tank and willing to hoist manure like this onto a serious American public.

17 responses so far

17 Responses to “The Art Of Lying – Badly Or Baldly”

  1. GuyFawkes says:

    “Except when you recall that the Chief of Staff of a President represents the president, speaks for the president and can answer for the president. The Chief of Staff is basically the President when the President is not present.”

    Umm… no.

    The President is the President.

    The Chief of Staff is the Chief of Staff.

    They are… (wait for it)… two different people!

    Dana Perino != George W. Bush
    Rahm Emmanuel != Barack Obama

    My first grader could figure this out. Why can’t you?

  2. Aitch748 says:

    Reading comprehension isn’t GuyFawkes’s strong point, I see.

  3. kathie says:

    Are you kidding Guy? You can’t possibly be as dumb as what you have written.

  4. GuyFawkes says:

    Let’s try this for a moment. Dana Perino is the current Press Secretary. She *IS* the person who speaks for the President, when it comes down to it.

    If she says, “I was hit in the eye during the recent shoe-throwing incident.”

    Does that mean the President was hit in the eye?

    Wait – aren’t they basically the same person?

    Or are you simply now arguing over what the meaning of “I” is?

  5. GuyFawkes says:

    Oh, and I forgot this obvious route:

    Prove what I had said is wrong. Address what I wrong, or admit that you have nothing.

    Or, alternately, list all of the other political positions that also “speak for the President”, or are “the President when the President is not present”.

    Do those rules apply for George W. Bush, too? Can I go back and find quotes from people that were close to Bush, and then implicitly insist that they all have to apply to him too?

  6. kathie says:

    No Guy you have it all wrong. Dana Perino is press secretary. That is a completely different roll then Chief of Staff. The Chief of Staff, tho a different person then the President, does speak for the president. He is not a PR man necessarily, but what he says he says in place of the President, as if the President had said those words himself. That is the function of the Chief of Staff, it is his job.

  7. owl says:

    Well……….I aim to nitpick the combination of ‘professional’ and ‘journalist’. No such animal. Okay, okay, I slime that .0000009 that are so hidden or so ‘professional’ they are related to those ‘professional Overseerers’. They refuse to point out that their fellow so-called journalists are flat lying. They lost all creds when they allowed that MSM sham called Plamegate. They promoted and wrote most of that script. They were the stars. They were the witnesses. Then they exercised their ‘professionalism’ by reporting on their own script. We do not have ‘professional journalists’ in this country.

    We have a bunch of Political Hacks that just elected themselves a president. I never said they did not hold the most political power of the 4 branches of government. Thank God they are Dems, huh? It will be a cold day in h*** before they give up power again and they get the Supremes.

    And don’t ever expect the media to ask The Office of the PE another question unless it is something along the line of ……….”Did anyone thank you for investigating yourself and giving us your results?” The Office of the PE then says “Knock it off, you guys. That’s enough.”

    Axelrod?

  8. GuyFawkes says:

    Honestly, if you have this much outrage over this – what are you going to do when there’s a real, actual scandal?

    Seriously, AJ – it’s as if you never read The Boy Who Cried Wolf or Chicken Little. It’s hilarious and pathetic at the same time – an impressive double-play.

    Let’s pick some random, relatively minor scandal from the past 8 years… umm, oh I know, Jeff Gannon.

    If you have several thousand words of pearl clutching nonsense over the defintion of the word “I”, how would you react if it turned out Obama planted a gay prostitute in the White House press corp to lob him softball questions?

  9. AJStrata says:

    Guy,

    You know why this has legs? Because folks like you come around and try and tamp it down, since you KNOW it looks bad.

    The fact is I have seen so many pols play this game it is not surprising. But it does bely the ‘agent of change’ BS only the extremely naive still believe in.

    The fact is this is a white wash – if your saint Obama cannot stand the heat he is not ready to lead the nation. Whimpering about how unfair it is to hold him up to a reasonable standard doesn’t reflect bad on me!

  10. OLDPUPPYMAX says:

    Lying? Parsing? We got used to it during the 90s, as Will and Hill turned the arful misuse of language into an art form–almost always to the glee of their press corps co-conspirators. I have a feeling the next 4 years will find us longing for the honesty and integrity of slick Willie and his humble spouse.

  11. bill says:

    I wonder how Rahm explains the indictment citing “paid board positions” and who was going to provide those quid pro quo actions?

    This has big time legs, will last for years and years. Unlike Rezko buying houses for the one, bidding on a Senate seat is easily understood by even Obama voters.

  12. MerlinOS2 says:

    From reading the release ,written by the impeachment lawyer for Bill Clinton, they easily miss a hole you can drive a truck through.

    They are very careful in their parsing in general , but to have done a true distance of the issue they should have generalized in some aspects as to saying for example “no contact on this issue by ANY third party or direct talks”.

    When they can say I didn’t tell person X to convey a message it still leaves open the option of person Y or person Z.

    Many times it is not what they say,but what they don’t say that tells the story.

  13. Redteam says:

    Guy,
    why is this an issue? a big deal?
    Obama promised ‘change’, no more ‘politics as usual’, remember?
    Well, here we are, the very first opportunity he has to live up to that and what does he do? Lie. Plain and simple. Lie.
    It doesn’t matter who was speaking, Obama and his team had one intention. Lie.

    And for anyone to expect anything to come of it. Slick willie got away with rape, remember?

    So Guy, come and and tell us one more time. You are ok with Obama and his ‘team’ lying.

  14. Terrye says:

    Guy wants to know why this is a big deal. I see, the fact that Sarah Palin bought a used tanning bed for a thousands bucks is news, but the fact that our new President elect is a product of the most corrupt political machine in the country..well that is not worth mentioning. Let’s talk about how yummy Obama looks in a swimsuit instead. gag me.

  15. GuyFawkes says:

    Well, okay – if this is what you need to get you through the slow news cycle, or deal with the fact that your hero Dubya is leaving office with the lowest approval rating in history, then have fun with it.

    Tell ya what – you all let the adults handle trying to fix the global economic meltdown, and we’ll let you sit in your corner over here and argue about the meaning of the pronoun “I”. Deal?

  16. Dc says:

    You mean the same adults that caused this mess in the first place? Sure, why not. Let them investigate themselves over their own possible wrong doing. What could possibly be wrong with that??

    Lets “not” have an independent investigation into Freddie and Fannie and what fueled the largest financial crisis in this country since the Great Depression. Easier to just blame it on Bush….since he’s leaving…and sweep it under the rug. Who cares what really happened? Because the object is not to actually fix this…it’s to milk it for political gain.

    Lets have Rangel handle the money, Barney chair the committee, and Emanuel sit on the board. We’ll get to the bottom of this and fix things…yes sir ree. We don’t need an independent investigation, we don’t need to know what happened, when we already have the people directly involved here to answer any questions for themselves and issue a report clearing themselves, and blaming Bush for everything. That’s letting the adults handle things…eh?

    Obama doesn’t seem to make a decision on anything…just an observation. He voted present most of the time to keep from taking positions. The positions he has taken don’t match his rhetoric…which he equivocates and changes constantly with political winds. He’s keeping most of the “war criminals” and profiters that have entirely screwed up the ME and done a horrible job, in his opinion, and for which he ran a campaign to change. It’s gonna end soon anyway…right? Why risk “change” or getting involved . Besides, he can always toss them out in front of the speeding bus (along with Wright, Ayers, Blago, and the list keeps growing of people close to Obama that turned out to be …”not the person (he) knew”).

    Perhaps the American people will turn out to be different than the people he thought he knew too? Perhaps Obama will turn out to be a different person than you thought you knew? Personally, I think that suit looks a bit too big for him and he’s going to be equivocating and re-equivocating and reallocating and voting “present”….while his staff lines up sacrifices to throw at the growing hordes of angry voters. But, my guess is…if it’s any consolation…you’ll still be able to buy Obama coins and plates for a while.

    Adults indeed.

  17. Redteam says:

    guy: Dubya is leaving office with the lowest approval rating in history

    so let the entire liberal media start beating up on anyone, including THE ONE and his approval rating would tank also.
    I thought about that while watching a commercial for an “Official Obama Inauguration Plate” accompanied by a “certificate of authenticity”. wonder how much having that ‘certificate of authenticity’ attached ‘increases’ the value? Just what is that value? depends on what a willing person wants to pay to a willing seller, right? If I were the willing buyer, I wouldn’t pay anything for it, in fact, I wouldn’t pick one up and take it home if it were free. Now if they offered me enough money to take one free, I might do that, then throw it in the trash and keep the money.

    So “approval” rating Guy, it’s all in the eye of the beholder, I’d give Bush about a 90% approval rating and believe me, my rating is the only one important, to me.