Skip to comments.D.C. Chapter to Hold Demonstration in Support of Jeff Gannon and the First Amendment, 2/18/05
Posted on 02/18/2005 6:28:03 AM PST by 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 MONICAS 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 Podestas Media Matters for America, went into high gear and made an example of Mr. Gannon to any reporter who might dare to challenge Sen. Clintons 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.
This isn't about putting a stamp of approval on whatever the liberals are accusing Jeff Gannon of doing before he became a reporter, it's about the rights of citizens and reporters to exercise their First Amendment rights without fear of being personally destroyed.
When CBS News and CNN were targeted in recent months, it was because of their professional behavior--and that's what we focused on.
D.C. Chapter mega-ping.
D.C. Chapter mega-ping.
I cannot attend (picking kids up at 6).
Give 'em hell for me. 'Pod.
Isn't what this guy is accused of doing kinda creepy? Why would you want to be involved with that?
I've heard some wild allegations...I hope Mr. Gannon stands up and fights the Leftist devils...MUD
Asking a question about the dum loss of reality based thinking? If your referring to the domain names he registered. That's what his company did.
You mean being a prostitute?
Although I agree he has the right to pursue any job that will bring him happiness, I have to believe that if WE found out that some MSM reporter had been a fomer? prostitute....the guns would be blazing.
This is a place for ideas and opinions, not a place for witch hunting.
BTW, for all that Gannon's accused of, he's qualified to represent Massachusetts in the House or Senate, given the standards of liberals.
I don't see how we can support "Gannon" at this point.
It seems he was caught up in his own lies and deceptions.
If you're getting distracted by this line, I'm sure a rapist's attorney would love to have you in jury room after he portrays the victim as a slut who got what she deserved.
Focus on the issue (persecution because he doesn't toe the "party line" jouralists expect from each other), not the sideshow.
Right on D.C. And I'm just so sure that NYT and See BS will join you in your support of free speech!
Count me in.
Meeting at the 'Monice Gate' is very appropriate if you are going to defend this guy.
Again....I'm a Libertarian and unlike many here I couldn't care less if he was or wasn't a prostitute. I understand that the MSM went after him because of a "question" posed. However, the dirt dug up would discount anyone in the MSM as well.
I'll be with you all in spirit Kristinn. Give'em what-for!!!
Count the wife in also.
"This is a place for learning--not a house of...hearing about things!"--Homer Simpson
Well, except that Katya's right. Do a quick internet search on "Jeff Gannon." I've seen the pictures and the websites. The guy is an ?ex? prostitute who markets himself as a US Marine. Why on earth would you want to support that?
But he's radioactive because of the sex websites and the naked pictures that are now also part of the story. I don't see why you would stick your neck out until he's explained the entire story. This is a Jerry Springer society - no one is going to remember the question that started all this, they're going to remember you sticking up for a guy with a creepy past.
Because he's a gay prostitute who asked a pretty question. Isn't that a good enough reason for a vigil?
Are you sure you guys wants to show support for Gannon/Guckert? He appears to have quite a checkered past.
Whatever. First, this guy created his own problems. Second, this has nothing to do with the First Amendment. No one in the government is denying him the right to speak. If he can't handle the heat from the MSM, then he shouldn't have publicized himself as a prostitute to begin with.
"Focus on the issue"
Bingo. Is it me or does it seem a lot of Freepers have attention deficit disorder?
They also told Drudge he did not belong. What gives the MSM those rights?
Who cares what they think or what they say? Who really cares who gets let into their club? And it isn't a "right," it's an opinion. And you know the old saying about opinions....
Cynic remove the black cloud following overhead.
Just got this as a PING, it may have bearing on this issue:
You do acknowledge if we found this sort of dirt on a MSM reporter, we'd do everything to take them down. This has nothing to do with anyone's first amendment rights.
Exactly. Once again, the Clintonista's have reared their ugly heads and shown that the politics of personal destruction is alive and well - within their ranks.
This personal attack on Jeff Gannon just sickens me.
There but for the grace of God go you or me!!!! And that is exactly the point. It could be anyone - anyone that the Clinton's decide they need to shut up and shut down. When it comes to their interests, the First Amendment does NOT apply.
I will be with you in spirit if not in body.
Eagles up, DC Chapter!!!!!
Oh darn, I wish we could join you. We've already paid for that Reagan dinner tonight at CPAC, so can't get out of it now. We'll be with you in spirit. Hope to see you sometime today or Saturday at CPAC!
Gov. Arnold did porn in his past. Did it count here? Your statement is wrong.
Jeff is a good guy. This the media trying to lynch someone because he writes for an conservative internet publication.
The media sings the praise of Ted Kennedy who is a creepy as you can get and further more is guilty while they slander a conservative with unsubstantiated rumors.
Must be a DC Chapter Activist. You all know...a guy with guts, ready to stand week after week, year after year in the face of corruption and in support of what he beleived was right.
Perhaps I don't feel as strongly about this as you do, kristinn, but if I was in driving distance I'd be there with you just to bask in the glow of your strength of character.
"Jeff is a good guy. This the media trying to lynch someone because he writes for an conservative internet publication."
He very well may be a good guy. However, there are lots of people who write for conservative internet publications. What made them decide to focus on him? Do you really want to be shilling for the guy described in this article?
Anyone? I suppose 'anyone' that has naked pictures of them posted on their male escort site. As for the rest of us, I don't think we need be concerned.
"Focus on the issue"
Remind me what the issue is. Is it the right of gay prostitutes using an alias to ask questions of the president on behalf of phony news sites? If so, what's the source of this "right", and why should I be defending it?
Bump! Despite my personal misgivings about him, I believe this is a worthy cause. I won't be able to make it but good luck kristinn/everyone!
It will not do any conservative any good to take this guy's part - and most folks here have the stones to admit that. While y'all are whining about the "attacks" on Gannon, why not stop and think about how geared up you would be if a male prostitute was regularly admitted into the CLINTON WH press room after being denied Capitol Hill credentials and did nothing but lob t-ball questions whenever the going got a little rough for Lockhart. Think about it, and be honest with yourself about what you would be saying and doing. Then come back and explain why you think you should protest in this guy's corner.
Do you mean "good guy" in his professional capacity? Worth $200 / hr.?
OLBERMANN: Now to Ron Hutcheson of Knight-Ridder newspapers, current president of the White House Correspondents Association. Mr. Hutcheson, good evening. Thank you for your time.
RON HUTCHESON, KNIGHT-RIDDER: Thanks for having me, Keith.
OLBERMANN: About getting White House press credentials, obviously we can stretch a point one way or the other, and say that the legitimacy is in the eye of the beholder. One mans, no matter which political affiliation you have, one mans vanity Web site, is anothers alternative media outlet. But how do you get a White House press credential if you arent actually affiliated with anything that look like a news organization, in so much it appears as Mr. Guckert did that before the founding of Talon News?
HUTCHESON: Well, to me, thats whats this whole story is about, Keith.
What Editor & Publisher has brought to life, its pretty easy to get into the White House briefing room. Its pretty easy to go to any news conference in Washington, whether its on Capital Hill or whether its at the White House. And the truth of the matter is, most of us in the journalistic profession arent looking ways to make it harder. Certainly at the White House Correspondence Association, my goal is to get people in to the briefing room not to work with the White House on ways to get them out.
OLBERMANN: As Mr. Fleicsher said today, to quote him again, I dont think the party organization should have people in that room acting as reporters. They are advocates, not reporters, and a line should be drawn.
Hes saying, I presume, that if the White House isnt necessarily going to draw that line or it is not fair to draw that line and say, no, opposite party Web site could be represented. Then somebody else has to. Would that devolve to being your responsibility?
HUTCHESON: It could be if we wanted to take it on. And frankly, it is funny, and frankly, I agree entirely with Ari. I looked at Gannon or whatever his name is, his Web site early on. My initial reaction was this is the Republican National Committee thing. Thats outrageous. I looked a little closer, it is not really R.N.C.
You know, one thing thats overlooked, we have a long not so proud history of coconuts in that briefing room. We get questions from the left. We get questions from the right. We get questions from outer space. And for most of us, most of us are in there to try to gettry to listen for information, not to promote ideology. So, we all sort of resent it when the briefing gets hijacked for ideology.
On the other hand, trying to figure out how to solve that problem, the solution is probably worse than the problem. So, you get a couple questions that come from the left, come from the right, come from presumably nowhere. So what? We can live with that.
OLBERMANN: But judging by what Ms. Dowd New York Times wrote today, and judging by Mr. Fleicshers surprise about the real name of Jeff Gannon and somewhat contradicting Mr. McClellans statement, obviously somebody does decide who gets in and who doesnt. Is that one person the press secretary to the president? And if not, who is? And what are the rules?
HUTCHESON: It is definitely not the press secretary. Its somebody at a lower level. The bar is pretty low.
And in fact, I guarantee you if Maureen Dowd wants to go there tomorrow, all she has to do is call up and get a daily pass.
It is harder to get what we call a hard pass, which is a regular White House credential. For that, you have to undergo some certain checks that you dont go for a daily pass, which is really intended for people, say, the mayor from their town goes up, their local sports team comes up, they want to get into the White House, they have a legitimate reason to go there on a short-term basis, but not on a regular basis.
OLBERMANN: And you just brought it up so she clarify this. This whole question that has just been raised about whether or not Guckert had a hard pass or a daily pass. He apparently had nothing but daily passes. And what people thought might have been a hard pass was his own he lanyard, his own thing around his neck thats really had a plastic card that said Talon News. Thats what weve been able to see from video.
HUTCHESON: Yes. Thats certainly my belief.
OLBERMANN: OK. Ron Hutcheson of Knight Ridder, president of the White House Correspondents Association, great thanks for an inside view of whats going on there. Thank you, sir.
HUTCHESON: Thank you.