« So, just who is this Hamas anyway? | Main | Nothing like the classics... »

Media Still Demanding Bush Abramoff Pictures

Oh jeez...

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Three in four Americans want President George W. Bush to disclose his aides' links with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, a demand the White House has rejected so far, according to a poll published on Saturday.

The Washington Post said the demand was supported by clear majorities of both Republicans and Democrats in the Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted between January 23 and January 26.

Abramoff pleaded guilty to fraud charges this month and agreed to help U.S. prosecutors in a corruption probe that has sparked calls for reform of the Washington practice of lobbying lawmakers with donations and favors to influence legislation.

I agree that the President should cooperate as much as possible with the investigation into the Abramoff matter, but I don't think information about meetings between Abramoff and White House aides is really what the media is after. I think this statement from the article is a clearer indication of what the media wants:

At a White House news conference on Thursday, Bush said he did not know Abramoff and would not release photographs in which the two appeared together.

The media wants the pictures of Abramoff with Bush so they can draw him into this scandal - albeit superficially - and have the second term "Watergate" scandal they've been lusting after since Bush won last November.

If Bush needs to release information about meetings between White House people and Abramoff so be it. I think he should. But as far as these pictures are concerned I don't think the President has a responsibility to provide the media with ammunition.

You can read more from Rob Port at SayAnythingBlog.com


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Media Still Demanding Bush Abramoff Pictures:

» Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator linked with ‘I don’t know him’

» In Search Of Utopia linked with I dont even know what...

» In Search Of Utopia linked with You could not even make stuff like this up...

Comments (17)

So, let me get this right (... (Below threshold)

So, let me get this right (once again for the billionth time).

If President Bush appears ANYWHERE in the frame of a photo of Abramoff, he must know him, and therefore must be involved in this scandal. It doesn't matter that Bush is in the background talking to someone else (anyone else really) off to the left, and Abramoff is in the extreme forground to the right standing by someone who isn't even a W.H. employee, since they were at one time in the same room, even if Bush didn't know it, that equals guilt. Can we start looking at every photo with Clinton in it to see if a criminal is in the shot with him? Because if this logic is used here, we can use it to keep Billary out of office!

SmokeyFunny how yo... (Below threshold)


Funny how you say "So, let me get this right" and then proceed to get it totally wrong. No one has suggested anything remotely like what you said. Bush claimed not to know Abramoff. Photographic evidence can be informative in determining if two people knew each other. If they're in an informal pose, with Bush's arm around Abramoff's shoulder and both of them laughing hysterically, then it suggests a closer relationship than Bush stiffly shaking Abramoff's hand in a reception line. Of course, I don't know if either scenario is true, since Bush won't release the photos. The only example I can think of that's close to yours is Republicans accusing Hilary Clinton of some kind of wrongdoing because she was in the same hotel ballroom as Harry Belafonte at a fundraiser. How ironic.

And I guess it's OK for Bush to refuse to release the photos, because they must have been taken by his own privately compensated photographer, at a function that wasn't paid for by the government. Because knowing the way Republicans are always yelling about their tax dollars being abused, I'm sure no one would support Bush witholding photos that were paid for by you and me, simply because he doesn't want us to see them?

If Bill is in a picture by ... (Below threshold)
B Moe:

If Bill is in a picture by himself a criminal is in the shot with him.

Chris, mostly when I make a... (Below threshold)

Chris, mostly when I make a comment like that, I leave it dripping with sarcasm. I know that the GOP and DNC BOTH have problems, but I find myself closer aligned with the GOP (although I listen to each candidate and then vote for who I believe is best). My problem here is that when Bill says "I did not have sexual relations with that woman", instantly the press LEAPS to his defense, and anyone who seeks more information is simply in "character assasination" mode. When Bill says that an answer depends on "what the meaning of IS is", he is simply not able to answer. Yet, when President Bush says that he does not know the person, and therefore will not release photos, he is automatically lying, and trying to cover something up. Here is one more scenario for you, I have worked on about 10 campaigns in my life since High School, each time I was able to meet, talk to, and have my photo taken with the candidate. On more than half of those occasions, the photo was taken with the candidate in a "non-informal" pose (arm over my shoulder, or something like that), but were you to ask any of them today (and one of them I worked for less than 18 months ago) who I am, they would not know me from Adam. So, the question is, were I in Abramoff's place, and one of those officials were asked about a photo they took with me, would you take those photos to mean they know me well, and were involved, even though I was just a volunteer on their campaign in the past, and therefore had a photo taken? It's the same with people who work in DC and the President. If they are lucky enough to have a photo with Bush, I'll bet that being in his position (and being a Texan) he won't be "stiffly shaking their hand", but will probably assume a more "informal" or friendly pose for their photo, knowing they will probably keep it for some time.

Just because I'm in a photo with someone (not just in a photo of a room where we both are), doesn't mean I know that person or am in any way connected to them.

<a href="http://tekgnosis.t... (Below threshold)
Juan Schoch:
"Three in four Americans wa... (Below threshold)
Don Knotts:

"Three in four Americans want President George W. Bush to disclose his aides' links with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff."

It looks more like three in four Americans want President George W. Bush to disclose his aides' links with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff to me.

I mean I could be wrong.

I suppose there is another way to interpret that statement.


I wonder how many they had ... (Below threshold)

I wonder how many they had to call before they could even get a decent amount who even knew who Jack Abramhoff was. Another bogus poll.

I bet 3 out of 4 Americans wanted to know who in the Clinton administration hired Craig Livingstone, but I don't think the WaPo ever bothered to conduct a poll on that one.

what happend to the w.m.d. ... (Below threshold)
mr king:

what happend to the w.m.d. then it was sadam and now it is terroist what happend to osama and afganistan

mr bush does whatever it ta... (Below threshold)
mr king:

mr bush does whatever it takes to make the rich richer and dosent care about anything or anyone else just look at his track record sadam was right bush is the criminaland dick is just as dirty

how could somone recieve 10... (Below threshold)
mr king:

how could somone recieve 100 grand and not know who he is.itis is like dog shit on your shoe you can clean it off but it still smells like shit amr bush is like o.j simpson with the gloves ,the shoes ,the cut on his hand or mr bush jack abramoff ,tom delay ,bill frist ,scooter libby,karl rove ,to .name a few and dont forget dick mr haliburton himself it all stinks

This is what you get when y... (Below threshold)
B Moe:

This is what you get when you start putting computers in preschool.

Bush's defense of not re... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

Bush's defense of not releasing the photos is“'I’m also mindful that we live in a world in which those pictures will be used for pure political purposes, and they’re not relevant to the investigation.” Of course the photos were taken for purely political purposes as was or were the meeting(s) so Bush who said that he wants to get to the bottom of the scandal, in dismissing the request as being only politics by the other side, is being disingenous as always, since his administration has been one of the most hotly politicized in memory.

Are you saying the investig... (Below threshold)
B Moe:

Are you saying the investigation is purely political then, Crick?

Of course the investigation... (Below threshold)

Of course the investigation is politically motivated. What about the scores of lobbyists who the DNC actually LIKES? Those who take Kennedy, Boxer, Feinstein, Kerry, Reid and more on trips, out to lunch, or other stuff? You don't hear the dems asking for reform based on that, do you? What about a President (and first lady) who spied on people who WERE NOT foreign terrorists, but were citizens of this country? Care to guess which couple that was, it was less than 10 to 15 years ago.....did anyone call for an investigation into that? Bush may appear to be "lacking in intelligence" but if you will allow me, I'll teach you a new term....."country dumb"

This is when you ALLOW people in your life to THINK you're dumb, in order to either learn more about them, or get something from them. Bush KNOWS that no matter what, the DNC is doing all they can to impeach him. Therefore, when a lobbyist who Bush may be in photos with, but whom Bush doesn't know, is under investigation, he knows that those photos will be shown and you'll here that according to the photos, they know each other and were both involved in this. Then, it's his word against theirs, and they cry and whine so loud who could get a word in edgewise.

Basic rule of thumb, when someone is trying to shoot you down, you don't GIVE THEM AMMO!

SmokeyI know your ... (Below threshold)


I know your post was dripping with sarcasm. But the point of good sarcasm is that it illuminates the underlying truth of an issue. You were so far off base that your comments qualified as fantasy, not sarcasm. That was my point.

But if those pictures were taken by a government paid photographer at an official function, then they belong to the people, not to Bush. By what rationale can he withold them? I realize he doesn't want to give people ammo. That's why he doesn't hold press conferences and only speaks in front of handpicked groups. Jusy because the President always wants to pussy out of being held accountable doesn't mean we have to let him. Remember, he's only king in his own mind.

And lobbyists or lobbyists' clients contributing to politicians isn't the scandal, which is why it doesn't matter who the "scores of lobbyists who the DNC actually LIKES" are. It's the quid pro quo, the doing of favors in return for contributions that's the crime, and the opening of the legislative process to control by lobbyists that's the scandal. And so far it's all Republicans.

It's funny how right wing sites can publish these stupid lists where a guy who commits a crime and used to be the gradener of a guy who once met the Clintons magically becomes a Clinton associate, but the guy who Bush put in charge of setting purchasing policy for the ENTIRE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT gets indicted, and everyone's strangely mum.

And I'd be curious what you mean when you say the Clintons spied on ordinry Americans. Perhaps you could provide more detail, instead of assuming that just referencing a Clinton scandal is sufficient because anything bad you say about the Clintons is automatically true.

Here's my favorite, though. The DNC wants to impeach Bush, and "it's his word against theirs, and they cry and whine so loud who could get a word in edgewise." Once again, nobody plays the victim like a Republican. Yeah, the guy who's President, and whose party controls all the branches of government, can't get a word in edgewise. Boo fucking hoo. Give it a rest. This Republican culture of victimization is getting really ridiculous.

B. Moe, the Abramoff inves... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

B. Moe, the Abramoff investigation by federal prosecutors and FBI is presumably not political but, everything that surrounds this issue is, as some leading Republicans urged today. If I may borrow from the following bloggist everytime Bush in particular, dismisses his critics by saying they are 'Just playing politics' "you can't use politics, or play politics. Evidently politics is like grandma's good china,you never actually get to eat off of it, it just sits there all decorative and shit.".Incidentally, I would never accuse you, B. Moe of not playing politics. Thats what makes you a good man to disagree with.

<a href="http://www.cbsnews... (Below threshold)






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy