quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

The law that DomKen cited seems very broadly worded and can obviously be interpreted (by some) to mean that any communications from the executive branch not specifically authorized by Congress are illegal. For the Congress to attempt to hamstring presidential speech... which is what's being attempted here, by implication... for Congress to do that would be pure political hackery.

There certainly won't be an investigation much less prosecution because again, this whole argument seems pointless and insane.

quote:

Sec. 626. No part of any appropriation contained in this or any other Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States not heretofore authorized by the Congress.

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

Surely you don't mean to suggest that laws are never misused?  It is hardly an original notion that law--any law--will inevitably be misused.  History abounds with myriad laws that have been misused.

quote:

Regarding Congressional "oversight" of the Executive--what in their track record holds any comfort that they will not abuse and distort presumptively reasonable laws in order to subjugate the Executive?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
The POTUS can say anything he wants. He can give speeches to the american people without Congress's approval as long as the networks pay for the equipment etc. which is precisely how things have always been done.

What no part of the executive branch can do is spend money on propoganda unless Congress authorizes it. That is what this law says and it is a restatement of a bedrock principle of the US Constitution. When White House staffers met privately, in person or over telecommunicatiosn devices, with FNC staff to distribute talking points they spent appropriated money to do so. That made it illegal. This isn't simply my opinion the GAO ruled on this stuff back when the administration got caught distributing deceptive VPR's.

quote:

As someone else has said, if you can't trust an organisation to fulfil its role of oversight, then is the alternative no oversight at all?

quote:

ORIGINAL: bipolarber

Just what we've always suspected, but is now verified by former White House Scott McClellan: The White House fed "talking point" memos to the production staff and talent of Fox News. Their job was to disseminate the propaganda on their shows, building up support for such things as the War, wiretapping of Americans, Torture... All of which is prohibited by law, of course, but when has the law ever been followed by "Bad King George?"

So, if you feel in anyway betrayed by the lies that led us all on this "merry mideast adventure"... you weren't just being paranoid about the Bushies using an entire network to aid and abet their "Master Plan" via manipulation of the media.

"Fair and Balanced" my ass!

Just kinda makes you think of that line from "V" For Vendetta, doesn't it?

"We just report the news, we don't make it up.... that's the government's job."

quote:


The newest wrinkle to the Scott McClellan-talking points story twists the whole situation 180 degrees. McClellan now says FNC anchor Bill O'Reilly never received White House talking points.

quote:


Johnny Dollar has the audio from today's Radio Factor, in which McClellan appeared as a guest. "The truth is I messed up. I was specifically not trying to single anyone out, including you," said McClellan. "There were people, not you, but there were people."
As for the response to his comments: "Some people tried to paint it in a black and white term to their preconceived notions," said McClellan. "I should not have left it open to interpretation."

quote:

"I think that happens both ways when people go on other networks that are favorable to Democrats."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

Here's an interesting quote from your link:

quote:

"I think that happens both ways when people go on other networks that are favorable to Democrats."

According to Scott, everybody's doin' it... it ain't no thang.

Rosanne Rosannadanna's quote comes to mind yet once again - "Never mind."

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Bullshit.

There hasn't been a Democrat in the executive branch to do this in over 7 years and no allegations of such about any prior administration. Put up or shut up. Precisely which Democratic administration gave talking points preferentially to a network that was made publicly available as press releases? You weren't lying again were you?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

Here's an interesting quote from your link:

quote:

"I think that happens both ways when people go on other networks that are favorable to Democrats."

According to Scott, everybody's doin' it... it ain't no thang.

Rosanne Rosannadanna's quote comes to mind yet once again - "Never mind."

Bullshit.

There hasn't been a Democrat in the executive branch to do this in over 7 years and no allegations of such about any prior administration. Put up or shut up. Precisely which Democratic administration gave talking points preferentially to a network that was made publicly available as press releases? You weren't lying again were you?

quote:


O'Reilly had Dick Morris on the Radio Factor. Morris said when he was in the Bill Clinton White House, he would routinely send talking points to liberal hosts, including FNC's Alan Colmes.

"Yeah I always sent them to liberal hosts," he said. "I'm the guy that thought it up."

quote:


"Certainly it wasn't necessarily something I was doing, but it was something we at the White House, yes, were doing in getting them talking points and making sure they knew where we were coming from," he said, although he qualified, "I think that happens both ways when people go on other networks that are favorable to Democrats."

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

When precisely was Dick Morris on the federal payroll? He worked for the campaign and was piad by the campaign and as such is not bound by any law governing how the executive branch spent appropriated funds.

As to Obama when was he elected POTUS? The law governs the use of appropriated funds by the executive branch.

Put up or shut up.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

When precisely was Dick Morris on the federal payroll? He worked for the campaign and was piad by the campaign and as such is not bound by any law governing how the executive branch spent appropriated funds.

As to Obama when was he elected POTUS? The law governs the use of appropriated funds by the executive branch.

Put up or shut up.

Has McClellan provided any proof of those allegations?  He has already backed down on his claim that he gave them to O'reilly.  Who is next to get an apology?  Not only does McClellan say he didn't give them to O'Reilly but he says it wasn't something he was doing.  SO that leaves the question of who was giving them out at the White House, using your loophole, was it somebody in the role as a consultant, or was it somebody on the Federal payroll?

The knife cuts both ways, both parties have been guilty of this one... If it was on the federal dime, then let the laws of the land see to justice.
McClellan has already put his personal credibilty into question,  He either lied when he was spouting stuff at the podium that he knew was untrue (and didn't resign over it), or he is lying now to cash in on book sales.  Which is the truth? I don't know I wasn't there.

quote:


When did I mention Obama in any of this? 

quote:

Sanity did and one reply is simpler than two.

quote:

SEC. 626. No part of any appropriation contained in this or any other Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States not heretofore authorized by the Congress.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

On second thought it might apply to Obama's senatorial staff since they are paid by appropriated funds. It definitely doesn't apply to the Senator while campaigning or his campaign staff.

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

On second thought it might apply to Obama's senatorial staff since they are paid by appropriated funds. It definitely doesn't apply to the Senator while campaigning or his campaign staff.

Senators aren't paid by appropriated funds?  Since when?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/fnc/scratch_that_mcclellan_says_oreilly_didnt_receive_talking_points_90365.asp 

Ah, the fun of election year politics... it's good to know that honest journalists are willing to report rumors as fact.  What has McClellan offered as proof to any of his allegations?  Can he produce anybody that will back up his various claims?  He hasn't offered them up yet, perhaps he is saving all of that for when somebody sues him for slander.