Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Buying of news..by this administration? Really? For sure!

Posted By: gt on 2005-10-01
In Reply to:

Buying of News by Bush's Aides Is Ruled Illegal



By ROBERT PEAR

Published: October 1, 2005


WASHINGTON, Sept. 30 - Federal auditors said on Friday that the Bush administration violated the law by buying favorable news coverage of President Bush's education policies, by making payments to the conservative commentator Armstrong Williams and by hiring a public relations company to analyze media perceptions of the Republican Party.


In a blistering report, the investigators, from the Government Accountability Office, said the administration had disseminated covert propaganda in the United States, in violation of a statutory ban.


The contract with Mr. Williams and the general contours of the public relations campaign had been known for months. The report Friday provided the first definitive ruling on the legality of the activities.


Lawyers from the accountability office, an independent nonpartisan arm of Congress, found that the administration systematically analyzed news articles to see if they carried the message, The Bush administration/the G.O.P. is committed to education.


The auditors declared: We see no use for such information except for partisan political purposes. Engaging in a purely political activity such as this is not a proper use of appropriated funds.


The report also sharply criticized the Education Department for telling Ketchum Inc., a public relations company, to pay Mr. Williams for newspaper columns and television appearances praising Mr. Bush's education initiative, the No Child Left Behind Act.


When that arrangement became public, it set off widespread criticism. At a news conference in January, Mr. Bush said: We will not be paying commentators to advance our agenda. Our agenda ought to be able to stand on its own two feet.


But the Education Department has since defended its payments to Mr. Williams, saying his commentaries were no more than the legitimate dissemination of information to the public.


The G.A.O. said the Education Department had no money or authority to procure favorable commentary in violation of the publicity or propaganda prohibition in federal law.


The ruling comes with no penalty, but under federal law the department is supposed to report the violations to the White House and Congress.


In the course of its work, the accountability office discovered a previously undisclosed instance in which the Education Department had commissioned a newspaper article. The article, on the declining science literacy of students, was distributed by the North American Precis Syndicate and appeared in numerous small newspapers around the country. Readers were not informed of the government's role in the writing of the article, which praised the department's role in promoting science education.


The auditors denounced a prepackaged television story disseminated by the Education Department. The segment, a video news release narrated by a woman named Karen Ryan, said that President Bush's program for providing remedial instruction and tutoring to children gets an A-plus.


Ms. Ryan also narrated two videos praising the new Medicare drug benefit last year. In those segments, as in the education video, the narrator ended by saying, In Washington, I'm Karen Ryan reporting.


The television news segments on education and on Medicare did not state that they had been prepared and distributed by the government. The G.A.O. did not say how many stations carried the reports.


The public relations efforts came to light weeks before Margaret Spellings became education secretary in January. Susan Aspey, a spokeswoman for the secretary, said on Friday that Ms. Spellings regarded the efforts as stupid, wrong and ill-advised. She said Ms. Spellings had taken steps to ensure these types of missteps don't happen again.


The investigation by the accountability office was requested by Senators Frank R. Lautenberg of New Jersey and Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, both Democrats. Mr. Lautenberg expressed concern about a section of the report in which investigators said they could not find records to confirm that Mr. Williams had performed all the activities for which he billed the government.


The Education Department said it had paid Ketchum $186,000 for services performed by Mr. Williams's company. But it could not provide transcripts of speeches, articles or records of other services invoiced by Mr. Williams, the report said.





Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Sorry, not buying it.....
*I don't like Michael Moore.* Well, I can't imagine why. If you really aren't reading him, then you should be suing him, because your material is the same, right down to the disdainful delivery. Mind cluing me in on the nonpartisan more scholarly research? One or two examples would suffice.
Not buying it. It is about -me me me.
nm
Nice try...not buying it! (nm)
The police are not buying it either. Desperate times call for desperate measures, and the Republicans are beyond desperate at this point!
well, 43% are out buying ammo and
43% are going over their past emails and organization memberships and the other 14% are undecided which way to go and are sitting here handwringing.
Oh pleeeese - I'm not buying it
This is about people obeying the laws...plain and simple. I sick to death of hearing these people talk about how your being "picked on".

Any group/congregation who hold regularly schedule meetings of a large group of people need to get a business license just like anyone else.

What's even more pitiful are the delusional/dysfunctional ones who actually believe they are being picked on simply because they are christians.

Get a grip! Nobody cares what religion you are. If there is a large group of people meeting on a regular basis inconveniencing the neighbors in their own homes, that is called a business. Get a license and the problems will be cleared up.

I live across the street from a guy who turned his home into a car repair shop. Can't tell you how many times our driveway is blocked and no where for our friends to park.

One rule to follow that's very simple. Obey the law. Disobey the law and you should go to jail.
Okay, he is buying them one more year -
Maybe by the end of that year things will be looking better for everybody and they can start to help themselves again.

I compare this to my daughter not having a job and needing my help right now, but hopefully by the end of the year she will be back on her feet and can survive on her own.

At least give people a chance. If he was doing nothing but letting people fend for themselves you would be mad too. Change has got to start somewhere!
I'm not buying his music and never will
and will never listen to it.
Nice try, but I am not buying, and I doubt others are either.
Your style of posting is obvious and it is not hard to figure it out. You post under different monikers to pile on and support your own points, in the same condescending manner. You just messed up this time and forgot what moniker you were posting under. So now we all know the truth...so let's just let it drop. Put a fork in it...it's done.
Who in their right mind would be buying but the elite?
This is a great site, explains derivatives (hedge funds) which Warren Buffett calls WMD. If I understand it correctly, people bet on funds just like football, at a whopping total of 16 trillion dollar world wide. No one knows who owns them or who sells them. They cannot be traced.

It is very strange. Cramer of Mad Money has even mentioned "financial terrorism."

I bet you 25 cents the market collapses tomorrow. This link is very informative. But in the end, even the politicians do not quite understand how this works as well as the brightest minds in economics.

http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2008/06/derivatives-market-is-unwindin
g.html
I'm thinking of buying a bunch of really mean -
pitbulls, and teaching them to seek and destroy wall street CEO's.
Nice try, not buying that. I have looked at both
nm
Some of this is a rescue caused by those buying
nm
More right-wing propaganda...not buying it! (nm)
:p
Sorry...not buying it, but it was good for a laugh! (nm)
:p
Buying her clothes IS from donations.....
!!
Unfortunately, Americans are buying into O's plan
nm
You are buying into her so-called "history"
nm
What they couldn't afford was buying
that had no true value, and when the housing bubble burst, they were left holding worthless paper.
Chinese buying up south CA

They don't want to buy any more of our debt, as our $ is almost worthless.  They've been buying up homes in southern CA big-time.  They already know that this most liberal "plan" will make the US self-destruct.


Those who voted for this man and refused to listen to many of us who said h'ed do this, don't cry to me.  This is merely the beginning.


Sorry, but that article is loaded with opinion. I'm not buying the
x
Rupert Murdoch, GW, & Co. are buying up all her books LOL, sm
like they say the Scientologists buy Cruise's movie tickets. She is a good servant for those in the shadows, so I am sure she is highly paid, just like those gas bags Hannity, Limbaugh and O'Reilly. No one with a conscience would do what they do unless it involved a lot of money.
I heard this morning russia is buying up
iceland's debts, guess they are in real trouble. supposedly could be a change in the balance of power (not a good one if you know what I mean)...?
valid points and YES, people are buying
concerning, huh?
Or we'd be BROKE buying his carbon credits
while he's rolling in the dough.
How about Bush's plan of buying banks?
What's that called?
People have been buying foreign cars
for years.  What does that have to do with losing our jobs due to fewer patient visits to doctors or hospitals?  Actually, a lot of so-called American-made cars are made in Mexico, like the PT Cruiser.  In fact, a lot of cars are made in Mexico because of cheap labor, including VW.
Nah, this administration isn't in bed with
Document Says Oil Chiefs Met With Cheney Task Force

By Dana Milbank and Justin Blum
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, November 16, 2005; A01

A White House document shows that executives from big oil companies met with Vice President Cheney's energy task force in 2001 -- something long suspected by environmentalists but denied as recently as last week by industry officials testifying before Congress.

The document, obtained this week by The Washington Post, shows that officials from Exxon Mobil Corp., Conoco (before its merger with Phillips), Shell Oil Co. and BP America Inc. met in the White House complex with the Cheney aides who were developing a national energy policy, parts of which became law and parts of which are still being debated.

In a joint hearing last week of the Senate Energy and Commerce committees, the chief executives of Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron Corp. and ConocoPhillips said their firms did not participate in the 2001 task force. The president of Shell Oil said his company did not participate to my knowledge, and the chief of BP America Inc. said he did not know.

Chevron was not named in the White House document, but the Government Accountability Office has found that Chevron was one of several companies that gave detailed energy policy recommendations to the task force. In addition, Cheney had a separate meeting with John Browne, BP's chief executive, according to a person familiar with the task force's work; that meeting is not noted in the document.

The task force's activities attracted complaints from environmentalists, who said they were shut out of the task force discussions while corporate interests were present. The meetings were held in secret and the White House refused to release a list of participants. The task force was made up primarily of Cabinet-level officials. Judicial Watch and the Sierra Club unsuccessfully sued to obtain the records.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), who posed the question about the task force, said he will ask the Justice Department today to investigate. The White House went to great lengths to keep these meetings secret, and now oil executives may be lying to Congress about their role in the Cheney task force, Lautenberg said.

Lea Anne McBride, a spokeswoman for Cheney, declined to comment on the document. She said that the courts have upheld the constitutional right of the president and vice president to obtain information in confidentiality.

The executives were not under oath when they testified, so they are not vulnerable to charges of perjury; committee Democrats had protested the decision by Commerce Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) not to swear in the executives. But a person can be fined or imprisoned for up to five years for making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation to Congress.

Alan Huffman, who was a Conoco manager until the 2002 merger with Phillips, confirmed meeting with the task force staff. We met in the Executive Office Building, if I remember correctly, he said.

A spokesman for ConocoPhillips said the chief executive, James J. Mulva, had been unaware that Conoco officials met with task force staff when he testified at the hearing. The spokesman said that Mulva was chief executive of Phillips in 2001 before the merger and that nobody from Phillips met with the task force.

Exxon spokesman Russ Roberts said the company stood by chief executive Lee R. Raymond's statement in the hearing. In a brief phone interview, former Exxon vice president James Rouse, the official named in the White House document, denied the meeting took place. That must be inaccurate and I don't have any comment beyond that, said Rouse, now retired.

Ronnie Chappell, a spokesman for BP, declined to comment on the task force meetings. Darci Sinclair, a spokeswoman for Shell, said she did not know whether Shell officials met with the task force, but they often meet members of the administration. Chevron said its executives did not meet with the task force but confirmed that it sent President Bush recommendations in a letter.

The person familiar with the task force's work, who requested anonymity out of concern about retribution, said the document was based on records kept by the Secret Service of people admitted to the White House complex. This person said most meetings were with Andrew Lundquist, the task force's executive director, and Cheney aide Karen Y. Knutson.

According to the White House document, Rouse met with task force staff members on Feb. 14, 2001. On March 21, they met with Archie Dunham, who was chairman of Conoco. On April 12, according to the document, task force staff members met with Conoco official Huffman and two officials from the U.S. Oil and Gas Association, Wayne Gibbens and Alby Modiano.

On April 17, task force staff members met with Royal Dutch/Shell Group's chairman, Sir Mark Moody-Stuart, Shell Oil chairman Steven Miller and two others. On March 22, staff members met with BP regional president Bob Malone, chief economist Peter Davies and company employees Graham Barr and Deb Beaubien.

Toward the end of the hearing, Lautenberg asked the five executives: Did your company or any representatives of your companies participate in Vice President Cheney's energy task force in 2001? When there was no response, Lautenberg added: The meeting . . .

No, said Raymond.

No, said Chevron Chairman David J. O'Reilly.

We did not, no, Mulva said.

To be honest, I don't know, said BP America chief executive Ross Pillari, who came to the job in August 2001. I wasn't here then.

But your company was here, Lautenberg replied.

Yes, Pillari said.

Shell Oil president John Hofmeister, who has held his job since earlier this year, answered last. Not to my knowledge, he said.

Research editor Lucy Shackelford contributed to this report.
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
Despite everything I know about this administration...
 I am still stunned when I hear the next hairbrained scheme, the next faux pas, the next wrong-headed decision (a decision that is so blatantly flawed that my 10-year old neighbor can see and explain what is wrong about it), deliver the next  we-will-do-whatever-we-want-and-don't- give-a -flip-about-what-you-people-think-Americans-or-anyone-else speech, then proceed to do it. The litany of wrongdoing surrounding this administration is growing exponetially; I don't know what to be more appalled at first. Last week Bush is offering help to the earthquake victims in Iran and this week he is going to nuke them...and pray tell, what is the rationale for this preemptive attack. WMD?, democracy for Iranians? or something else. I believe it is actually going to take a group of people, a coup, to just go in and remove these idiots from the White House...really. I agree with Harry Taylor, the guy in Ohio, I have never been so ashamed nor frightened of the administrators of my own country. God Help Us All and I cannot tell you how much I really really mean that.
Hug the former administration? I'm no

Bush supporter, but you can't blame Bush for this economic mess.  Perhaps you should do a little more research before you go off like a screaming meemie.  It was Bill Clinton who proposed everyone should have a mortgage in every pot, whether they could afford it or not, especially minorities, and the chickens came home to roost.  Do a little research, kiddo. 


LOL, you can't blame Bush for everything.  I think the time is coming when all Americans will realize what a decent man he is, the last decent one we will have as a president.  If Americans can vote in an illegal ursurper and think he is the Messiah, they sure won't vote for an honorable, Constitution-abiding successor, assuming we even have another election in this country with Comrade Obama in charge along with his Marxist cabinet. 


 


and yet this administration is
going to make it harder for charities to get donations by not making donations tax exempt.  They are going to tax people more and they will have less money to donate and contribute.  It is sad really.  The charities are already receiving less donations, etc.  It will only hurt them more. 
..and the Administration that has run the US into near insolvency
is any more credible?  pleeze....
Yes, and in an Obama administration...
censorship, intimidation, and all the rest. He is already doing it and he doesn't have the job yet. Cannot BELIEVE all the people concerned about civil liberties can't see this....sigh.
With everything they have to say grace over, this administration
will need streamlined, efficient performance. He's sounds like a great pick.
Clinton Administration.

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.


Here is the link to this article


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink


Here is another one


http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,432501,00.html


I was taught in school if the economy is doing bad now, it was due to the president 6-8 years ago.  If the economy is doing well, it is also due to the president who was in office 6-8 years ago. 


Since it's almost Income Tax time, here's some interesting facts about the Democrat and Republican tax policies.  Just compare - and, while you're at it, use these facts the next time you hear that President Bush only "cut taxes for the rich".  Looks to me like someone single and making $30K, or a couple making $60K, got a 46% tax break under the Republicans.  That's what I would call taking care of the "middle class".


And remember, the truth only comes out when we refuse to be silent....
 Source:  www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html


      Taxes under Clinton 1999                         Taxes under Bush 2008


      Single making 30K - tax $8,400                Single making 30K - tax $4,500


      Single making 50K - tax $14,000              Single making 50K - tax $12,500


      Single making 75K - tax $23,250              Single making 75K - tax $18,750


      Married making 60K - tax $16,800             Married making 60K- tax $9,000


      Married making 75K - tax $21,000             Married making 75K - tax $18,750


      Married making 125K - tax $38,750           Married making 125K - tax $31,250


 


Take a gander at FDR administration. Hello.
before the winds of CHANGE blew us in a different direction. There is one thing for sure. Whatever we have been doing over the past 8 years AIN'T workin', and by the looks of things, it is going to take some bold, if not drastic measures to fix it. It is not going to be a walk in the park and most definitely will require us to put the bickering aside, come together and do our parts. When the storm has passed, we can sort it all out again, but from a personal standpoint, I will NEVER forget how we got here.
This is still the Bush administration.

There will be ZERO help for the average Americans who need it.  It's like a reverse "Robin Hood."  Take from the less fortunate and give to the wealthy.


This is Bush's policy (more like fascism than socialism), and we don't hear a whimper of protest, yet when Obama even hints at helping struggling Americans, everyone yells and screams SOCIALISM.


Bush can still do a lot of damage in the weeks he has remaining.  That's what worries me more than anything. 


Ok, how do you think the administration will handle this

I knew it was a mistake to pick Clinton for SOS.  The person who said she had no problems obliterating Iran if they didn't do what she wants (or something like that).  How do you think the current administration to include Hillary will handle this one.


http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed2/idUSTRE50E3QB20090115


 


Ok, how do you think the administration will handle this

I knew it was a mistake to pick Clinton for SOS.  The person who said she had no problems obliterating Iran if they didn't do what she wants (or something like that).  How do you think the current administration to include Hillary will handle this one.


http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed2/idUSTRE50E3QB20090115


 


Unlike our last administration....
at least Obama will not accept crooked politicians and they are on both sides of the aisle.
Sorry.........we got this garbage during the last administration
I support my President, now. I did not support Bush, torture, Vietnam II, failure to catch Bin Laden, the failure to protect our own country from natural disasters, Bush's attempt to appoint Harriet Myers to the Supreme Court and a host of other idiotic endeavors he tried to employ or, unfortunately, he did employ. I don't do stupid. IF YOU AIN'T WITH US, YUR AGAINST US! Remember that? Blow me is all I have to say to that.
We had a dictator with the last administration......nm
x
So, you want to try and justify THIS administration?
nm
It's not the past administration?
What color are your eyes? Brown? Thought so.
I know. The Obama administration (sm)

has gone out of its way to be FAIR to everyone (including Republicans), right down to Eric Holder (the Attorney General) taking a look at Republican Ted Stevens' case (prosecuted under the Bush administration) and dismissing the charges against this REPUBLICAN because of mistakes made by the Bush administration. 


They're trying to reach out to everyone, but most Repubicans and their followers are returning his outstretched hand of conciliation with a clenched fist.


This is truly sad and does nothing to help strengthen our country.  What is comforting is that the "party of no" and their followers represent the minority of Americans.


We became "extremists" with THIS administration....
--
To be fair to the present administration..

There hasn't been a SINGLE PRESIDENT willing to address the borders.  I wish Bush would get off his duff about the border too, but if he did put a military clamp down on our border, you'd have a huge uproar from the civil liberties camp.  You can never make everybody happy. 


As for spending... Most Democrats never met a dollar they didn't want to spend.  Wanna have your hair stand on end?  Read a synopsis of The Big Dig in Boston, a la Kennedy and Kerry.  Talk about a money pit at the taxpayers expense.  If only it were a perfect world, but it never will be.


Uh.....what in the world does the administration have to do with recruitment?
Ya know, I am waiting for you to throw original sin in here any time.
WHy don't we check and see which administration started...
borrowing money from China. The Clinton administration took huge amounts of money from Chinese...remember the scandal? Ahem.
yeah, does get worse with each administration.
nm
Oh, I remember the Nixon administration
I think our woes go way farther back than just Bush.  The politicians seem to just get worse and worse with each administration.  I think in order to fix our government we might all do well to look back at previous administrations and evalulate their performance.  I don't remember the Great Depression but I do remember that my parents and people I knew from their generation swore FDR saved the country. 
NOBODY from Bill Clinton's administration.
They did enough damage.