DOWNSIDE LEGACY AT TWO DEGREES OF PRESIDENT CLINTON
SECTION: FR LAWSUIT AND SALON
LAWSUIT AGAINST FREE REPUBLIC
LAWSUIT AGAINST FREE REPUBLIC
Washington Weekly 10/4/98 Wesley Phelan Marvin Lee "The Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times last week filed suit in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles against Jim Robinson, founder and operator of the Free Republic web site..(Brian Buckley, attorney for Jim Robinson)BUCKLEY: Well, the law does not discuss or use the word 'reposting.' It simply talks about expropriating copyrighted material -- you cannot do it. However, the statute also makes an exception for materials that are put to 'fair use.' 'Fair use' is then defined in the statute itself by pointing out components to look for. Those components, if found, show the material is being put to fair use. If otherwise copyrighted material is put to fair use, as fair use is defined by the statute, then it is by definition not an infringement. What is fair use? There are a number of components. The one that is applicable here and gives us a fair use exemption, is that we use the materials on a not-for-profit basis in order to foster free speech and discussion of political and social issues..QUESTION: Do you think this lawsuit is politically motivated? BUCKLEY: Yes I think it is, and so does my client. QUESTION: What gives you the indication that it is politically motivated? BUCKLEY: The web site is literally free to participants. Anyone with internet access can read anything on the site. All you need to do to participate, i.e. put your own commentary there too, is register. Registration is free. There are participants of all stripes politically -- conservatives, liberals, very liberal, very conservative, libertarian -- everything you can think of. The only restrictions are regarding profanity and so forth. The forum is an expression of Jim Robinson's political passion and he wants it to be open to all. Now, having said that, it is mostly a conservative oriented web site. And its enormous, growing popularity, as a place where people can read breaking news and comment on it, has led to a bit of political influence by the Free Republic forum. It is a place where people with conservative views can start an email campaign: "Let's all email Senator X and tell him to vote yes on proposition Z." Next thing you know, Senator X gets 5000 emails. It has flexed its muscles from time to time, and it is a place where the President's resignation or impeachment would be welcomed. I'm not saying the White House is involved in this lawsuit, but I do think the Washington Post and the LA Times have a different viewpoint than Free Republic. They have chosen to make an example of us for some reason. Only they can tell you why they have come after us instead of, say, Microsoft, which by their definition of infringement is a serial infringer..QUESTION: How would you sum it all up? BUCKLEY: We think there are a lot of parallel activities to what happens at Free Republic that go on every day in a free society. One ought to be able to get on a United Airlines plane and have the stewardess come down the aisle and hand out newspapers that you did not purchase. You ought to be able to go to your dentist and read in his lobby newspapers and magazines that you did not buy. When companies like the Washington Post and the L. A. Times go overboard, those kinds of expectations are going to be a thing of the past...If instead of a financial motivation there is a political motivation for the lawsuit as Brian Buckley believes, then the following facts may be relevant: (1) Free Republic is probably the most influential political forum on the Internet today and is a focal point for criticism of the White House. It is frequented by opinion makers such as Lucianne Goldberg, Matt Drudge, Gary Aldrich, as well as those that remain among the "lurkers." According to Jim Robinson it has 50,000 to 100,000 visitors per day, making it almost as popular as the Drudge Report. (2) White House critic Matt Drudge's popularity was rewarded with a lawsuit by Sidney Blumenthal, later revealed to have been filed on behalf of, or with the knowledge of, the White House. (3) The Free Republic web site was singled out as a target for copyright infringement last year by the law firm of Debevoise & Plimpton, a DNC law firm that has conducted most of the internal investigation of illegal foreign contributions received by the DNC. For this work, the DNC owes Debevoise & Plimpton $6 million. Clinton private eye Terry Lenzner admitted in a Filegate deposition earlier this year that he had been retained by Debevoise & Plimpton to perform investigations of a political nature. Debevoise & Plimpton refused to answer questions about the selection of the Free Republic site when contacted by the Washington Weekly last year. (4) The legal counsel appearing on the suit filed in Los Angeles is Gibson, Dunn, and Crutcher, with $25,000 one of the major donors of the Presidential Inaugural Foundation sponsoring events at President Clinton's 1993 inauguration.."
The Fresno Business Journal 10/5/98 Kelly Reynolds ".Robinson, a former computer programmer and one-time president of ProtoSource Corp, a local Web site design and Internet provider company, believes his Web site is being attacked because it posts the stories and invites written comment from users. "We are a public discussion forum, mostly for political issues," said Robinson. "Right now, we're following Clinton and his corrupt regime. We go through the liberal media, the Congressional Record, other Web sites, and acquire talk show transcripts, and we post these for anyone who is digging for information about the corruption in government and the subversion of our Constitution being carried out by the socialists who control and have been in control for the past 60 years. The readers will go through these reports and tear them to pieces trying to expose the lies and the distortions and trying to bring the truth out." Robinson says he recognizes the copyright law but says his site doesn't post the entire paper and the fair use doctrine allows for a small amount of what is published to be reproduced. "We're just a great big bulletin board or great big town hall meeting. This is not a commercial venture. I can understand they're (the newspapers) displeasure with us, however, we have First Amendment rights and rights within the copyright law itself to do what we're doing," Robinson said. The stories are given away free on the Washington Post and Los Angeles Times Web sites so revenue is not the reason for the lawsuit, according to Robinson. The lawsuit has been orchestrated by the White House to shut down the Web site because followers continue to increase, Robinson said.."
WorldNetDaily 10/16/98 "Just three days before the nation's midterm elections, conservative politicians, authors and legal experts will lead a National March For Justice anti-Clinton rally near the White House in Washington. Featured speakers include Dr. Alan Keyes, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and a WorldNetDaily columnist; Larry Klayman, chairman of Judicial Watch; Gary Aldrich, author of "Unlimited Access"; Lucianne Goldberg, literary agent; Jonah Goldberg, a journalist at National Review; and Dr. Paul M. Fick, author of "The Dysfunctional President." The rally is sponsored by the influential grassroots group Web site www.FreeRepublic.com, and its founder, Jim Robinson. FreeRepublic, based in Fresno, is a two-year-old organization of Internet users who communicate through the Web site, a not-for- profit enterprise that encourages people to exercise their free-speech rights.."
Washington Post 10/12/98 R. Jeffrey Smith ".Some analysts say the government's decision to close three independent newspapers and shut down several independent radio stations is part of a strategy by Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic to prevent the Serbian public from learning about the foreign presence he has agreed to allow in Kosovo." and email to Jim Robinson ".Jim, Today's Warsh Post carries an article in the International Section concerning the closure of a number of independent publications in Serbia. It seems their "crime" was to carry reprints of articles which have appeared in the Warshington Post. There was no mention about whether the Serbian dictator did this on his own or if he did it at the request of the Post management and attorneys. In either case, we must also note that the Post did not ask the Serbian dictator to back off his action. So, Jim Robinson is right up there with freedom fighters in former-Yugoslavia while the Warsh Post is down in there digging it's bunker in and amonst the perpetrators of genocide. Seems about right to me, doesn't it to you? "
Washington Weekly Marvin Lee 10/19/98 "Their opinion has been unwavering in the polls. They are known from their calls to C-SPAN and other open forums. They dominate the Internet. They are derisively referred to as "Clinton haters" by the liberal media. Soon, the media may be forced to take them seriously. A National March for Justice set for October 31 in Washington DC seeks to mobilize the one- third of the electorate that wants to hold President Clinton accountable under the law. "As for attendees, this thing has gotten out of hand," says Connie Hair, Director of Media Relations for the march. "We've already had to move the venue from Lafayette Park. We're working with the Park Service on another location, either the Ellipse or even The Mall. We've already sold out one hotel and have a second one lined up." Conservative in nature, these are hard-working individualists who do not seek their identity by belonging to unions or organizations. Mobilizing them for concerted political action beyond the ballot box has been difficult in the past. Now the Internet is changing that. Springing up around the FreeRepublic forum on the Internet are the local Freeper chapters and the national Freeper Action Network (FAN). "There is a wealth of information [on FreeRepublic] that allows thousands of people to understand what the government is actually doing. Armed with knowledge they now want to take action. We created FAN to help facilitate their political activism," says Caroline Katzin, co-chair of FAN. Freepers are responsible for many of the small protests organized outside Clinton fundraisers in recent months. In a true grass-roots fashion, Freepers are the ones organizing this march. FreeRepublic founder Jim Robinson is clear about the purpose of the March on the White House: "We intend to wrap the scene in crime tape, serve the current occupants with an eviction notice and a summons... and execute a citizens arrest," he says."
RUSH LIMBAUGH AND CONNIE (CLINTON'S A LIAR) 10/19/98 ".RUSH LIMBAUGH, HOST, RUSH LIMBAUGH RADIO SHOW: ...we go to Connie, in Los Angeles. Connie, welcome to the program, good to have you with us. CONNIE, FREEREPUBLIC.COM MEDIA RELATIONS DIRECTOR: Hi, Dittos, Rush, from the left coast. .CONNIE: Well, FreeRepublic.com is a web site that's set up to expose corruption in government and question everything the mainstream media tells us. RUSH LIMBAUGH: Right. CONNIE: Because the mainstream media, as you well know, has become this huge propaganda machine of the liberal culture. RUSH LIMBAUGH: Yeah, it's a heck of a web site, too. CONNIE: Oh, thank you very much. RUSH LIMBAUGH: Oh, yes, yes."
USA Journal Online 10/20/98 Jon Dougherty ".But Americans love an underdog. And if there is one force more powerful than money in this country it is favorable public opinion and support. Such is the case of the Free Republic, an Internet information web site that has billed itself as a shining example of the First Amendment in action in the age of the online news source. The kind of information forum provided by the Free Republic is wholly legal, but it is irksome to the big media conglomerates because the biased stories which pass for news in the corporate-owned media outlets usually appear as fodder in the Free Republic..In the end, this lawsuit is just another attempt to stifle dissent and freedom of speech. It's also a classic example of how nasty the "fair" and "objective" mainstream news organizations can get when they are getting outdone and overlooked. Corporate news organizations have so obviously been bought and paid over the decades that readers have, in record numbers, begun to look elsewhere - mostly to independent news sites like the Journal and select others - for their information. This paradigm shift in readership was born out of necessity and caused by the very "objective" news organizations that sold their souls out to big government ideals long ago. My guess is that the LA Times and the Washington Post don't even care whether or not they win their case. Perhaps they don't even believe they can win - but they will go through with this because they want to break the will and the finances of Jim Robinson, and they hope to kill the Free Republic web site in the process.."
WorldNetDaily 10/30/98 Anne Williamson ".But Bill Clinton has succeeded in making another significant contribution to American political life. Citizenship is back with a vengeance. If you don't believe me, then just check out the hottest site on the Internet, freerepublic.com. Begun by a handful of concerned citizens who discovered their comments regarding Clinton administration corruption were being censored in an AOL political chat room, the website itself is the achievement of one man, Jim Robinson of Fresno, California. A retired software executive suffering from muscular sclerosis, Robinson marshaled his outrage and his resources to establish the website. With nearly 10,000 posters and over 120,000 daily hits, Free Republic has become a phenomenon, a community and -- most recently -- a nascent political force of mindboggling potential..Some freepers suspect their growing effectiveness tipped the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post to file suit several weeks ago against Jim Robinson and Free Republic for violation of their property's copyright based on freepers posting entire articles from their respective publications. FR's position is that the postings and discussion threads compare to neighbors mulling over the daily newspapers around a kitchen table and are therefore allowed under the fair use doctrine, which permits the nonprofit use of copyrighted material for purposes of public discussion. The courts must sort it out but if I were writing the script, I'd pursue Free Republic's defense on the "creation of something new" aspect of the fair use doctrine. The website is unlike any other venue in American life; the newspaper articles alone are just so much fishwrapping for tomorrow's garbage, but the archived material is the unique product of an informed community of engaged citizenry; the very purpose the founders intended free speech to serve..On Saturday, literally thousands of average Americans -- people who look like your neighbors because they are your neighbors -- from across the country, many of whom never gave a thought to political protest before in their lives, will have descended on America's national home in order to participate in a six hour grassroots protest funded out-of-pocket. They will be standing with one man in support of just one idea; the idea of one nation, under God, with liberty and justice for all. Eagles up, America!"
Washington Weekly 10/26/98 Wesley Phelen ".In the spring of 1994, FBI agent Lawrence Monroe interviewed Knowlton for the Office of regulatory Independent Counsel Robert Fiske. Knowlton learned in October of 1995 that his statements to Monroe were falsified in the FBI interview report. Shortly thereafter Knowlton received a secret grand jury subpoena from Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr, who was conducting the third investigation into Foster's death. That same day several men began to harass Knowlton in the streets of Washington, D.C. John Clarke, attorney for Knowlton, filed suit in U.S. District Court in Washington D.C., claiming the harassment was a violation of Knowlton's civil rights . The suit alleges the harassment was part of a larger conspiracy to cover up the facts surrounding Vince Foster's death.."
Newsday 11/3/98 James Pinkerton ".PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON Saturday lamented the "extreme partisanship" in Washington. On that day, he didn't have to look far for evidence; just a few hundred yards from the White House, gathered for a rally in the shadow of the Washington Monument, were the Freepers. They're extreme partisans. And proud of it. And they represent something new in American politics: a citizens' movement conjured up almost entirely out of cyberspace."
Star Democrat - Eastern Shore, Maryland Rose Spick & Leslie Crook 2/11/99 ".Bay Bridge Airport personnel were asked to detain a man accused of flying over restricted Washington, DC airspace Wednesday and skywriting a message: "THIS IS GOD, CONVICT AND REMOVE, OR ELSE., An unidentified Secret Service Agent later reported that the pilot had not flown in restricted airspace. According to the federal agent, Gene McDonald of Free Republic hired a Hollywood, FL firm, which in turn hired a pilot for $300 to fly near Reagan National Airport and write the message. The pilot, who flew a red Rawdoo T1 single engine plane, works at the Ford automotive assembly plant in New Jersey, according to the Secret Service..The pilot had not violated restricted airspace while skywriting after all, according to the Secret Service agents. And the plans to skywrite were anything but a secret. They had been announced in advance on the Internet at www.freerepublic.com under the name Gene McDonald..."
New York Times 3/8/99 Felicity Barringer Freeper Andrew "…By contrast, the news that appears on a site like Free Republic is the news the stridently conservative readers bring to it. Free Republic, a Web-based discussion group run by a former software company executive in Fresno, Calif., posts the full text of articles from major newspapers and asks for comment. The site is being sued for copyright violation by The Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post. Asked to describe his readers, the site's owner, Jim Robinson, said: ``We're basically just a group of individuals, conservatives, who are debating what we can do to roll back some of the liberal laws and agencies. The government has overstepped its limits, in our opinion.'' Robinson, who works on the site 18 hours a day, and says it is supported by reader donations. For Mark Hosenball, an investigative reporter in Newsweek's Washington bureau, Free Republic is ``more entertainment and a study in abnormal psychology than anything else.''…"
Reason website 7/28/99 Cox Reports Interviewed by Michael W. Lynch and Jeff A. Taylor 8/9 99 Reason: Have you been happy with the way this report has been received by the media? Cox: It has been received well throughout the country, including on television, and indeed it's received positive press throughout the world. The one pocket of negative press has been the Los Angeles Times. It looks a hell of a lot more like The People's Daily. One can read the People's Daily party line on the Internet. About a day before The People's Daily said our report was racist, the Los Angeles Times wrote an article saying this was breeding racism. It is an astonishing charge, inasmuch as I have been working for 11 years with the democracy movement in the People's Republic of China....
The State News/ Michigan State U 8/6/99 Carey McConkey "...Methods used by East Lansing police to identify rioters are being utilized by New York authorities trying to identify Woodstock rioters. Photographs of rioters at last month's Woodstock '99 festival are being posted on the New York State Police Department's Web site. East Lansing police also turned to the Internet after the March 26-27 riot following the MSU basketball team's loss to Duke University in the Final Four.... But, New York police have run into problems with The Associated Press. The AP claims that some of their pictures used on the Web site were posted without their permission. However, the police will continue to keep the pictures on the Web site. "We are using published photos," said Lt. Jamie Mills of the New York State Police Department. "We will continue to use them. (Our attorneys) don't feel that there is any copyright infringement because of a section of federal (law) that limits copyrights when used for non-profit purposes." ..."
This Week with Sam Donaldson and Cokie Roberts 8/30/99 "… COKIE ROBERTS Now, "The Washington Post" is reporting today that you are very keen on a conservative Web site on the Internet, and that this seems to be identifying you as a Clinton opponent. NORTA TRULOCK Well, I voted for Bill Clinton twice. I was asked to come to Washington to be a member of the Clinton administration. I was given my job by a Clinton appointee. I also have bookmarked "The Nation and the New Republic" (ph) and ABCNEWS and a variety of other things. I'm in the information business and so I try to cast my net as broadly as possible. I'm a little concerned that people are monitoring my Internet use, but I guess maybe we won't go there…."
The Washington Post 8/29/99 "…By last week, Trulock, who was considered a non-ideologue during his days at Los Alamos, declared himself a regular visitor to a chat room of FreeRepublic.com, one of the most conservative Web sites. "I have been lurking here for months," he messaged a group that was bitterly commenting on The Washington Post's treatment of his resignation. "During some of the most trying times, FR has been a source of moral support." …"
NewsMax.com 8/30/99 "…No matter that Trulock, as director of intelligence for the Department of Energy, wanted to ferret out the spies who had turned over the nation's most guarded nuclear secrets to the Red Chinese. What really bothered the [Washington] Post was that Trulock was apparently a "conservative." The Post reported that Trulock "declared himself a regular visitor to a chat room of FreeRepublic.com, one of the most conservative Web sites." "'I have been lurking here for months,' he messaged a group that was bitterly commenting on the Washington Post's treatment of his resignation. 'During some of the most trying times, FR has been a source of moral support.'" So important was the Post's disclosure -- that Trulock had the audacity to visit a conservative Web site -- Cokie Roberts of ABC's "This Week" confronted Trulock on-air about the Post report. Yes, Trulock had visited FreeRepublic. He also said he had regularly visited Web sites of a left-wing perspective, such as the Nation magazine's Web site…."
C-Span: House Committee, Independent Council Practices 9/23/99 L N Smithee "….Rep GEORGE GEKAS, R-PA: My first question is to counsel for Ms. Steele. I'm not sure the answer to this. Would you have the right to talk to the jurors after the hung jury reported?
NANCY LUQUE, Julie Hiatt Steele's attorney: There's a rule in the eastern district of Virginia which prohibits the lawyers from talking to the jurors. Mr. Starr's office petitioned to be allowed to talk to them and the judge denied it.
GG: Is the report that nine voted in favor of conviction and three to acquit which caused the hanging, is that accurate?
NL: I don't believe it is accurate, Mr. Chairman, in fact, we learned during the course of the trial that the foreman of the jury was a member of the group called the Free Republic, and had been online during the course of the trial, something which was somewhat terrifying and lends some support to the notion that there is a right-wing conspiracy. In any event, he apparently is one of the people that told the reporter about the split. Knowing that, I have absolutely no faith in that being accurate information.
GG: But that there's a hanging jury means there were votes both ways.
NL: Hanging jury means Mr. Starr lost.
GG: But we know what a hung jury is, do we not?
NL: I think we do. I think we know that Mr. Starr lost. And we don't know the split.
For those of you who are tuning in late, the man selected as jury foreman for the Julie Hiatt Steele trial was the workmate of a man who is a registered member of FR. The workmate was NOT A REGISTERED MEMBER, but was a lurker. A thread about this man is still in the White Water Archives.Click here. ….
To my knowledge, this is the first time anyone has disputed that 9-3 in favor of conviction indeed was the split, 75% in favor of convicting Steele.In the same story in which AP reporter Pete Yost talked with the jury foreman/FR lurker, two other jurors were interviewed, one of which was Thomas Brown a pro-conviction Treasury Department employee who made this memorable remark about Kathleen Willey: "I've met liars before, but this is the first time I've met one with papers to prove it.'' Luque, Steele, and the Starr-slimers can't even admit that the majority of jurors thought he had a case. It's like they don't only want you to believe that Starr is Satan the Devil, they want you to believe that doesn't recycle his beer cans, either……"
"The First Partner-Hillary Rodham Clinton" 1999 Joyce Milton by William Morrow Co Freper Invictus notes ".....In "acknowledgments" section of the book, is the following..."Jim Robinson and the FreeRepublic website epitomize everything that Hillary Rodham Clinton finds dangerous about the Internet. Whether or not one agrees with the views of the Freepers, their site proved to be an invaluable source of daily news stories and contentious but often illuminating opinion....."
The Wall Street Journal. 10/25/99 Jason Riley "…..The Internet is testing America's vaunted commitment to free speech. The Web now gives individuals the means--and the First Amendment, the right--to applaud, critique, parody or simply discuss whatever with whomever on an unprecedented scale. The past few years have seen a body of law begin to emerge to address these issues. First, courts rejected would-be Web censors, who wanted ill-defined "decency" laws enacted to ban "offensive" material online….. While that debate is not yet settled, another has gained attention. The ease with which the Internet allows us to reproduce and disseminate texts and images has raised concerns about protecting intellectual property, specifically copyrights…… Fair use allows others to lawfully reproduce copyrighted works "for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching . . . scholarship, or research." But reproducing copyrighted work for commercial gain--for instance, posting this article on your Web site without permission and charging for access to it--is unlawful…… The inconsistency doesn't surprise observers like David Post, a law professor at Temple University. For one, "the threshold for copyright protection is fairly low," says Mr. Post, who is also co-director of the Cyberspace Law Institute. "Pretty much anything that you can imagine flying around out there in cyberspace is protected. So copyright is going to be the place where people try to shut up their opponents. It's the weapon of first resort, in a sense." More important, says the professor, is the fact that the issue is being played out through the common law process of the courts, in a sort of conversation among judges. This process, says Mr. Post, is a very effective, decentralized way of adapting existing law to this new medium without ham-fisted legislation….."
latimes.comhttp://www.latimes.com/business/19991109/t000101776.html 11/9/99 Greg Miller "….In a ruling that could shape how copyright laws are applied in cyberspace, a federal judge on Monday rejected a conservative Web site's position that posting articles copied without permission from major newspapers is legally protected. …."
From Alamo-Girl: Here is an illustration of why it is in the best interest of the LAT/WP to have the entire article posted to Free Republic before comments are made instead of excerpts or summaries as they are seeking:
An excerpt of this article could look like this:
11/9/99 Los Angeles Times Greg Miller "....Pamela Samuelson, an expert on copyright law at UC Berkeley, said [Judge Margaret] Morrow was mistaken in not giving Free Republic some latitude because it copies and posts articles mainly to enable Internet users to comment on them. "They're not trying to set up an alternative publication system," Samuelson said......"
A summary of this article could look like this:
Greg Miller of the Los Angeles Times reported on 11/9/99 that Judge Margaret Morrow's decision against Free Republic's claim of Fair Use in posting LAT/WP articles was questioned by a University of California Berkely copyright scholar. Judge Morrow is a recent Clinton appointee, i.e. new to the bench. Her appointment had been held up for years due to some Senator's concerns she might use the position for judicial activism. Since Free Republic was and is actively seeking the impeachment and removal of President Clinton, and since her appointment followed a number of favorable articles written by the LAT, motives are being questioned.
In both cases, the actual substance of the article would be clearly misrepresented.
WorldnetDaily 11/11/99 Jon Dougherty ".... A federal judge has ruled against the operator of a popular online conservative discussion forum, rejecting the owner's claim that reposting entire news stories constituted a "fair use" of copyrighted material. Judge Margaret Morrow of the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles rejected FreeRepublic.com's request to dismiss the case, and said owner Jim Robinson was not protected under "fair use" provisions of existing copyright law when he copied and posted entire newspaper articles on his site......Robinson told WorldNetDaily he believes Morrow's decision is wrong and pledged to fight the ruling....... Robinson also said the judge ignored the fact that his website "only uses a small portion" of each newspaper every day, and said that by law users of copyrighted material are permitted to do that. "We use individual articles; however, they copyright the entire paper," he said....... Another aspect of the decision that Robinson disagreed with was the court's characterization of FreeRepublic as a commercial website. He told WorldNetDaily that Judge Morrow said because he received donations through his site, "that makes me a commercial enterprise, but that's completely false." In disputing Morrow's claim, Robinson said he has recently filed for non-profit status but that the paperwork has not yet been approved. "We have never operated the FreeRepublic as a commercial venture -- not at any time," he said. "She just ignored that. She said in the courtroom that the only reason for our existence was to raise donations."....."
WorldnetDaily 11/11/99 Jon Dougherty ".... Binyamin L. Jolkovsky, editor of another Internet news and commentary site, the Jewish World Review, sees merit in both sides of the case, but said he was more concerned about the loss of impact FreeRepublic could have as a "valuable and informative site" if Robinson loses his case. "For small sites like ours, it's somewhat damaging when somebody copies entire articles and reposts them elsewhere," he said, "especially when you're a site that is paying for content." On the other hand, he said, "they have been very kind to me. We've had a lot of their readers come to JWR." "I don't want to see FreeRepublic weakened because I think it's an absolutely amazing site," he said. "As something is breaking live, on television for example, site members (at the FreeRepublic) will immediately post a synopsis of the event, and that's just incredibly useful." Jolkovsky said the plaintiffs couldn't completely stop Robinson or his members from posting allowable amounts of copyrighted information......"
Salon 11/10/99 Mark Gimein "…So I sat down to write about FreeRepublic.com with the idea that what Robinson was doing was a flagrant abuse of the power that the Web puts in the hands of the independent publisher. I also had the idea that I would compare what Robinson was doing -- copying and illegally reprinting work that other people had written -- with the work of Robert Lane, the operator of Blue Oval News, a Web site devoted to news about Ford cars and the Ford Motor Co……Except that I didn't count on one thing. While a judge had upheld Lane's right to publish stories based on internal Ford documents, she prohibited him from publishing the documents themselves. Lane has since had to remove Ford's documents from his site. Without them, his investigation loses a surprising amount of its edge. Investigative stories, to be effective, need to give readers a lot of information. It is important to include as much documentation as possible so that readers know that they are getting the full story and nothing is being taken out of context. When I read an investigative piece like Lane's story about Ford's emission problems, I want to see the documents. Unfortunately, however, I can't, because Ford has used the copyright law as a club to prevent Lane from publishing them….. So Ford is using copyright law for one purpose only: to minimize bad press….."
Salon 11/10/99 Mark Gimein "…That story should give the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times some pause, and should make media organizations think seriously about the purposes of copyright law…. It is upsetting that the same principles that can be used to protect the rights of writers and publishers to their hard-earned work can be used by a big corporation to draw a veil over its mismanagement. That, however, is exactly the case. …….But the very same newspapers [WP/LAT] also will have an interest in making sure that the copyright laws are not used as a club against their own investigative reporting….."
NY Times 11/15/99 "…. The House of Representatives is considering legislation designed to protect databases, or collections of facts or data, from misappropriation. The issue is increasingly important because electronic databases have become integral to all kinds of commercial and educational activities on the Internet. Many database owners want a federal law to ensure that their data collections are not duplicated and sold by others trying to get a free ride on what they spent time and money to compile. But in protecting the labors of database owners, Congress must be careful not to limit the use of facts that should remain in the public domain, a restriction that could be far worse than any problem the legislation is seeking to cure. …."
The New York Times 11/15/99 Christian Berthelsen "…. In a case that pits the push by newspapers for online revenues against the free-for-all nature of cyberspace debate, a federal judge here says she intends to rebuff the assertion of a conservative Web forum that it has a right to post articles from two newspapers to foster discussion…… FreeRepublic's owners asserted they have a "fair use" and First Amendment right to post the articles because the issues covered in the stories -- and sometimes the stories themselves -- become the subject of written debate and criticism on the site. They also contended that the site had increased Web traffic to the Post and the Times, citing testimony from a witness who determined that FreeRepublic was responsible for 20,000 so-called referral hits on the newspapers' Web sites each month…… "We're using it to critique the government, and to critique the media itself, which is supposed to be a watchdog over the government," Robinson said. "So we feel we're an ideal case for fair use." Both parties are now awaiting a final ruling from the judge. Robinson said he would appeal. …."
www.lynnsamuels.com 11/15/99 Freeper Doctor Raoul "....And keep your eye on this suit against the Free Republic. You don't have to agree with this far-right wing web-site to see the danger in major media outlets suing citizens for posting articles on the Internet for the sole purpose of discussing them...... Could there be a political reason for this? The "freepers" are far right-wingers and the two papers involved are what passes for liberal, these days. Could there be government involvement, since FR is one of the places that most despises the administration? ...."
Roll Call 12/2/99 John Mercurio
"…..A legal cyberspat broke out this week when officials of the Senate Democratic and Republican campaign committees traded charges that each have set up Web sites that break the law. Democrats started the skirmish, claiming that the National Republican Senatorial Committee's Web site, www.nrsc.org, could violate copyright laws because it features "framed"archived newspaper articles that are only available through individual media organizations for a fee. ……"
"…..Responding to DSCC claims that he said are baseless, however, NRSC Legal Counsel Craig Engle noted that Democrats may have committed legal infractions of their own. Engle said the DSCC may have violated campaign finance laws by soliciting contributions on its own Web site, www.dscc.org, without an authorization statement or other disclaimers required under the Federal Election Campaign Act…… Engle also alleged that the DSCC's Web site violates a rule enforced by the Internal Revenue Service, which requires political fundraising organizations, such as the DSCC, to state to prospective donors that their political contributions are not tax deductible for federal income-tax purposes….."
"….."Clearly, the NRSC is grasping at straws in their effort to cover up their campaign to pirate intellectual property," said DSCC Deputy Communications Director David DiMartino……The DSCC initially targeted a page on the NRSC's site called "News Desk," which features stories from major media organizations, including ABC News, The Washington Post and The New York Times. Trying to determine whether the NRSC had committed wrongdoing, DiMartino sent the Post an e-mail Nov. 19 asking whether the committee could use Post articles "within frames on our website." Michael Golden, a customer care representative for the Post's Web site, www.washingtonpost.com, responded that his organization allows text links, with no use of the Post logo, graphics or photos, to current articles for two weeks after they are published. After that time, Golden said, the articles are transferred to fee-based archives "and are unavailable for linking. We also do not allow our content to appear within frames at other sites."
"….But Engle countered that the NRSC does not need the Post's consent because it is shielded by a "fair use" exemption to federal copyright law, which stipulates that it is not considered a copyright infringement if the reproduced material is intended for "criticism, comments, news reporting, teaching, scholarship or research." "A political party's Web site is much like the television commercials. It's general public advertising, and we're reproducing some of this work to echo it for attribution," he said. "The Post owns the content," Elias countered. "People can use it if they have the permission. They can't if they don't." …"
SJ Mercury 11/20/99 Peter Lewis "….In what some legal experts believe is an unprecedented ruling, a King County District Court judge presiding over a harassment case has barred a Seattle man from posting any comments to an online discussion group. The ruling, which came in a case before Judge Marcine Anderson, has prompted questions about the right to free speech in an electronic forum. After hearing from individuals involved in the civil case, Anderson issued a ruling last week restraining Scott Abraham from ``making or responding to postings on the Internet site either directly or indirectly, in person or through others.´´ ……."
Antiwar.com 8/30/99 Justin Raimondo "…. In the wild and wacky world of the Internet - why do you think they call it WWW? - politics takes on an immediacy and intensity that seems to exaggerate the foibles and conceits of the human species. Political "chat rooms" are noisy and often noxious places, filled with the smoke and flame of cyber-political sloganeering, all too often IN ALL CAPS and in sentences invariably ending in at least three exclamation points!!! A more sophisticated form is the posting site, where champion posters show off their research skills in uncovering the most informative news articles on current events: but it is more than a collective clipping service. For anyone who is a registered member can comment on the article, or on the last comment, or on anything at all. At its best, a posting site is a combination political salon and "Crossfire" segment, in which cute one-liners intersperse serious political analysis. For some reason, this is a cyber-phenomenon that - as far as I know - is purely a creature of the Right. The best and most famous site of this kind is, without a doubt, Freerepublic.com, run by Jim Robinson out of his living room somewhere out in the California boonies. And therein lies a tale . . . "
Antiwar.com 8/30/99 Justin Raimondo "…In spite of many premature pronouncements of its death, Freerepublic is flourishing with more visitors and more activity than its heavily-subsidized rival and nemesis, the ultraliberal Salon.com online "magazine" that since its founding has really functioned as a virtual Clinton.com. While Salon's stock is falling, its seems as if Freerepublic's is rapidly climbing, with almost as much activity as at the height of the Clinton scandals. The discussions are spirited, but usually civil, or at least no less civil than out in the "real" world. But most impressive of all is the consistently high quality of the postings: there are some real champions out there (are you reading this "Hamiltonian," and especially 'StandWatchListen"?) whose research skills are truly awesome, to say nothing of the speed at which they work. If it's on the Internet, they'll find it - and you can be sure they all have an opinion about it. The unique sense of community that came out of shared politics and the new technology created a virtual movement: and the "Freepers," as they call themselves, continue to thrive. But like all movements, especially new ones, the new cyber-populism soon began to differentiate itself into various tendencies: it was almost inevitable that a split would come. When it finally did, all hell broke loose….."
Time Daily 12/10/99 "…..The choppy waters of Internet copyright law just got even rougher. This week, a federal judge in Utah issued a preliminary injunction against Sandra and Jerald Tanner, whose site, which contains criticisms of the Mormon church, provides links to text pirated from the church's Handbook of Instructions. The judge, whose injunction will stand until the case is tried or settled, said it is likely the couple engaged in "contributory copyright infringement" by linking to a site they knew, or should have known, contained the unauthorized copies. The Tanners' lawyer, on the other hand, argued that since the couple were acting strictly as intermediaries - an anonymous source pointed them toward the text - they were not guilty of direct copyright infringement. "This is a whole new category of information, and it leads to a whole new category of copyright law," says TIME technology writer Joshua Quittner. This case opens up a can of worms many in the communications arena ardently hoped would remain tightly sealed……"
Washington Weekly 12/8/97 "….Jim Robinson who hosts the "Free Republic" web site received a number of cease and desist orders from mainstream media organizations last week. They all ask him to stop reposting their news content as well as framing content from their web sites on his web site. In addition to a public discussion forum where news stories are posted, Robinson's web site has a number of links to mainstream media organizations. When those links are followed, the content appears in a "frame" of Robinson's web page. "If 'Framing' is illegal, I'm guilty," Jim Robinson declares to the Washington Weekly. "But I'd like to see the regulations that prohibit it before they sentence me."
There is something odd about these cease and desist orders, which Robinson has shown to the Washington Weekly. They have similar wording and details, and three of the letters were sent on the same day, December 5. The timing and the language suggests that this was a concerted effort. Some person or group did the legal research on Robinson and his web site, uncovering all his past and present business affiliations, and distributed a legal brief to the news organizations Times Mirror, Dow Jones, Reuters and Washington Post.
Who might that person or group be? Well, there are three clues. First, we may look at which article is cited as the offending piece of evidence against Robinson. The first article cited, by the Washington Post, is the Sep. 12, 1997 "Intelligence Data Suggest Role in China Plot Senators Told," by Brian Duffy and Bob Woodward. The article focused on Chinese agent Ted Sioeng and his $250,000 donation to the Democrat Party and his meetings with Bill Clinton and Al Gore. This article, highly embarrassing to the White House, was ignored by the mainstream media but distributed widely on the Internet.
The second clue is that Jim Robinson says that his web site has been visited by White House computers from the eop.gov domain. This fact is significant. It means that official White House computers were used by government employees to research Robinson's site.
The third clue is that a Clinton defender on November 16 posted a complaint on the Free Republic forum, asking that instead of reposting Washington Weekly articles in that forum, posters give a link to our web site instead. An odd complaint, given that our copyright notice contains a specific permission to repost. Odd indeed, unless that person was aware of the effort underway to stop exactly such reposting on the Free Republic web site. The identity of the poster is concealed, hidden behind the alias "serpenthead." Where have we heard that before? Serpenthead did not wish to reveal his identity to the Washington Weekly.
Now let us look at the claims of the "aggrieved." They charge that Robinson is guilty of commercial misappropriation, copyright and trademark infringement and unfair competition, among others. The first and last claims are ludicrous on their face. None of these organizations derive any significant revenue from their web sites, and the effect of reposting on this insignificant revenue is questionable. As for copyright infringement, Robinson cites the "fair use" exemption.
It is obvious that "framing" is only a pretext issue. Robinson says that he is happy to remove links to government propaganda sites such as the Los Angeles Times, originator of one of the cease and desist notices. The real issue is that citizens in public forums such as the Free Republic compare notes on various newspaper articles and compare them to their own research, memory, and information they gather from various other news outlets and books. That was never the intended use for those mainstream media stories, for it often reveals them as propaganda and disinformation. Such propaganda and disinformation are only effective against citizens who rely on one newspaper, such as the Los Angeles Times, as their only source of information. It allows the Los Angeles Times to control what information such readers receive, and what picture such readers form of government. It is such readers who then vote for Bill Clinton.
Why was Jim Robinson singled out? Perhaps because his Web site has become a focal point for White House opposition in recent months. Again and again we have heard of influential people making reference to it.
It is amazing that the Establishment should be so afraid of one citizen with an electronic printing press. Jim Robinson says that he and his wife are confined to wheelchairs. Less than $15,000 in revenue from a web site hosting venture is their only source of income. Yet his voluminous volunteer Web collection of the truth about the Clinton administration apparently is so subversive that he must be shut up for the government to survive. ….."
San Francisco Examiner 12/8/99 Scott Winokur ".....A Northern California company has accused the Los Angeles Times of pirating a $2,000 software program designed for journalists, at a cost of millions of dollars in lost revenue to the manufacturer, who alleges that possibly thousands of programs were stolen. In a lawsuit filed Oct. 26 in federal court in Sacramento, CE Engineering Publishing Systems, Inc. of Loomis, in the Sierra foothills, asked for $5.4 million in treble damages from the Times for alleged copyright infringement, breach of licensing agreements, theft of trade secrets and unfair competitive practices. "Their attitude is we'll do what ever we want. The power of the press belongs to those who have one," said CE's founder and Chief Executive Officer Chris Ellsworth. "The L.A. Times is saying, really, we don't think we should have to pay for software -- we've taken the liberty to copy it and we'll do it thousands of times," Ellsworth said. "I know they're setting records on net profits. CE Engineering's software is part of that. What it boils down to is software piracy." ...."
Heads Up 1/23/2000 Doug Fiedor "…. While snooping around on the Federal Election Commission web site to see who is contributing to which election campaigns this year (to check on that, go to: http://www.fec.gov/1996/sdrindex.htm), I stumbled upon an FEC preliminary rule making call for replies that concerns political speech on the Internet. At the moment, there is little to worry about. However, it is possible that the FEC could attempt to promulgate rules and regulations that would stifle most free political speech here. Obviously, they are thinking about it…… It appears that, for the moment, FEC is mostly interested in those who set up web pages and/or distribute banners in support of (or against) a political candidate or issue. They say that this activity is a time and money contribution and should probably be regulated. We, of course, have a greatly different opinion. That is, we class our conversations with friends and acquaintances on the Internet as the very same speech we would have at a neighborhood meeting, or by distributing an opinion flyer around the neighborhood. That the Internet neighborhood is somewhat larger than the brick and mortar neighborhood does not change the amount of protection due this type of political speech. Because, according to the United State Supreme Court, political speech is the most protected of all speech. That is, citizens are free to display political signs as they wish, write either signed or anonymous texts for or against candidates or issues and peacefully assemble with like minded people to propose and plan political action. Doing this in cyberspace changes nothing. It is still political speech among American citizens….."
The Washington Times 2/16/00 Barbara Saffir "…..Mrs. Clinton called to apologize to the waitress she stiffed at a diner in Albion, N.Y., after she walked out on consuming two breakfasts on the house without leaving a tip. But she didn't say anything about making it up to her. Since then, hundreds of residents of the big village called America, on reading about the incident in their newspapers or hearing Jay Leno's jokes about it, have. Tricia "Trish" Trupo, 31, the single mom who waited on the first lady at the Village House Restaurant last week, has received hundreds of dollars in the mail. Mrs. Trupo, an uninsured mother of an 11-year-old son who earns about $5,000 a year before tips, says Mrs. Clinton's "personal planner" called her Friday to apologize for the first lady after she read about it in The Washington Times. Shortly after that, Mrs. Clinton called herself. "She apologized for not giving a tip," Mrs. Trupo says. "She said I was a sweetheart." But she didn't say anything about a forthcoming tip. "She didn't offer and I didn't ask." "I work for the waitress wage -$2.90 an hour plus your tips. "Basically, you live off your tips. Me and my son have no health insurance at the moment." …… Americans from as far away as California and Florida have sent cards and letters with money enclosed - mainly $1 bills. Some have enclosed $10 bills. "A lot of them say, 'You go girl,' " says Mrs. Trupo, 31. "Some of them say, 'Good luck to you and your son. I hope this dollar adds up for you.' " Meanwhile, visitors to a conservative Internet site - freerepublic.com - have sent her more than $500, says Peter W. Kessler of Jupiter, Fla., one of the first people to suggest sending her money. "I am amazed at the amount, the number of people who have jumped on this," he says. ….."
NewsMax.com 2/12/00 Carl Limbacher "….As news percolated through the Internet Friday that Hillary Clinton had accepted a hearty free breakfast at an upstate New York diner and then stiffed the waitress out of her tip, charter VRWC members at the Web site Free Republic were taking pledges to make up for the First Freeloader's stinginess. As of Saturday morning, the "It Takes A Village To Tip A Waitress Fund" had collected over $250.00 in pledges. Within 24 hours of its first report in the Washington Times, the story of the Hillary's snub of "Trish" the waitress (her boss at the "Village House" diner in Albion, N.Y., won't release her full name) had become a defining moment in Clinton's bid to become that state's next U.S. senator. …."
Tech Law Journal 4/11/00 David Carney "……. There is a final order on the fair use issue in the LA Times v. Free Republic case. I have a copy, which I received from plaintiffs' counsel. I have also spoken with plaintiffs' counsel, but not defendants' counsel, about the opinion. I would have put it on line by now, except that it is 40 pages long, and it is a very poor quality copy that cannot be scanned and converted into HTML with OCR software. I have already begun to retype it, but still have a long way to go. I have a rough draft of the first 15 pages in HTML now. I have 25 pages, and a lot of proof reading, and HTML editing (such as two way hyperlinking the footnotes) to go….. It is not a significant development. The order merely finalizes the tenative order issued several months ago (which I have put on line). It adds some additional citations, and elaboration, but follows the same step by step analysis of the fair use statute, and reaches the same conclusion. I have found no major departures from the tentative order. Also, it does not go into any issues not already addressed in the tentative opinion. It resolves the fair use defense, but otherwise, the case is still active, and ready to proceed to trial. ……"
WorldNetDaily 8/10/00 Jon Dougherty ".....A late-night television host for CBS may have threatened the life of GOP presidential nominee George W. Bush during a parody of a news report showing Bush accepting his party's nomination at the Republican National Convention........ Craig Kilborn, host of the network's The Late, Late Show, aired a video clip of the GOP convention, which depicted several convention scenes in Philadelphia. ......The video segment began by displaying briefly a photograph of Bush giving his acceptance speech, with the words "SNIPERS WANTED" appearing in white letters at the bottom of the screen. ......The portrayal outraged some viewers, who in turn contacted CBS. Others contacted the U.S. Secret Service to inquire about whether the parody constituted a threat. ........Not only do such actions legally constitute a threat, but, according to a Secret Service agent who spoke with WorldNetDaily, the agency takes all such threats seriously -- regardless of who makes them or who they are directed against. ......."
WorldNetDaily 8/10/00 Jon Dougherty ".....Mackin said the Secret Service was made aware of the "SNIPERS WANTED" parody shortly after Kilborn aired it last Friday night, one day after the close of the Republican National Convention. Since then, he said, agents have been in contact with Kilborn and CBS after verifying the authenticity of the clip. "I can't go into any details, but I can tell you that we have investigated this matter and whether or not there was any harmful intent behind it," Mackin told WorldNetDaily on Wednesday. He also declined to comment on CBS's reaction to the clip or whether action would be taken against the network generally or Kilborn specifically.
Others were clearly upset by the broadcast, however. ......"
WorldNetDaily 8/10/00 Jon Dougherty "....."Kilborn has made a statement that, for all intents and purposes, should mean his arrest," said one poster on the Free Republic chat and news website. "He may have meant it in jest, but it's not funny. He should make a public apology, he should apologize directly to [Bush] in person, and he should resign." "If it was a Republican saying this, there would be protests in the streets," said another. .......... The Gore campaign did not return calls for comment, nor did The Late, Late Show's media representative, Michael Naidus. ...... Keenan said CBS was "concluding a review of this matter" and pledged to "take appropriate action when this process is complete." ........ In an oddly related incident, The Austin American-Statesman reported in its Aug. 2 edition that federal officials arrested a man for allegedly threatening Gov. Bush. According to the report, Winfred Ener Jr., 44, who officials say is homeless, was shouting outside of the governor's mansion in Texas on July 29. He was spotted by the Secret Service the following day and taken in for questioning. Authorities say among the contents of his bag were writings that stated "Die, pig" and "I'll cut the FBI's head off and stick it on the gate." Ener was charged with making threats to a presidential candidate and could face up to three years in prison if convicted......."
NewsMax.com 8/9/00 Carl Limbacher "…….CBS television network acknowledged late Wednesday that it broadcast an "inappropriate and regrettable" joke about the assassination of Republican presidential nominee George W. Bush last week. For days reports have swirled around the internet website Free Republic.com alleging that CBS's Craig Kilborn Show superimposed the words "Snipers Wanted" over the image of the Texas governor during his acceptance speech at the GOP convention in Philadelphia. ….When questioned about the incident by NewsMax.com, CBS's media relations bureau in New York acknowledged the bizarre Bush barb in a press release:
"STATEMENT FROM CBS AND WORLDWIDE PANTS
"On the Friday August 4 broadcast of THE LATE, LATE SHOW with CRAIG KILBORN, an inapropriate and regrettable graphic was briefly presented on the screen during an 'In The News' item about George W. Bush's acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention. This graphic -- which was not accompanied by any remarks from Mr. Kilborn -- should not have been included in the telecast and is not consistent with our broadcast standards.
"CBS and Worldwide Pants, which produces the program, deeply regret this incident. We are now concluding a review of this matter and will take appropriate action when this process is complete."
The Secret Service is said to be investigating the CBS incident……"
Newsmax.com 9/12/00 "…… A hearty band of protesters has been following candidate Hillary Clinton since she announced her "listening tour" of New York state last year. They go from town hall meeting to parade to fund raiser, waving signs and shouting wherever the first lady appears along the Senate campaign trail. And though the press has for the most part ignored the group, which seldom numbers more than 25 at a time, the anecdotal reports they post on the Web site FreeRepublic.com have chronicled the Clinton campaign in a way mainline journalists couldn't have. The Freepers, as they call themselves, don't see the velvet-gloved version of Mrs. Clinton that often appears in mainstream accounts. Instead, they return from the trenches with tales of being roughed up, cursed out, threatened and generally harassed by Clinton supporters and Mrs. Clinton's official security alike. ……."
Landmark Legal Foundation 4/30/98 ".The Hambrecht & Quist association with the Clinton administration even extends to the Pentagon. Former Clinton Defense Secretary William Perry was executive vice president at the firm from 1981 to 1985. Last year, Mr. Perry returned to Hambrecht & Quist as a member of its board of directors. ."
Landmark Legal Foundation 5/11/98 "Landmark Legal Foundation today accused the Internet magazine Salon of failing to reveal the extent to which millionaires bankroll it linked to President Bill Clinton and the Democratic National Committee (DNC). Landmark called on Salon to make a full disclosure of the financial interests behind the online magazine. Landmark president, Mark R. Levin, said, "Salon attempts to portray itself as a non-partisan, web site journal when, in fact, its patrons are millionaire Democrat activists and many of its reporters have long-time links with top White House official Sidney Blumenthal. Hambrecht & Quist is a principle investor in Salon. Its chairman until recently was William Hambrecht. From 1991 to 1997, William Hambrecht, his wife and daughter gave more than $384,000 to Democrat candidates and organizations, exclusively. Last February, William Hambrecht hosted a major fundraiser for Democrat House candidates at his San Francisco home with President Clinton.ú Adobe Systems is another principle investor in Salon...ú Apple Computers, Inc. is the second major computer company backing Salon..Levin added, "Salon's pedigree reveals that it is not a serious media outlet, but a political tool of liberal fat cats. Until it discloses the full extent of its financial relationships with the likes of Hambrecht & Quest, Adobe Systems and Apple Computers, Inc., it must be viewed a just another weapon in the White House's spin arsenal." ."
Freeper (Jim the Just) report to Alamo-Girl "Keep going on the money trail. You'll also find that H&Q has much of it's money invested in companies that are competitors to Microsoft. H&Q, Adobe, and Apple have all followed strong anti-Microsoft strategies (until this past year). H&Q, Apple, and Adobe execs move in the same circles as the execs at Sun and Silicon Graphics. Silicon Graphics (SGI) bought Cray, the supercomputer manufacturer. SGI & Sun (along with IBM) are the makers & sellers of the "supercomputers" that the Russians & Chinese have obtained illegally. What do these companies, and to a lesser extent HP, IBM, Netscape, and Novell, have common? Well, they all would benefit greatly if Microsoft stumbled, they all have big defense & international security business, they all support Clinton & Co. strongly, and they all view China aas a huge market opportunity. They also strongly support Orrin Hatch.."
Ether Zone Online! 6/1/98 ".As the saying goes, follow the money. When somebody says, "It's not the money," it's always the money. With our own research and what has already been published by Landmark Legal Foundation, we present the following money trail. Adobe Systems Is a major investor in Salon Magazine. A quick look at their web site under Adobe Ventures Portfolio at http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/adobeventures/Salon.html and one will see a glowing report of this acquired investment. A major computer software company, Adobe was partly launched with investment capital from Hambrecht & Quist an investment banking firm. William Hambrecht ex-chairman of this banking firm, serves on the Board Of Directors for Adobe. Adobe's president Charles Geschke has contributed over $95,000 to Democratic candidates and organizations exclusively since 1991. Their CEO, John Warnock has contributed over $36,000 to the same cause. Apple Computers A second major computer company backing Salon. From 1996 to 1997 alone, Steve Jobs, Apple's head, contributed over $167,000 to the DNC. It has been also reported that the Clinton's stayed with Mr. Jobs at his Woodside, California home at a recent fund raising weekend. Hambrecht & Quist A large southern California banking firm is another principal entity funding Salon magazine. William Hambrecht the ex-chairman of the firm, is a major contributor to the Democratic Party and is also a major financial supporter of President Clinton. As recently as February, Mr. Hambrecht hosted a fundraiser for Democratic House Candidates at his home in San Francisco, which was attended by President Clinton. According to the New York Times, "the president rubbed shoulders with guests who paid $10,000 a person to dine with him on Hog Island oysters and stuffed lamb loin". In addition, William Hambrecht gave more than $384,000 exclusively to Democratic candidates and organizations. The firm's venture capital investments include such companies as Adobe systems and can be found at http://www.hamquist.com/venture/adobe.html.."
L.A. Times 8/9/94 ".Previously, the accounting firm Coopers & Lybrand was ordered by a Denver bankruptcy court to pay $95 million to settle claims filed by MiniScribe's creditors and shareholders related to the accounting firm's work for MiniScribe. It was one of the largest legal settlements by an accounting firm in U.S. history. Wiles and the San Francisco-based Hambrecht & Quist investment banking firm, which has had many high-technology firms as clients, was named in several civil suits resulting from MiniScribe's failure and was forced to make some settlements. For example, Hambrecht & Quist settled for an undisclosed sum a Texas suit in which MiniScribe bondholders were awarded $550 million in damages.."
L.A. Times 8/25/1997 "It doesn't show up on the roster of White House advisory panels and blue-ribbon commissions. It doesn't even have an official name, although those in the know have nicknamed it "Gore-Tech." Once a month, Vice President Al Gore meets privately with a select group of Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, sometimes on the high-tech executives' home turf in Northern California, sometimes around a conference table at the White House. Who's in it? Gore-Tech' Group Silicon Valley entrepreneurs are regular participants in montly brainstorming sessions with Vice President Al Gore. They include: * Marc Andreessen, co-founder, Netscape Communications * Brook Byers, partner, Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield and Byers * Scott Cook, founder, Intuit Corp. * John Doerr, venture capitalist, Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield and Byers. * David Ellington, CEO, NetNoir * John Gage, chief science officer, Sun Microsystems. * Chuck Geschke, president, Adobe Systems. * Gilman Louie, chairman, Microprose. * Paul Lippe, chairman, Synopsys * Halsey Minor, founder and chief executive, CNET. * Steve Perlman, founder WebTV Networks. * Nancy Pfund venture capitalist, Hambrecht & Quist. * Kim Polese, founder, Marimba * Sandy Robertson, chairman, Robertson Stephens and Co. * Jerry Yang, chief executive, Yahoo!
Freeper report on Fox News O'Reilly Factor 9/17/98 "Bill O'Reilly of The O'Reilly Report just destroyed editor David Talbot of Salon Magazine. Talbot said that the reason they attacked Henry Hyde is that he is a partisan who has a history of attacking Bill Clinton on moral issues. Bill O'Reilly said he did a NEXIS search on Henry Hyde and couldn't find a single instance of Henry Hyde attacking President Clinton on anything, ever! Talbot was visually stunned. Several seconds went by without him uttering a word. Finally he stumbled on that Hyde was leading the Judiciary Committee, and the Committee was attacking Clinton. But O'Reilly smelled blood, he kept banging away on his point. Until the segment ended.."
Freedom Works website 9/17/98 """Two reporters have told ABC News that a senior White House official peddled a story to them that Hyde once had a girlfriend. Another reporter said the official was offering stories of sexual escapades by Republican House members."-- Linda Douglass, ABC News, 9/16/98
Freedom Works website 9/17/98 ""Sam Donaldson: "Are you suggesting for a moment that what they're beginning to say is that if you investigate this too much, we'll put all your dirty linen right on the table? Every member of the Senate? Every member of the press corps?" George Stephanopoulos: "Absolutely. The President said he would never resign, and I think some around him are willing to take everybody down with him." -- ABC's This Week, 2/8/98
Freedom Works website 9/17/98 """This is often known as a strategy of mutual assured destruction, and the Clinton people have been hinting at it for a very long time. Just this last week, Sydney Blumenthal was making phone calls to reporters, urging them to look into the sex life of a Republican who would have an important role in any impeachment procedure." -- Jay Nordlinger, CNN, 9/6/98
Freedom Works website 9/17/98 """James Madison said among the grounds for the impeachment of someone would be 'failure to superintend the excesses of subordinates.' Leaving aside 900 FBI files winding up in the White House, we have the experience recently of a member of the White House staff, Sidney Blumenthal, calling journalists in an attempt to smear Henry Hyde." -- George Will, ABC's This Week, 9/6/98
Freedom Works website 9/17/98 """Russert's commentary ran on the 'Today' show around 7 a.m. and a few hours later he was surprised to get a call from Salon magazine demanding to know if Starr was leaking to him. Perhaps Salon would like a transcript to see what he really said, Russert suggested. Nope, no need, he was told - Salon already had a transcript. Russert burst out laughing since at that time [Sid] Blumenthal was the only person who had called NBC to get a transcript." -- Deborah Orin, New York Post, 7/16/98
Freedom Works website 9/17/98 """From its founding 18 months ago, Mr. Carville's Education and Information Project (EIP) has attempted to portray itself as being primarily concerned with defending Mr. Clinton. But that posture conceals a less public effort to attack Mr. Clinton's enemies. . EIP's primary background goal [according to internal documents] is to 'target key Republican players used in attacks against the administration and the Democratic Party to expose their hypocrisy or partisan nature.'" -- Washington Times, 6/15/98
Landmark Legal Foundation 9/18/98 Mark Levin letter to Kenneth Starr and John Keeney concerning a request for criminal investigation (SALON) ".This is a formal request that one or both of your offices open a formal criminal investigation into apparent efforts by the White House and the online magazine Salon to, among other things, intimidate members of Congress, as they begin consideration of an impeachment inquiry, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1505 (Obstruction of proceedings before committees of Congress) and 18 U.S.C. Sec. 371 (Criminal Conspiracy)... Salon is a website funded largely by wealthy individuals who contributed tens of thousands of dollars to the Democratic Party organizations and Democratic candidates. Landmark Legal Foundation has uncovered the following information about several of Salon's key financial backers. Salon's relationship with the White House goes beyond its financial ties.. On April 14, 1998, Landmark provided the Office of the Independent Counsel (OIC) with considerable information demonstrating Salon's role in working with former Arkansas Senator David Pryor - who now heads the new Clinton legal defense fund - to undermine Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr's Whitewater investigation..On August 8, 1998, The Hotline reported, in part: Salon's Broder/Jaffee, under the header "Clinton's Sexual Scorched-earth Plan," report on the prospect of a "sexual Gotterdamerung, a spectacle in which reputations may be strewn about like body parts in 'Saving Private Ryan.'" Clinton backers are "spreading the word" that if GOP leaders push impeachment "their own dirty secrets will be exposed..On Wednesday, September 16th , 1998 , on the eve of the House of Representatives considering an impeachment inquiry against President Clinton , Salon published both an article and editorial accusing House Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde of an affair in the mid - 1960 ' s , to which Mr. Hyde acknowledged . Although Salon denied any involvement in the report , ABC News reported the following on the same day : Two reporters have told ABC News that a senior White House official has peddled a story to them that Hyde once had a girlfriend. Another reporter said the official was offering stories of sexual escapades by Republican House members.. Salon is not a news outlet, let alone an independent news organization. It functions as an appendage of the Clinton White House - funded largely by the President's supporters. Its staff has close associations with the President's staff. And Salon and the White House share information. These associations are not, by themselves, unlawful. However, Salon appears to be a direct functionary of the White House. It is advancing the President's ' scorched earth policy ' in an effort to intimidate elected representatives - specifically , members of Congress who are currently considering issues of impeachment. In fact , on September 16th , 1998 , ABC News reported that Mr. Hyde "made clear [in a memorandum to his Republican colleagues that] any efforts to intimidate committee members could amount to obstruction of justice. But even before he wrote that memo, Hyde learned that the President's allies might be spreading a story about him.".."
Washington Times 9/18/98 Donald Lambro NancyRoman "House Republican leaders Thursday asked the FBI to investigate the White House's role in a rash of sex stories about GOP lawmakers that they charged was an attempt to undermine the impeachment inquiry into President Clinton's perjury scandal.. In a letter to Mr. Freeh, they cite published reports that top White House officials, including Mr. Clinton's chief media strategist, Sidney Blumenthal, attempted to peddle the story that Mr. Hyde had an extramarital affair with a married women in the 1960s -- eventually getting it printed in the Internet publication Salon.The GOP leaders said that whether the Hyde story "originated with the White House or its allies, clearly there is credible evidence that an organized campaign of slander and intimidation may exist." ."
Washington Post 9/19/98 Juliet Eilperin "Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.) offered to resign from the committee last week after public disclosure that he had had a five-year extramarital affair during the 1960s, Republican sources said yesterday. The offer was tendered to House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), who rejected it. Disclosure of Hyde's liaison provoked a storm of controversy in the House, with some Republican members accusing the White House of trying to smear Hyde -- who is overseeing an investigation of President Clinton's affair with Monica S. Lewinsky -- as part of a "scorched earth" policy against Clinton's accusers. The White House categorically denied being the source of the article, which first was published by Salon, a left-leaning Internet magazine, and said anyone involved in disseminating such information would be fired. Gingrich and other House GOP leaders sent a letter to FBI director Louis J. Freeh on Thursday asking him to investigate any personal attacks on members of Congress, including Hyde, that are aimed at intimidating them. "It is a sign of the depth of Chairman Hyde's integrity that he would automatically offer a resignation over a 30-year-old story," said Gingrich spokeswoman Christina Martin. "The speaker did not consider the resignation because he can think of no one who has earned more respect or affection from the House. Henry Hyde is a man of dignity who has handled the situation well."."
Capitol Hill Blue 9/18/98 ".The defecation hit the rotary oscillator this week when Salon, otherwise known as the White House Press Office West, splashed an affair by House Judiciary Chairman Henry Hyde from 30 years ago all over its World Wide Web site. . What is surprising is how the rest of the media, which had ignored the story that the White House had tried to peddle for weeks, jumped on the bandwagon once Salon published the scoop that everyone else knew about and considered trash that wasn't newsworthy. .While claiming they have a right to smear Hyde for something he did 30 years ago, Talbot got pissed earlier this year when other publications uncovered the unpleasant fact that his Washington correspondent, Jonathan Broder, was fired by the Chicago Tribune for plagiarism. That, he said, was a single mistake from the past. Funny. That's what Hyde said.."
Dick Armey's letter 9/17/98 to Louis Freeh "We are deeply troubled by recent media reports indicating that certain individuals may be engaged in a systematic attempt to intimidate Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde and other elected members of the House from doing their constitutional duty by promoting prurient allegations about their personal lives to the media..Whether or not that specific story originated with the White House or its allies, clearly there is credible evidence that an organized campaign of slander and intimidation may exist. If it does, any individuals promoting such a campaign may be in violation of federal criminal law:.If these reports are true, the actions of the individuals responsible are pure and simple intimidation - no different than threatening jurors to change their verdicts in organized crime trials. Therefore, we urge you to investigate these reports in an effort to determine whether any individuals -- inside or outside of the White House -- have made efforts to undermine the lawful and Constitutional work of the Judiciary Committee.."
Freedom Works website 9/17/98 ""But with more Democrats publicly venting their anger at Clinton over the Lewinsky affair, these sources admit the [White House] strategy is risky and could collapse under the impact of Starr's report. If that happens, one hard-core Clinton ally warned, Washington had better prepare for the so-called Doomsday scenario -- the dreaded sexual Armageddon in which the personal peccadilloes of everyone -- Republicans, Democrats, journalists -- are exposed if Clinton's infidelities are dragged into the open."-- Jonathan Broder, Salon magazine, 9/10/98"
ABC This Week with Sam and Cokie 9/20/98 transcript about the Hyde/Salon/Bluementhal issue ".DONALDSON: Joining us now is William McDaniel, attorney for White House aide Sidney Blumenthal...DONALDSON: As you know, news organizations, some news organizations, including ABC News, have told their viewers or readers that Sidney Blumenthal in fact, has spoken to reporters about this type of rumor..And then in the final sentence Mr Blumenthal said "I never brought such rumors to the attention of any reporter." Now, did that statement mean to be all-inclusive, that never at any time debris a rumor about a peccadillo, sexual or otherwise about a member of Congress to the attention of any reporter? McDANIEL: I think he was referring there to the Hyde story. He did not bring the Hyde story to the attention of any reporter..DONALDSON: ABC News reported and we've talked to two individuals who have told us that Mr. Blumenthal discussed the Henry Hyde story with them. Are they lying? .. McDANIEL: He testified under oath about you know, about the prosecutors. That's part and parcel of this. Starr's prosecutors hauled him down there and asked him all kinds of questions about whether he was peddling rumors about them. ROBERTS: Let's talk about that. In an article in the Nation magazine, Doug Ireland wrote about Sidney Blumenthal and the prosecutors and said "Three members of the media have confirmed to me that Sidney Blumenthal, the White House media counselor, had indeed been spreading such stories." They heard him do it. These were stories that members of the Starr team were gay...WILL: You said in response just now to Cokie that would be inappropriate but not illegal. In your original letter to ABC News to the President of ABC News, David Weston, you said the accusations against Mr Blumenthal were false and defamatory. So if true, Mr. Blumenthal's behavior would be infamous, you're saying? McDANIEL: No, I think it would be something that would tend to lessen his reputation. That's what defamatory means. WILL: And should this lessen his reputation? .DONALDSON: He says "I never brought such rumors to the attention of any reporter." McDANIEL: That's correct. Reporters called him and said "I've got this guy calling me up, telling me DONALDSON: So he did discuss this information with reporters? McDANIEL: Yes and it says so in his statement. DONALDSON: You have to look through what the meaning of this? What is meaning of "brought to the attention?" You're saying he discussed the story with Henry Hyde but only when reporters ask him about it? McDANIEL: Yes, he told them "I don't think you ought to publish this and I don't want to be part of it." That letter doesn't say you have any information to the contrary. DONALDSON: You can help us out. I had to say, as all news organizations do, that we would protect our source. You could, on behalf of Mr. Blumenthal today, ask our sources to let us off of that, discharge that, release us from that pledge of confidentiality and if they will do that, we'll name them in a moment. Go ahead. McDANIEL: I can ask them to release it. How do I have any power? DONALDSON: On behalf of your client. Well, if you don't McDANIEL: I want to hear their names. Sure. I don't have a piece of paper. do; Ask them to come forward then, and release us from our pledge of confidentiality and we'll tell you their names. McDANIEL: That's fine with me, have them come forward. DONALDSON: Would it be all right with your client, have you consulted your client? McDANIEL: I don't know what you mean by all right. My client has no power to control these people. I would like to hear their names. DONALDSON: I think if he asked them to come forward and said "I release you from any pledge of confidentiality" they would consider that very strongy. WILL: Sam's point is that they feel bound by confidentiality to protect your client. McDANIEL: Oh no, let's hear the names. I haven't discussed this with my client, but I know what's happening. Let's hear the names. .."
Freeper LarryLied reports SALON sponsors include REI, Borders, Octavo, Mercedes-Benz, The Apple Store, OshKosh B'Gosh, Thanksgiving Coffee Company, Yamaha, Hong Kong Tourism, AT&T, CNET Back-to-School, Air Canada
Weekly Standard Scrapbook 9/22/98 "Presidential aide ( and ex - journalist ) Sidney Blumenthal could conceivably be in legal jeopardy , as well as professional peril , if it can be proved that he played a role in circulating stories about the lives of Representative Henry J . Hyde , as well as others . The SCRAPBOOK has learned that , in a deposition in his libel lawsuit against Matt Drudge , Blumenthal denied under oath talking to journalists about Hyde and other public officials . It is thus hardly surprising that Blumenthal released a statement late last Thursday , specifying that he " was not the source , or in any way was involved with this story about Henry Hyde . [ Salon Magazine ' s notorious " scoop " about Rep . Hyde , and his a lleged affair back in Illinois in the 1960s ]."
AP 9/26/98 Walter Mears ".Hyde was the third House Republican within the month to disclose a past adulterous affair, each going public because of an impending news story. After the Hyde story, House Republican leaders complained to the FBI of what they called a possible attempt at intimidation against impeachment. They sought an FBI investigation, suggesting that Clinton allies were behind it all. The White House denied involvement, and chief of staff Erskine Bowles said any Clinton aide found to be party to planting such stories would be fired. ``Their butt would be kicked out, and they should be kicked out,'' said political advisor Rahm Emanuel. ``But the fact is, we're now in a process criminalizing and politicizing people's personal lives.'' Meaning Clinton's. In his grand jury testimony, he complained that some questions went ``too far in trying to criminalize my private life,'' and he wouldn't answer them. But that private life involved sexual liaisons with an aide in his White House office complex. By any guideline, such conduct would warrant reporting. The argument continues about the way the Republican sexual disclosures made it into print. Rep. Tom DeLay, the GOP whip, who wanted Clinton impeached long ago, said he was acting on suspicions, not proof, when he blamed the White House. He said on CBS that it fit the pattern of conduct there. ``And unfortunately, I think more of this is going to happen,'' DeLay said. Probably so, with the lid off scandal reporting.."
Washington Post 9/29/98 Howard Kurtz "Jonathan Broder, Washington bureau chief of Salon, has been forced to resign after criticizing the online magazine's decision to disclose Rep. Henry Hyde's 30- year-old affair. Broder had argued in a memo that to publicize the 1960s extramarital affair would make the magazine's staff look like "sex-obsessed hypocrites." Salon Editor David Talbot, the story's author, demanded his resignation after Broder responded to a call from The Washington Post by saying: "I objected to it on journalistic grounds, on grounds of fairness and because of the way Salon would be perceived." .. The Sept. 16 article in Salon, which has been a fierce critic of independent counsel Kenneth Starr, infuriated House Republicans, who demanded an FBI investigation of whether the White House helped plant the story. The administration denies any involvement. Salon's on-the-record source was Norm Sommer, a Florida retiree who is friendly with the ex-husband of Hyde's former mistress. Ironically, Sommer called Talbot several months after trying to peddle the story to Broder, who brushed it off.. "
Weekly Standard Scrapbook 9/28/98 "Presidential aide and ex-journalist Sid Blumenthal could conceivably be in legal as well as professional peril if it can be proved that he played a role in circulating stories about the lives of Rep. Henry Hyde and others. THE SCRAPBOOK has learned that, in a deposition for his libel lawsuit against Matt Drudge, Blumenthal denied under oath talking to journalists about Hyde and other public officials. It is thus hardly surprising that Blumenthal released a statement late last Thursday specifying he "was not the source or in any way involved with this story on Henry Hyde." Salon magazine's notorious scoop the day before had revealed the adulterous affair during the late 1960s of Rep. Hyde, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. Hyde is presiding over the hearings on whether to impeach Blumenthal's boss, Bill Clinton. Like all carefully lawyered statements emanating from the Clinton White House, Blumenthal's denial elicits the question, What does he mean when he uses the word this? Does he mean that he was the source for, or in some other way involved with, other stories on Henry Hyde? ... The FBI, at the urging of House Republicans, is considering an investigation of whether dirt is being dredged up to intimidate the members of Congress who may soon sit in judgment of the president. Salon has denied any White House involvement in its scoop, but that's hardly the end of the story. The San Francisco Examiner reported on Saturday that Salon rushed its story into print because it learned that two "political operatives" were "leaking details of Hyde's affair." According to Salon managing editor David Weir (who was interviewed by the Examiner's Matt Beer), one of the operatives was Terry Lenzner, a private eye "hired in the past by the White House to check out Clinton opponents." So Salon confirms that Terry Lenzner was spreading stories about Henry Hyde. A Lenzner spokesman denies it to the Examiner."
Ether Zone 10/1/98 Bob Momenteller ".Talbot's Clintonian obsession with sex may not be well known, but should be. Sex sells and Talbot takes no exception to this fact. Their recent article "Unzipped" which focuses on fascinations with oral and anal sex will attest to this. A quick look through their archives would make a seaman blush. Talbot himself is a co-author of a book on the subject, "Burning Desires: Sex in America". So it comes as no surprise that Talbot authored the thirty year old extra-marital affair article of Henry Hyde that no one else would touch. Aside from the obvious political timing of the story itself, the Zone has learned of several latent motivations behind the release. Salon, just prior to their bombshell, signed a deal with America Online to become one their anchor tenants. This will allow AOL's 13 million members access (children too) to Salon's smut without ever leaving the AOL domain. In addition, the boost in readership caused by the Hyde story leaves Salon's marketing department in euphoria. Seems that Talbot is ready for the big boys on Wall Street and wants to go public. Their 75% increase in readership will solidify their public offering with p/e ratios going through the roof. Talbot's money hungry evil is only rivaled by that of Larry Flint. "
Ether Zone 10/1/98 Bob Momenteller ".If one hunts long enough through Salon's archives, the name James Carville keeps surfacing. Sure enough, Clinton's chief political strategist and former campaign manager was once a regular columnist for Salon. Carville should have been an early clue to those that questioned Salon's alliance to the White House. This seedy character went on to become one of the main defenders of the President in the talk show circuit. Reported by the Zone in Big Mouth Carville's Last Stand, he also started the Education and Information Project. A website war machine who's sole purpose was to discredit Ken Starr..
Ether Zone 10/1/98 Bob Momenteller ".Salon once again has demonstrated that they are clearly a front for the White House. They do not report on news worthy events, they create them. Indeed, as reported by the Ether Zone on June 1, 1998, (Left Wing Salon Magazine Uncovered) two eyewitness sources told the Zone,"Jonathan Broder and Murry Waas met behind closed doors at the White House with Sidney Blumenthal". The two hour meeting took place while Salon was putting together their Hale story. Broder and Waas were co-authors of the article. So, we have a clear and blatant example of how Talbot's Salon took an activist role in undermining the Office Of The Independent Council's investigation of the President. They also embarrassed Starr in the public forum and demoralized his key witness, David Hale. Finally, it made Talbot's magazine a household word with every main stream press outlet spewing Talbot's big lie in the name of Salon..Talbot's three year drive to make Salon magazine big, fat and wealthy, at all cost, may have earned him and some of his staff a pair of handcuffs. As we have seen, Salon acts as a direct functionary of the White House. Their proliferation of the White House's "Scorched-Earth" campaign which is designed to intimidate members of Congress who are considering issues of impeachment, could amount to obstruction of justice. His decision to publish the Hyde story itself, only pushed the legal envelope further. Salon's collusion with top level White House staff, on this story and others, could amount to conspiracy.."
Jewish World Review 10/23/98 Mugger ".One very positive development in the past month has been the neutering of Clinton's favorite propaganda organ: Salon. When the online magazine published the story about Henry Hyde's adulterous affair of 30 years ago -- not such a crime in this year's climate -- a decision that resulted in the resignation/firing of its chief Washington correspondent, Jonathan Broder, a week-long dust-up had the result of vastly reducing the left-wing mouthpiece's credibility. Most of it can be traced to one paragraph in editor David Talbot's defense of the story. "Aren't we fighting fire with fire," Talbot asks, "descending to the gutter tactics of those we deplore? Frankly, yes. But ugly times call for ugly tactics. When a pack of sanctimonious thugs beats you and your country upside the head with a tire-iron, you can withdraw to the sideline and meditate, or you can grab it out of their hands and fight back." James Carville and Sidney Blumenthal must've been proud of their puppet. Problem is, with that one line, "ugly times call for ugly tactics," Talbot marginalized his magazine, perhaps forever. It's no accident that since Broder left, Salon has run very few political stories..Just last week, on Crossfire, Slate's Michael Kinsley was grilling a Republican congressman, who replied, "I thought you worked for Slate, not Salon. The electronic mag's a political joke now that probably won't recover.."
The Independent - UK Mary Dejevsky 11/27/98 ".THOUSANDS OF sensitive documents relating to US national security have been leaked, according to reports on the Internet yesterday. But America's mainstream media, preoccupied with the Thanksgiving holiday, seemed not to want to know. The documents, as many as 20,000 pages of them, are said to detail efforts by the Clinton administration to conceal the extent of Iraq's weapons development plans, White House approval for exports of sensitive satellite technology to China, and information about the incentives offered by Washington to North Korea in return for curbing its nuclear programme - terms that North Korea has in the event ignored...Verbatim details from the papers were not available yesterday, and Murray Waas, the reporter said to have the papers, could not be reached. Drudge suggested that Waas, who writes for the pro-Clinton Internet magazine Salon, was reluctant to divulge the contents while Bill Clinton faces impeachment proceedings.."
Local TV Station/Indianapolis CBS Affiliate 12/21/98 Freeper unitedwestand ".The local CBS affiliate in Indianapolis is reporting this evening that Salon Magazine will be reporting tonight on a scandal involving Dan Burton and two congressional aides. The report is also (supposedly) going to insinuate the misuse of campaign contributions by Dan regarding expensed incurred in these affairs.."
Washington Times 12/24/98 Joyce Howard Price and Bill Sammon ".A new media report by a liberal on-line magazine about the sex life of a Republican congressman has fueled the debate over the role of private morality in public life, even as President Clinton condemns what he called the "politics of personal destruction." "The left routinely accuses religious conservatives of sexual McCarthyism, but it's the left that is outing gays and exposing the private lives of others. It's not Gary Bauer. It's not the Christian Coalition. It's not the Weekly Standard," said William Kristol, editor of the conservative Weekly Standard. "The politics of personal destruction is the politics of Bill Clinton," he said. Salon, the liberal on-line magazine, and Larry Flynt's Hustler magazine have been responsible for most of the recent character assassinations. Victims have included three top House Republicans -- former Speaker-elect Robert L. Livingston of Louisiana; Rep. Henry J. Hyde of Illinois, chairman of the Judiciary Committee; and Rep. Dan Burton of Indiana, chairman of the Government Reform and Oversight Committee. Some Republicans have charged that the White House fed Salon and Hustler the information. The White House and the two publications deny that... Conservative pundit Cal Thomas contrasted Mr. Clinton's current talk about the need for "reconciliation" and "healing" with the attacks his political adviser James Carville has leveled against independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr and House Republicans who voted to impeach Mr. Clinton. "While his minions slime his enemies, [Mr. Clinton] pleaded for the sliming to end," Mr. Thomas wrote in a column that appeared yesterday in The Washington Times. The New York Post's Dick Morris assailed Mr. Carville's "crazed strategy," which he says has hurt the president. Mr. Carville yesterday blamed Republicans for initiating destructive politics by refusing to back off their investigations of Mr. Clinton. "There are doors in life which are best left shut, and they insisted on opening them," he told The Washington Times. "At every point, people begged these people to stop it, and at every point they ignored them." Mr. Carville bemoaned the fact that Hustler's publisher, Mr. Flynt, a staunch Clinton defender, offered $1 million to women who came forward with proof of extramarital affairs with congressional Republicans. In a new development, Salon ran a story Tuesday that accused Mr. Burton of groping a female lobbyist for a family planning organization in the mid-1990s.. The story by Russ Baker, a free-lance writer who penned an earlier Salon article that discussed an extramarital fling Mr. Hyde had with a beautician in the late 1960s and early 1970s, also raised questions about Mr. Burton's ties with a former model, Claudia Keller...A separate report in Tuesday's issue of Salon blamed liberals for "hypocrisy" in "backing a president who lied under oath in a sexual harassment lawsuit." "Before the rest of us get too misty-eyed about ending the politics of character assassination, we might want to take a closer look at our own record in this area," Andrew Ross, a Salon founder and vice president, wrote in an article titled "What if it were President Packwood?" ..Mr. Ross also cited liberal opposition to the nomination of the late Texas Sen. John Tower as defense secretary. His "crime," Mr. Ross said, was that "he enjoyed a drink or two." Others targeted for destruction by liberals, the Salon writer said, included failed Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork, "whose video rental receipts were paraded in front of the world," and Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who was hit with a "sex harassment smear" during confirmation hearings. Paul McMasters, ombudsman for the Freedom Forum, says: "The bar hasn't just been lowered. It's been done away with." .."
The Times of London 12/24/98 Ian Brodie ".ONE of President Clinton's harshest Republican critics in Congress was embroiled in new controversy yesterday over allegations of sexual harassment and paying a woman on his staff to do two jobs... In the latest fracas, questions have been raised about Mr Burton's payments of nearly $500,000 (œ300,000) to Claudia Keller, who is both his campaign manager and on his congressional staff. Members of Congress must ensure that none of the money paid to them by the Government for their official duties goes to subsidise their campaigns. A spokesman for Mr Burton, chairman of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, said the dual funds paid to Ms Keller were kept quite separate. But The Washington Post said federal records show that payments to her for the two jobs over the past nine years often covered the same periods of time. The newspaper also reported that the Burton campaign paid Ms Keller monthly rent to have his campaign headquarters in her home. Further, her daughter, ex-husband, sister and aunt were all said to be on the campaign payroll. A list of alleged sexual harassment by Mr Burton was carried by the online magazine Salon. In one episode, a lobbyist for Planned Parenthood was quoted as saying that she was groped by him as she left his Washington office. "He had his hands up my skirt so fast I didn't even know what was coming," she said. The Salon account detailed other episodes of alleged harassment dating back to his days in the state legislature in Indiana when he was an insurance salesman and estate agent.."
N.Y. Post 12/29/98 Dick Morris ".IF President Clinton truly wants to end the ''politics of personal destruction,'' he might send the message downstairs to the White House basement, where Director of Communications Ann Lewis works. Lewis, the sister of Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), has her fingerprints all over Russ Baker's expose of Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.) in the Internet magazine Salon. While Baker piously won't name his sources, his article contains the accusation that Burton, who headed the congressional inquiry into the misuse of FBI files, sexually assaulted a lobbyist for a woman's family- planning organization when she visited him in his Capitol Hill office. Baker won't name the woman's group, but published reports say that the group was Planned Parenthood. The incident allegedly took place in the ''mid '90s.'' Isn't it an odd coincidence that - prior to her appointments as communications director of the White House and, before that, of the Clinton-Gore Campaign - Ann Lewis served as vice president of Planned Parenthood from 1994-1995? According to Baker, the top officials of the ''woman's group'' were involved in the decision to release the information about the alleged assault to him for publication. It's hard to pin down the source of Baker's smear: He won't name the group or the lobbyist involved. All he does is accuse a member of Congress of a felony; in his lettre-de-cachet style, he won't say who or what or when it took place. But if published reports are correct and the group is, indeed, Planned Parenthood, the likelihood is that Lewis was involved in the decision to give Baker the green light to publish Baker denies ever speaking to Lewis directly. But she likely made a quiet phone call to her old buddies at Planned Parenthood and, presto, the information was en route to Baker and Salon.."
Insight Mag 1/25/99 Paul Rodrigues ".One of the latest twists in ongoing coverage of Rep. Dan Burton is a story recently "published" on the Internet by Webzine Salon. The story raises questions about the Indiana Republican's dual use of congressional and campaign funds to pay some employees.Several news organizations, including the Washington Post, seized on this latest allegation of wrongdoing plus others involving people who claim Burton has groped or otherwise made advances to several women over the years... Stepping aside from sexually related issues such as adultery or personal relationships between government employees and their political bosses, such as Colorado Gov. Roy Romer and Clinton, the issue of mixing personal and public behavior when it involves taxpayer funds raises legal issues and questions the press generally doesn't shirk from. But when it involves Democrats, the press appears to turn the other way or drops the story if there is no interest at home. An example of such unpursued questions involving a Democrat is found in Richard Gephardt of Missouri, the House minority leader. In the early 1990s, Gephardt had on his congressional payroll Robert Bauer, a prominent Washington lawyer who has done considerable work for the congressman going back a number of years. At one point, according to public records reviewed by Insight (see "A Matter of Ethics," March 4, 1996), Bauer was found to have received a congressional salary of about $1,200 a month at the same time he was being paid by Gephardt's campaign committee and representing the congressman before the Federal Election Commission over disputes involving Gephardt's failed 1988 presidential bid. Bauer, in response to Insight in 1996, denied he was an employee of Gephardt's congressional office despite the fact that the congressman signed monthly voucher receipts so stating, as well as congressional records showing he was an employee.."
Capitol Hill Blue 10/13/98 Daniel Harris Teresa Hampton ".Earlier this year, just days before a Florida Democratic activist began a campaign to plant the story with the media, a private investigator's report detailing a 30-year-old affair between then Illinois State Representative Henry Hyde and a married woman arrived at the White House, Capitol Hill Blue has learned. Clinton aides, including communications assistant Sidney Blumenthal, were ecstatic that they finally had some dirt on the grandfatherly Congressman from Illinois who would head up any possible impeachment hearings against the President. A short time later, news organizations in Florida, Washington and elsewhere in the country started getting calls from Norm Sommer, a 72-year-old retiree in Aventura, Florida, who wanted to tell them all about Hyde's affair..Besides the Times, the Boston Globe, Miami Herald, Nation Magazine and The Washington Post, among others, also turned down the story. Sammon then called Salon, a left-leaning Internet publication with close ties to Blumenthal and the Clinton White House. Salon Editor David Talbot, whose hatred of Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr is well-documented, jumped at the story over the objections of his staff. Although the Clinton White House denies any involvement in the story, Capitol Hill Blue has confirmed that Sommer's phone calls started just days after a private investigator's report on the Hyde affair was delivered to the White House and after White House aides offered the story to at least one major news network. White House sources say Blumenthal was so ecstatic when he learned that private investigators had confirmed Hyde's affair that he "talked about it to everyone" and walked around saying "Henry's got a babe." Blumnethal was advancing the President's trip to New York this weekend and could not be reached for comment..."
Salon 4/99 Joe Conason "...Instead of placing stricter controls on access to the national laboratories, however, the Reagan administration issued an executive order in 1987 that loosened controls so that scientific advances could be more easily commercialized by the private sector. That order also gave freer entry to foreign citizens and corporations. Then in 1988 an alarm arose from within the government: The General Accounting Office reported to Congress that security procedures to protect sensitive data at the national labs were fearfully lax, and needed immediate improvement...."
EO12591 (Reagan administration) Source: The provisions of Executive Order 12591 of Apr. 10, 1987, appear at 52 FR 13414, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 220, unless otherwise noted.By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, including the Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-502), the Trademark Clarification Act of 1984 (Public Law 98-620), and the University and Small Business Patent Procedure Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-517), and in order to ensure that Federal agencies and laboratories assist universities and the private sector in broadening our technology base by moving new knowledge from the research laboratory into the development of new products and processes, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Transfer of Federally Funded Technology. a. The head of each Executive department and agency, to the extent permitted by law, shall encourage and facilitate collaboration among Federal laboratories, State and local governments, universities, and the private sector, particularly small business, in order to assist in the transfer of technology to the marketplace. b. The head of each Executive department and agency shall, within overall funding allocations and to the extent permitted by law: ...Sec. 8. Relation to Existing Law. Nothing in this Order shall affect the continued applicability of any existing laws or regulations relating to the transfer of United States technology to other nations. The head of any Executive department or agency may exclude from consideration, under this Order, any technology that would be, if transferred, detrimental to the interests of national security...."
6/7/99 Salon David Moberg "... Now two journalists are hoping to widen those cracks. In "Henry Hyde's Moral Universe: Where More Than Time and Space are Warped" (Common Courage), Dennis Bernstein and Leslie Kean offer a catalog of Hydean hypocrisy, painting a canvas of Hyde's record that is broader than most people know -- and not one bit flattering. They provide some fascinating new details to expand on Salon's account, based on the first lengthy interview with Hyde's lover. They show the man who pleaded that "lying must have consequences" defending lying by his friend and hero from the Iran-Contra scandal, Oliver North, even when it involved North's deceiving Congress and the American people about illegal executive branch actions. The fervent defender of "the rule of law" when it came to Clintonian evasions about sex was willing to take the stand to defend lawbreaking by another Hyde hero, extremist anti-abortion leader Joseph Scheidler. This is not a full-fledged biography, but vigorous political pamphleteering from a leftist perspective. Rushed to print in three months (without enough care by the publisher to catch many annoying typos), it includes some new revelations, but it is valuable mainly for pulling together tawdry aspects of Hyde's record, many of which may be little known even if previously reported.The most serious charge against Hyde, which Bernstein and Kean ably summarize and bring up to date, concerns his role in the costly failure of an Illinois savings and loan of which Hyde was a member of the board of directors. Hyde's S&L debacle led to federal investigations and lawsuits, and even the staunchly Republican Chicago Tribune last fall called for an investigation of how Hyde managed to avoid any legal or financial consequences for the S&L's spectacular failure..."
Free Republic 7/20/99 Freeper Clarity "…The Los Angeles Police Department has today opened an official investigation of the possible illegal tape recording of a phone conversation by a reporter for Salon, the internet journal. Secret recording of telephone conversations violates California Penal Code section 632. Salon has been highly critical of Linda Tripp for secretly recording telephone conversations. Mr. Stein was reached by telephone today by Detective Frederickson [(310) 574-8441)] of the LAPD (West LA Division) and refused to discuss his "reporting methods." I spoke to the reporter (Jeff Stein) by telephone on July 11, 1999. An article he wrote was published on July 16, 1999. Upon its publication, I questioned the accuracy of his reporting. He responded to me in writing, "Watch it. I have a taped transcript of that conversation." Obviously, he knew I did not know that. In fact, the recording would show that my complaints about his reporting were exactly correct. Perhaps Mr. Stein will be willing to share the recording with us. In any case, the accuracy or not of his reporting is not at issue in the criminal investigation. It is his admitted violation of the California Penal Code that is under investigation…."
Ether Zone Online (http://etherzone.com) 8/1/99 Bob Momenteller "...Brief excerpts from a 168 report released on Wednesday, concluded there's no basis to charges that President Clinton's chief Whitewater accuser, David Hale, was paid off.... Hale alleges, under oath, that then-Governor Clinton pressured him to help secure an illegal $300,000 Small Business Administration loan. $50,000 to $60,000 from the illegal loan was funneled into the Clinton-McDougal cash-strapped Whitewater real estate development. The late Jim McDougal, one of Clinton's Whitewater partners, corroborated Hale's testimony. In a March 17, 1998 "Road To Hale" article, Salon charged while under FBI custody, Hale allegedly received payments from a bait-shop owner, Parker Dozhier. Dozhier received monthly payments as a stringer for the American Spectator magazine. The American Spectator Education Foundation, a non-profit group associated with the American Spectator magazine, received contributions from the Scaife Foundations. Richard Mellon Scaife is the head of the foundation. The fairy tale ending to all this of course, is that Richard Mellon Scaife bought Hale's testimony against Clinton. .....The basis of Salon's story was an eyewitness account from a Caryn Mann. Mann was a disgruntled ex-girl friend of Parker Dozhier. She gave Salon eyewitness details of the money being transferred between Parker and Hale..... She was also employed by a private investigative firm headed by two former Arkansas state troopers who undertook a 1996 photo-surveillance assignment for the National Enquirer of a Little Rock woman, not identified, seeking to learn whether she was having a romance with independent counsel Kenneth Starr. It turned out that man just looked like Starr. In a letter to the Justice Department, Hale's lawyer also claims that Mann was a "psychic, tarot card reader, and fortune teller" who claimed "to have knowledge of the last resting place of the remains of Jimmy Hoffa. Other than Mann's son, who would have been 13 years old at the time, Salon comes up empty handed in the creditable witness department for such serious allegations. Salon's two other concocted witnesses wanted to remain anonymous. Credible or not, U.S. Attorney, P.K. Holmes sent FBI agents to interview Mann. Mann told several news outlets, including the Washington Post, that the FBI visited her after a reporter for Salon contacted retired Senator David H. Pryor (D-Ark.). Salon contacted Senator Pryor on her behalf for assistance in getting the attention of Arkansas law enforcement officials. Former Senator David Pryor is the head of Clinton's legal defense fund.
Ether Zone Online (http://etherzone.com) 8/1/99 Bob Momenteller "...As we charged in our exclusive article in October of last year, "Salon created a story and then colluded with the head of Clinton's legal defense fund, former Arkansas Sen. David Pryor, to improperly instigate an investigation of fabricated allegations of witness-tampering." Salon was also given a free pass by the White House to the Clinton Justice Department. The department investigators were just a phone call away and bingo, they had the inside information on the progress of the Hale investigation. The investigation that they themselves orchestrated....To help promote Salon's left wing attack, Geraldo Rivera kept the story alive by promoting Salon's allegations night after night on his CNBC show. At the time, a full FBI investigation had been called for by Congressman DeLay on Salon. The investigation was to focus on this and the Hyde-Burton expose. Of course, the FBI investigation never materialized, much too political to handle. Indeed, had a legitimate investigation been given to the matter by either the DOJ or FBI, Salon's Editor in Chief, David Talbot, would be behind bars. Mark Levin of Landmark Legal made a stronger case against the White House and Salon. He wrote a report to the Justice Department's criminal division as well as the OIC. "I am not convinced that the current political leadership at the Justice Department is capable of putting the law before Mr. Clinton's political interests." Sadly, they still were not and still aren't. Salon continues to be a mouth piece for the White House and tends to sensationalize every political story with their left wing agenda. They do not report the news, but create it. Salon's chief Democratic backers, Hambrecht & Quist, continue to support their internet darling with a recent IPO and a $15 million dollar loan...."
Ether Zone Online (http://etherzone.com) 8/1/99 Bob Momenteller "...Once again, Salon cannot be taken as a serious news organization. Without exception, they are nothing more than a supermarket tabloid, disguised in corporate cloth. How long will Hambrecht & Quist continue to float this lost venture? We suspect as long as there is need for Hambrecht & Quist to fund a liberal platform in return for political favors in their investment world. William Hambrecht is a major donor to Bill Clinton and the DNC. The administration's open door policy on China has allowed this investment banking firm to profit in the supply of goods to the Peoples Liberation Army. Their latest venture in a $1.2 billion high tech silicon valley factory in Hong Kong is bound to keep the money rolling in and the favors at a high premium...."
Washington Post 10/22/99 Howard Kurtz "....The revelation [Hatfield] is the latest bizarre twist in the media's handling of a charge, based on three anonymous sources, that lacks any independent corroboration...... Salon and the Drudge Report were the first to publicize Hatfield's allegations. In fact, Salon helped put the story in play. Hatfield writes that he began investigating after an August gossip column in Salon reported a widely circulated e-mail claiming that a Texas judge had ordered Bush to perform community service "in exchange for expunging his record showing illicit drug use.".... Asked about its story this week on the Hatfield book, David Weir, Salon's senior vice president, said: "Salon, and the Internet generally, aren't really interested in the corporate-gatekeeper mode of deciding about stories.....Stephen Hess, a presidential scholar at the Brookings Institution, criticized the handling of the story. "The problem is that mainstream, distinguished publishers aren't checking these things," he said. "They aren't in the business of fact-checking." As for newspapers, "you wind up publishing a story because someone denies it, which strikes me as a pretty shabby ethic." ...."
The Washington Times 10/22/99 Hugh Aynesworth "..... A New York publishing company said it has halted publication of a new book that claims Texas Gov. George W. Bush was arrested in 1972 on a cocaine charge because the author hid the fact that he served five years in a Texas prison for hiring a hit man. St. Martin's Press, which had rushed the book by James Howard Hatfield into print three months early because of the salacious charges against the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination, said it no longer could trust the author.......Other details have emerged since news agencies began looking into Hatfield. For instance, Agence France-Presse reported there was a complicated media relationship between Salon and Hatfield, who was prompted to tack on the afterward after reading an Aug. 25 Salon column. The Salon story was based on a "tantalizing" e-mail titled, "News Tip: George Bush Drug Use," which was sent to the magazine's San Francisco office in the summer. After reading over the story, Hatfield then wrote his addendum based on three anonymous sources: a "high ranking advisor to Bush," "a longtime Bush friend" and a "former Yale classmate." The classmate, according to Hatfield, said the governor's arrest record was expunged in a "behind closed doors in the judge's chambers' kind of thing between the old man and one of his Texas cronies who owed him a favor." ....."
Christianity Today 11/99 Wendy Zoba "…..The mainstream press unquestioningly accepted Salon.com's flimsy "debunking" of the Columbine confession. ….. But the larger question is this: Why has Cullen's dubious assertion, based on incomplete reporting, so captured the imaginations of the media? …… In a Washington Post article (Oct. 14), Hanna Rosin took the controversy to new levels when she dismissed the encounter as a myth and then made the leap that "myth" alone is sufficient to animate the religious fervor of evangelicals, regardless of whether it is true. "It's the power of the story that counts," she wrote. "The truth is a trifle. . . . Should believers accept the literal truth, they'd be left with a hopeless equation." Mary Schmich and Eric Zorn echoed these thoughts in the Chicago Tribune (Oct. 20). "I suspect history will ultimately favor the Bernall myth over the Schnurr facts," Zorn wrote. "I'm not surprised," Schmich replied-conceding that Cassie's biography, She Said Yes, is "an interesting little book, even if the title is wrong." Leave aside, for the moment, the disparaging and demeaning implications behind these assumptions about believers-how are they different from Jesse Ventura saying "organized religion is a sham and a crutch for weak-minded people"? Neither Rosin nor Zorn nor Schmich, let alone Cullen, has proven the debunking case. The writers settle for the Jefferson County Sheriff Office's opinions about something that the investigators themselves claim to have no stake in. In two separate interviews, information officer Steve Davis told me, "We are not in a position to say it didn't happen" and "We have no reason or desire to prove or disprove this story." …..But many people can't seem to grasp that truth is not a "trifle" to evangelicals-myths and legends are not what animate our confession. Truth is everything. What really happened in the library that terrible day may be beyond the scope of any investigation. But Cassie's "yes" carries sufficient testimony not to be dismissed out of hand. As for what her life means to the religious community, it takes tremendous courage to say yes to God in the face of death; it takes courage of another kind to keep saying yes to God while living every day in an incredulous and jaded culture……."
Antiwar.com 8/30/99 Justin Raimondo "…In the pages of none other than Salon.com, Lucianne and her son Jonah accused the denizens of Freerepublic of having committed verbal hate crimes against not only homosexuals, but also against Jews. In an article by Jeff Stein, "Free for All at Free Republic," Lucianne let loose at the Freepers. And the special cruelty of it was that she was given a platform to do it by the same people who had excoriated the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy out to get the President and mercilessly mocked Lucianne, Linda Tripp, and other "Clinton-bashers" - as its headline-writers invariably described people they didn't like. Salon gleefully reported that Freerepublic's hits were down to half of what they had been a year ago (maybe, but still higher than Salon!) and more seriously gave vent to Lucianne's viperish charges, uttered in her characteristically "salty" manner. As Salon "reported": ….."He's a mean shit," says Goldberg of Robinson, once her partner in exposing Clinton crimes. She launched her own Web site, Lucianne.com, taking "2,000" Freepers with her, she says. "I am not anti-abortion, I am not Y2K either. I'm not a homophobe, I'm not an anti-Semite - Christ ... I have a Jewish husband ... I have four people who work for me and half of them are gay. I mean, this is ridiculous."…."
Antiwar.com 8/30/99 Justin Raimondo "…Yes, it's true: the poison of political correctness so permeates our culture that even the conservative movement is saturated with it. Of course, many on the Right are not "antiabortion," but they take pains to point out that neither are they pro-abortion either. Such subtleties are lost on Lucianne, however, who merely slings the whole barrel of mud at her former friends and allies without making too many fine distinctions…….But it is not hard to miss the meaning of the ugly charge of anti-Semitism, hurled without proof, context, or any reference to a particular individual. This is the traditional smear technique, which has always been used against conservatives by the Left, here employed by the Respectable Right against allegedly dangerous radicals. It was a cheap and slimy trick, a reckless charge offered without a shred of evidence or documentation, just the baldest of accusations. What is going on here? …."
WASH POST VIA ETHERZONE NEWS WIRES 2/3/2000 "…..SAVAGE, WHO was stricken with fever, says he put a pen in his mouth, handed it to the candidate and asked for an autograph. A gay journalist who was working as a volunteer in Bauer's Iowa campaign, Savage also says he licked the doorknobs, telephones and coffee cups in the Des Moines office - all because he despises Bauer's fervent opposition to gay rights and gay marriage. "To do what he did - wanting to infect people with the flu, and God knows what other germs he was carrying - is just inexcusable behavior," Bauer's Iowa campaign manager, Loras Schulte, said yesterday. "It's reprehensible. Had he directed that just at me, I would have remembered my Christian admonition to turn the other cheek. But I had men, women and children working in the office in very close quarters." ……Savage also says he voted in the Iowa caucuses, despite the fact that he lives in Seattle. State Republican officials in Des Moines have asked the local prosecutor to launch a criminal investigation. Polk County Attorney John Sarcone confirmed that he is looking into the matter…. "
New York Post 2/1/00 Rod Dreher "....Loras Schulte, Bauer's Iowa campaign director, is now planning to file a criminal voter-fraud complaint against Savage. He is investigating lodging assault charges against the columnist, who bragged online that he tried to spread the flu by licking doorknobs and coffee cups. Schulte is also fighting the flu. A civil suit against Salon.com, which published Savage's snot-smeared undercover account of working for Bauer, is also being discussed among the Iowa Bauerites who were the gay radical's targets. .... He says legal and financial penalties "are the only things these people respect." The man's got that right. And he also would appear to have a good case. Republicans unearthed Savage's voter-registration form, in which he certifies he is an Iowa resident. The address Seattle resident Savage gave on the form is for the Des Moines hotel in which he had been staying for a week. According to the Iowa attorney general's office, if Savage can't prove he signed that form honestly, intending to establish permanent residency in Iowa, he could face up to $7,500 in fines and five years in jail. The assault charge is a tad more complicated, Schulte believes. If merely spitting on someone in Iowa fits the legal definition of simple assault, how could spreading saliva intending to cause medical injury to others possibly be legit? And get this: If you assault someone in Iowa because of their religious or political affiliation (among other reasons), you violate the state's hate-crimes statute. Simple assault thus becomes serious assault, which is punishable by up to a year in jail. Danny Boy's smirky admission in print that he wanted to infect Bauer and his followers with the flu to get back at them for being members of the "religious right" looks pretty damning now. That's not journalism, boys, that's evidence....."
NYPost.com 1/28/2000 Rod Dreher "….. Salon, ever a trailblazer, has just gone beyond character assassination against conservative politicians, and has begun going after them with germ warfare. This week in Salon, syndicated sex columnist Dan Savage wrote of his undercover stint with the Gary Bauer campaign in Iowa. While lying in a Des Moines hotel room suffering from the flu, Savage caught the candidate on TV speaking out against gay marriage. That did it. The openly gay Savage decided his mission was clear: "Get close enough to Bauer to give him the flu, which, if I am successful, will lay him flat just before the New Hampshire primary." Savage regales readers with tales of coughing on everything in the Bauer office, even licking doorknobs when nobody was looking. He sucked on a pen he later handed to the candidate. "My plan was a little malicious -- even a little mean-spirited," Savage wrote. "But those same words describe the tactics used by Bauer and the rest of the religious right against gays and lesbians." My, what tidy moral reasoning. Hate your opponent's rhetoric? Then do your dead-level best to put him and his staff in the hospital. Ugly times, after all, call for ugly tactics. Bauer's Iowa office was shell-shocked by the news. "We just kind of knew him as Dan," said Iowa campaign director Loras Schulte. "This is trash-can journalism at its worst. I have no idea what he may have tried to infect us with." Indeed, it's hard to think of a stunt that could better play into the hands of authentic homophobes. Think of it: a crusading gay avenger secretly tries to pass on a virus to Christian conservatives, and is rewarded for his efforts by a trendy media outlet. It's the kind of fevered propaganda you'd expect from the crazy "God hates fags" people….."
New York Post 1/28/2000 Rod Dreher "….DURING the Clinton impeachment battle, the online magazine Salon gratuitously revealed that leading House Republican Henry Hyde had an extramarital affair 30 years ago. Was that playing dirty? "Frankly, yes," the mag's editors conceded in an editorial. "But ugly times call for ugly tactics." Salon, ever a trailblazer, has just gone beyond character assassination against conservative politicians, and has begun going after them with germ warfare. This week in Salon, syndicated sex columnist Dan Savage wrote of his undercover stint with the Gary Bauer campaign in Iowa. While lying in a Des Moines hotel room suffering from the flu, Savage caught the candidate on TV speaking out against gay marriage. That did it. The openly gay Savage decided his mission was clear: "Get close enough to Bauer to give him the flu, which, if I am successful, will lay him flat just before the New Hampshire primary." Savage regales readers with tales of coughing on everything in the Bauer office, even licking doorknobs when nobody was looking. He sucked on a pen he later handed to the candidate. "My plan was a little malicious -- even a little mean-spirited," Savage wrote. "But those same words describe the tactics used by Bauer and the rest of the religious right against gays and lesbians." My, what tidy moral reasoning. Hate your opponent's rhetoric? Then do your dead-level best to put him and his staff in the hospital. Ugly times, after all, call for ugly tactics. Bauer's Iowa office was shell-shocked by the news. …."We just kind of knew him as Dan," said Iowa campaign director Loras Schulte. "This is trash-can journalism at its worst. I have no idea what he may have tried to infect us with." …."
New York Post 2/15/00 Paul Tharp "…..Being modern online publishers isn't stopping rivals Salon.com and Slate.com from old-fashioned gutter fighting. In a throwback to the days of yellow journalism, the two editors of the online 'zines are in a war of words, exchanging insults ranging from "crap" to "kept man." They're also accusing each other of inflating their readerships. At stake is who'll hold the crown as the most widely read magazine online -- and thus reap the most advertising dollars. Salon.com, a public company with demanding investors, appears to be leading the 'zine pack, fueled by buzz about its edgy and sexy coverage. Slate.com, which is owned by Bill Gates' Microsoft, prefers to dissect the political establishment, and doesn't pull any punches. But its fare doesn't always catch the public's fancy the way the sexier material in Salon.com does. Their rivalry escalated yesterday following Salon.com's claim that it's getting 3 million readers a month. That prompted Slate's editor Michael Kinsley to say the numbers are fishy. "We have theories where they come up with their numbers," Kinsley said, which doesn't preclude making them up. ….."
[inside] media 6/7/00 Greg Lindsay "….. Salon.com fired 13 people on Wednesday, gutting its full-time media and entertainment staff in the process. Among those purged: media columnist Sean Elder, movie reviewer Charles Taylor, books editor Craig Seligman, New York correspondent Craig Offman and travel editor Don George. The eight others include advertising and sales staff based in San Francisco and Seattle. The Seattle office will be shut down completely. The firings come as part of the company's belt-tightening. Salon said it will cut its operating budget by about 20 percent for Fiscal Year 2001 through staff reduction, fewer freelance contributors and smaller marketing and other operating expenses. ….."
DRUDGE 7/14/00 "……The White House has once again been accused of leaking confidential information on a woman who claimed President Clinton groped her off the Oval Office. …… SALON.COM's detailed expose on Kathleen Willey's finances ["New bankruptcy documents make the murky finances of Ken Starr's key witness look even shadier" -- July12] raised suspicions after writer Bruce Shapiro quoted from Willey's "application" for a volunteer position at the White House. "Are we witnessing another episode of Filegate?" Willey charged Friday morning. "It is no secret that SALON magazine is the mouthpiece of the Clinton administration. The important question is: How did SALON obtain confidential financial documents and FBI 302 forms which are not in the public domain?" …….Willey pointed to "excerpts from secret FBI documents" which SALON cites -- documents that have not been part of any court proceeding. "This information is not subject to freedom of information, is not available to the public, and was made available to lawyers for the president," Willey told the DRUDGE REPORT. ……"