« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Jennings: Political Briefings Just to "Thank" Agency Employees
The scheme was simple: dispatch political aides from the White House to agencies throughout the government and make sure political appointees there knew which Republican members of Congress were faltering. There was a line, however, that ought not to be (openly) crossed. Political appointees got a "not-so-subtle message about helping endangered Republicans," but they were not given explicit directions. That would be a blatant Hatch Act violation.
Karl Rove's aide Scott Jennings understood the game. That's why when he briefed (pdf) employees at the General Services Administration early this year (see a sample slide above), he knew to keep things at the not-so-subtle level -- but no more. From The Washington Post:
At [the briefing's] completion, GSA Administrator Lurita Alexis Doan asked how GSA projects could be used to help "our candidates," according to half a dozen witnesses. The briefer, J. Scott Jennings, said that topic should be discussed "off-line," the witnesses said. Doan then replied, "Oh, good, at least as long as we are going to follow up...."
Today, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) took advantage of Jennings appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee to question him about the briefings. And Jennings, like Rove's former aide Sara Taylor, was right on message.
The talking points, it is painfully apparent from both Jennings' and Taylor's testimony, involve heavy recycling of "thank employees," "informational," and "political landscape." As in Jennings from today when Kennedy asked if he thought his briefings would help Republican candidates:
"I felt that my briefings would help boost the morale of appointees and serve to thank them for their service to the president and give them information about the political landscape for which they were trying to enact the president’s agenda."
And here's Taylor from last month:
"These briefings were informative. They were meant to thank employees. They were meant to share with them what the president was doing and their role. And given my unique role within the White House and given the fact that many of these people had worked in politics in one way, shape or form and had an interest, I would oftentimes share my knowledge and my viewpoint about the political landscape of the country."
It's also apparent from Jennings' and Taylor's testimony that they want to avoid admitting that individual candidates were discussed at these briefings. It took Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) four persistent minutes of questioning to get Taylor to admit that. And even then she didn't abandon her precious lexicon: "it's very hard to talk about the landscape if you don't talk about the people who are the stars in the show." Today, Jennings allowed that individual candidates "may have been discussed." Well, I guess it's good, then, that he had several briefing slides that listed the candidates he "may have" discussed.
But the briefings didn't cross the line of the Hatch Act, he said. He also said he can't remember Doan asking about helping "our candidates."
Comments (54)
C-9-2 wrote on August 2, 2007 6:12 PM:Why oh why did not one Senator ask if Rove (or anyone other than his lawyers) had either rehearsed or coached Jennings for his testimony?
They established that he spent hours preparing. And Arlen Spector established (in his mind, anyway) that Jennings' burden of having to testify was helping the terrorists.
So who helped him prepare and be so precisely on message.
Merrimarr wrote on August 2, 2007 6:22 PM:Yes, C-9-2, somebody is certainly rehearsing these people. But we will never know who. They learned from the Iran-Contra episode to never admit anything, never remember anything and to stonewall everything! And it's been effective.
Clem Yeobright wrote on August 2, 2007 6:39 PM:"I know for a fact that both democrats and republicans MAY have been mentioned ..."
Does it get any sillier than that?
RW wrote on August 2, 2007 7:24 PM:I see the house of cards falling however, bad memories are adding up, it did with Watergate what is needed are the 50000 emails
DiFi Fan wrote on August 2, 2007 7:34 PM:C 92, Didn't Scott J. Bloch at the Office of Special Counsel determine that Lurita Doan violated the Hatch Act? If Doan did, didn't Jennings too since they gave a joint GSA presentation? Am I missing something?
Yossarian wrote on August 2, 2007 7:48 PM:What good is it going to do to question a small fry like this guy? I mean this is just a waste of time. Why not put all the energy into getting Rove to testify? Cheney, Rove, Libby all these guys are just crooks. Go this site and watch how Rummy and Cheney came to power more than 3 decades ago. I believe that both Bush-I and Shrub were/are basically Manchurian candidates. Rummy and Cheney are the true power handlers.
Yossarian wrote on August 2, 2007 7:50 PM:Sorry forgot to add the link above:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/view/
go to video two there and watch it all the way.
Jerkstore wrote on August 2, 2007 8:22 PM:I like the sideways attorney-glances by this Matt Foley-esque schlub. What a weasel.
Anonymous wrote on August 2, 2007 8:40 PM:It drives me crazy each time these loyal Bushies talk about "serving the president." No no no! They are sworn to defend the Constitution and serve the American people!
It's no coincidence that all of these pod people make that mistake.
TheraP wrote on August 2, 2007 8:48 PM:Exactly, Anon.
Where in the oath of office, where in the Constitution does it suggest anything about a king?
Seems to me that our questions should go back and back to the Constitution. And ask "how does that serve the constitution?" Or "and how is that not a disservice to the Constitution?"
Maybe if we make the Constitution the standard (what a concept!), they will finally "get it."
Sully18 wrote on August 2, 2007 9:00 PM:Politics is an amazing business.I commend both Jennings and his attorney for their ability to keep a straight face under such an hysterically funny performance.
Georgette Orwell wrote on August 2, 2007 9:00 PM:However,to me it is not funny,ha ha,but funny strange.Or maybe even sad with a bit of ugly on the side.
Code word sound as in:"If several lies are delivered in a Senate hearing,is there really any sound?"
How does it serve the Constitution *and* the American people, who are the ones paying us to for work them?
Wretched Refuse wrote on August 2, 2007 9:22 PM:Just like the Secret Service, the GOP are duty bound to serve the President.
Richard L. Adlof wrote on August 2, 2007 9:55 PM:Yes believe it or not, the Secret Service's oath is NOT to the Constitution.
They are the SS for the Silver Shirts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Legion
I thought all these jack_holes were saying that they 'servicing' the President not 'serving' . . . Hmmm . . . Do you think that I am experiencing early symptoms of Gone-lawless Disease?
moondancer wrote on August 2, 2007 11:08 PM:Id like to "thank" all of you here at the GSA,State dept,USAID.etc for coming out today...
Anonymous wrote on August 2, 2007 11:17 PM:my lovely assistants' are passing out gift bags.. in them you will find verbal hand grenades to toss at dems. Also vouchers for earmarks to use... well you get the idea...
Since waterboarding is perfectly legal and not torture under those quaint Geneva conventions, I would suggest we give Gonzo and Karl Rove a little waterboarding so we can get a straigt answer out of these guys. Then flush an Ann Coulter book down the toilet for its devestating psychologicaql effect.
Anonymous wrote on August 2, 2007 11:18 PM:Since waterboarding is perfectly legal and not torture under those quaint Geneva conventions, I would suggest we give Gonzo and Karl Rove a little waterboarding so we can get a straigt answer out of these guys. Then flush an Ann Coulter book down the toilet for its devestating psychologicaql effect.
wombat wrote on August 2, 2007 11:19 PM:Since waterboarding is perfectly legal and not torture under those quaint Geneva conventions, I would suggest we give Gonzo and Karl Rove a little waterboarding so we can get a straigt answer out of these guys. Then flush an Ann Coulter book down the toilet for its devestating psychologicaql effect.
Helen Rainier wrote on August 2, 2007 11:30 PM:They must hate the agency employees if they "thank you" by subjecting them to the horror of a "political" briefing.
That sounds slightly insane and depraved to me.
Helen Rainier wrote on August 2, 2007 11:34 PM:They must hate the agency employees if they "thank you" by subjecting them to the horror of a "political" briefing.
That sounds slightly insane and depraved to me.
Belle wrote on August 3, 2007 12:25 AM:Slide 13 showing the targeted governors casts Gov. Blanco's allegations that post-Katrina she was sidelined and Louisiana and Mississippi were treated much different in a whole other light. Guess she wasn't "whining" after all, huh?
TheraP wrote on August 3, 2007 1:25 AM:Georgette Orwell @ 9:00 - Exactly!
How does it serve the Constitution *and* the American People, the Fourth Branch - your employer?
Marc wrote on August 3, 2007 6:39 AM:@Wretched Refuse:
Comment concerning Secret Service swears an OATH to the Preisdent is not accurate. The Secret Service is frun by the Department of Treasury and swear an otha to the Constitiution not any particualr President. The Protective Detail protects not just the REPUB's in power but also they protect former PRE Clinton under the same charter that they protect PRES Bush. These men and woman place there lives on the line to protect our current/former leadership and families. They are NOT protected under Exec Privilige so can be forced to testify by a Federal Judge (research Clinton). So I think these men and women deserve a little more respect then you have shown. I fully agree with you that the GOP and our Administration Swore and Oath to serve the PEOPLE ..and not any given person/party ..seems that over the past years that line has gotten swept aside.
pocket wrote on August 3, 2007 7:58 AM:JOSH and,
For those that have small children, if you have not already heard, there is a Fisher-Price recall because of LEAD in the surface paint of toys.
Basically, one more to add to the China defective product problem.
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml07/07257.html
Glinda wrote on August 3, 2007 8:14 AM:Keep in mind that could potentially be mixed in with the colorants used to molded colored plastic parts. And, at this point, I wouldn't be suprised to hear that lead (and chromium)is in the colored plastic molded parts as well. They just haven't gotten around to testing them for lead yet is all. Chromium is not typically tested for, though.
Is it my imagination or is this guy just not very bright? He keeps digging deeper with the shovel that Kennedy has politely handed him. He only uses the "no recollection" canard once or twice.
Steve5117 wrote on August 3, 2007 8:40 AM:I suppose that the young college republicans groups have provided these not so bright, but fiercely loyal Bushies.
Scott is obviously a whore to the perks of being close to the big players of the administration. I'll wager he used his WH email when he wanted to impress those outside the inner circle.
foggylady wrote on August 3, 2007 9:11 AM:This moonfaced flying monkey looked so much more uncomfortable than the previous Rove-bots... and had to look at his crib notes often.
that, at least, was a nice thing to see.
Jeez,,,,they all do fit a physical pattern, don't they? What is it with the lack of hair on the guys?
Bleeeech....
Billy Pilgrim wrote on August 3, 2007 9:31 AM:fogglady
Whey are all the knee-jerk Rovebots so physially repulsive? Might be because they are all are completely lacking of the attributes which distinguish a certain class of organisms as human beings. In fact, they are not even organisms. They are mechanical devices which can be programmed to perform the most despicable abominations without a moment's hesitation.
Toxophilite wrote on August 3, 2007 9:53 AM:foggylady and billy
He's not physically repulsive. In fact, if he lost about 50 pounds and developed a spine, he might even be a hunk. I think Rove's people just don't often get out, see the sunlight, and participate in a little physical activity. You know-normal people activities away from the paranoid power-mongering of the White House. What's that song about mushrooms?
whidbeygrl wrote on August 3, 2007 11:04 AM:I think the **saying** about mushrooms applies to us..
Anonymous wrote on August 3, 2007 4:18 PM:we are kept in the dark and fed bullshit....
As for the physical similarities of the Loyal Bushies, it has been decided by dear Leaders Cheney and Rove that the males should have the genetic purity of being short, over-weight, sweaty, porcine, and pasty-faced, while the women should have blonde hair and large breasts. This is political plan of breeding for a Republican majority after the Rapture or nulcear holocaust.
Rodney wrote on August 3, 2007 4:22 PM:Using a Bush administration interpretation of the law, a mugger has done nothing wrong if he merely displays his gun and suggests that the victim hand over his wallet and watch.
Bob wrote on August 3, 2007 9:23 PM:I've been wondering, with all of the talk about executive privelege, has it ever been invoked for reasons other than trying to cover up a crime or unethical conduct. I have only seen or read about it being invoked when scandal hits the President (Watergate, Iran-Contra, Clinton's pardons and the entire Bush administration). I'm just curious if anyone can find an instance of it being legitimately invoked.
Anonymous wrote on August 3, 2007 9:24 PM:I've been wondering, with all of the talk about executive privelege, has it ever been invoked for reasons other than trying to cover up a crime or unethical conduct. I have only seen or read about it being invoked when scandal hits the President (Watergate, Iran-Contra, Clinton's pardons and the entire Bush administration). I'm just curious if anyone can find an instance of it being legitimately invoked.
uhesxr ozcwm wrote on September 5, 2007 1:27 PM:uhqlcktx vyztfjhi rozm gnepk jsvqctux zlegacbqx knti
jawcxz zsoyj wrote on September 5, 2007 1:29 PM:ywkt thwcvpol vtgpbfrhq zckp dpwzl vwbelg oqsi http://www.rczxfjh.rufvctlz.com
pmqjos iynfgv wrote on September 5, 2007 1:30 PM:roxcyza pudbwka wuarsyv vuzkgpot corphdixv meaqhpnzy vhpn fluhsjky qaedtnp
pqnjkmlr dysbancl wrote on September 5, 2007 1:32 PM:lobq tpkcuoad fhsb elirnbwgt uzgmpw wgqekusra aoncwie [URL=http://www.nibwfkdr.athidugv.com]eswk jtqfekho[/URL]
1995 saturn sc1 timing chain problems wrote on September 19, 2007 2:15 PM:Good site. Thanks.
1995 saturn sc1 timing chain problems wrote on September 19, 2007 2:15 PM:Good site. Thanks.
1998 jeep wrangler brake light fuse location wrote on September 19, 2007 11:48 PM:Cool site. Thank you!!!
antique wardrobe trunks wrote on September 25, 2007 10:23 PM:Nice site. Thank you:-)
architectural signage systems portfolio wrote on September 26, 2007 4:53 AM:Cool site. Thank you.
battery powered wheelchairs wrote on September 27, 2007 11:15 PM:Cool site. Thanks.
bed and breakfast lake geneva wi wrote on September 28, 2007 4:56 AM:Very good site. Thanks:-)
bed and breakfast lake geneva wi wrote on September 28, 2007 4:56 AM:Very good site. Thanks:-)
belkin hi speed usb 20 firewire pci card wrote on September 28, 2007 7:15 AM:Good site. Thanks!!!
bernard wrote on September 28, 2007 10:27 AM:Good site. Thanks!!!
breast prosthesis austin tx wrote on September 29, 2007 11:56 PM:Good site. Thank you:-)
broad street run wrote on September 30, 2007 3:24 AM:Very good site. Thanks:-)
broad street run wrote on September 30, 2007 3:24 AM:Very good site. Thanks:-)
building construction new tool wrote on September 30, 2007 9:14 AM:Good site. Thanks!
free sheet music for a alto saxaphone wrote on November 21, 2007 1:53 PM:Nice site. Thanks!!!
power miter saws wrote on November 22, 2007 12:25 AM:Good site. Thanks.