The White House appears to have found the solution to Sarah Palin’s problem with pesky press and embarrassing interviews. The White House posted Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan’s first “interview” on its website and decided it would be better without an actual journalist.
The White House press was interested in who got the first interview with Kagan who is facing challenges from both the left and right as well as questions over her views on terrorism and free speech. Kagan spoke at length and at ease about her childhood, parents and professional career — never fielding a single tough question or addressing a single pressing topic. At the White House briefing a reporter immediately noted “It appears that Solicitor General Kagan did an interview yesterday right after the president’s announcement. You’ve now posted that on the White House Web site. Who did the interview? And can I have one?”
Press Secretary Robert Gibbs responded “I think it’s — I think it’s on the website if you want to see it.” The reporter then pressed further and said “So a White House staffer interviewing her.” Gibbs responded yes. When the reporter asked whether Kagan has indicated her willingness to speak to a real live journalist, Gibbs responded “She has — she’s not told me that, no.”
The reporter simply responded “Tell her we’re deeply frustrated.”
In the past, nominees have given few interviews and have been largely kept away from the press, which is a bad tradition. While allowing off-the-record interviews with Senators, the American people are prevented from seeing these nominees questioned by independent journalists. In combination with the Ginsburg Rule (which allows nominees to refuse to answer many questions on their views), this press ban allows the White House to block any substantive discussion of how a nominee is likely to change the Court. Unlike Senators who radically distort or steadfastly block questions, reporters have the ability to press a nominee on such issues. After all, the public should have someone asking serious questions questions as some point before giving a person lifetime tenure on a Court of nine.
For the full story, click here.
31 thoughts on “Kagan’s Palin Moment? White House Does Away With Journalists For Kagan’s First Interview as a Nominee”
Hallo im Sex-Talk.
Dieser Sex-Talk bietet dir die Alternative heisse jungs und natürlich vieles mehr,sicherlich auch sexuellen Vorlieben ausleben
Hier im besten Sex-Talk findest du heisse jungs Aufregend chatten
Du suchst Blind Date , sicher bist du hier genau richtig.Gut,auf was wartest du?
Heiße Live Chats männer mädchen ,sofort anmelden .
Suchst du jemand aus WienerNeustadt, oder von Halle, vieleicht von Recklinghausen , vieleicht aus Gland, vieleicht aus Waadt? Sicher kein Problem.!
Kagan: No need for court review of rogue juror
In a disturbing revelation for a Supreme Court nominee, Elena Kagan took millions of dollars from the Saudis as dean of Harvard Law School and a chunk of it reportedly came from 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden.
The bin Laden family has donated millions of dollars to the Ivy League university over the years, including generous endowments for the school’s Islamic law program and others to finance scholarships for students from Muslim countries. The family has a fondness for Harvard because Osama bin Laden’s brother, Abdullah, received a master’s degree from the school in the 1990s and a doctorate in 2000.
When Kagan took over as dean of the law school in 2003, she launched an aggressive and unprecedented fundraising campaign that raked in a whopping $476.5 million, the most lucrative in the law school’s history. Renowned as a prolific fundraiser, Kagan was tapped to head the law school after spending a few years as a professor there when her job in the Clinton White House ended. In addition to the $476.5 million generated by the targeted campaign—dubbed “Setting the Standard”—Kagan helped raise an extra $60 million for the Harvard Law School Fund.
A chunk of the cash came from the Saudis—and probably the bin Ladens—who have bankrolled many key programs at the Cambridge Massachusetts school over the years. In fact, Harvard has accepted so much cash from the bin Ladens that the Cambridge City Council passed a resolution calling upon the university to donate compensation money for victims of the 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Harvard officials refused.
Kagan’s Saudi/bin Laden money connection probably served as an inspiration in protecting the Saudi kingdom against a lawsuit for financing the 2001 terror attacks. Thousands of family members of 9/11 victims sued Saudi Arabia and several members of its royal family for actively aiding in financing the attacks through front groups posing as charities. As Solicitor General, Kagan blocked the lawsuit, citing the “potentially significant foreign-relations consequences of subjecting another sovereign state to suit.”
Another skeleton in Kagan’s closet is her financial ties to Goldman Sachs, the global investment firm embroiled in a major fraud scandal. For four years Kagan worked as an “advisor” at the Wall Street titan that donates generously to Democrats. She received a $10,000 annual “stipend” for her advice even though she was quite busy at the time raising money at Harvard and serving as dean of its law school.
Need another audience to pander? I guess the democrats are going to be announcing something that you and your group disagrees with and that why you are here. Or it could be that you are just keeping in practice of being as ass wipe for the tea baggers.
Because you obviously missed the point about this being a free speech area and the continuous drubbing the radical right get around here. They are allowed to spout their fascist propaganda brainwashed bullshit and others with the capacity for rational independent thought are allowed to rip them to shreds over their inaccuracies, errors and tactics.
People of all political persuasions can speak here. They can also suffer the repercussions of doing so if their statements and assertions are built on foundations of sand.
One of the great right wing lies is that anyone who opposes right wing comments taking over the comments section of newspapers and blogs is “a paid operative”. There is nothing to this charge, but then there is nothing to Glenn Beck and The Quitter from Wasilla either.
Mr. Turley is a very smart man, but his blog is a right wing drawing board because Mr. Turley is too lazy as a thinker and does not understand that his smarmy jokes and suggestions are not real humor.
Mr. Turley uses what you internet types call “snark” and the right wingers pounce.
Yeats: “The best lack all conviction, while the worst like quitter Palin and crybaby Beck are full of passionate intensity.
Strange to think of Mr. Turley helping to destroy the country he loves so well, just for his moment of fame.
“Right wingers” and paid DNC operatives.
I repeat that it is ridiculous how many right wingers take over comment sections.
Oops! My bad. I see an interview was done. And very well done!
Well, that about cinches it for me. Prof. Turley has three posts in one day about how bad Ms. Kagan would be for the Supremes, and Bdaman has eight (so far) posts stating the same.
President Obama must have it right – as he often does.
I notice Prof. Turley was not invited on the Olbermann or Maddow shows to give his opinion on Ms. Kagan. Curious, no? If they are so one sided, I wonder why Prof. Turley continues to conduct interviews with them.
If you’re referring to my comment above about the Neocons, I am a Progressive, not a right winger, and I NEVER watch Fox News. I want the press to do a thorough investigation of this woman and ferret out all of these rumors, but you needn’t worry about google. It is stripped clean of all offensive comments by this White House, as necessary, just as when Bush held the office.
It sounds as though you would like to do the same with Professor Turley’s blog. Keep it pure and positive to your cause. That’s quite interesting for a Democrat. You sound like a DNC employee.
Comments are closed.