DNC consults lawyers after Drudge Report story on Dean

The Democratic National Committee consulted its attorneys Monday after a story posted by online heavyweight Matt Drudge claimed that DNC chairman Howard Dean intervened in New Orleans' recent mayoral race, RAW STORY can reveal.

In an exclusive Sunday evening, The Drudge Report claimed that Dean threw his support behind mayoral candidate and sitting Lieutenant Governor Mitch Landrieu (D-LA) over sitting mayor Ray Nagin. DNC Communications director Karen Finney said the report was "absolutely false."

Finney told RAW STORY Monday she had just gotten off the phone with Joe Sandler of Sandler, Reiff & Young, the committee's attorney, and says the DNC is exploring legal options. A second DNC staffer confirmed the account.

"I have called our lawyer to see what if any legal actions we may have," Finney remarked. "The DNC does not as a policy get involved in Democratic primaries."

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/DNC_consults_lawyers_after_Drudge_Report_0522.html

for making up shit and eventually lose his bullshit website.

"The DNC does not as a policy get involved in Democratic primaries"

(in hopes that the story is picked up and quoted widely)

Or are you joking?

I was looking for "as yet have a policy" or "does not have a policy"

My error. Thanks :hi:

...it looks to have some punctuation is missing.

I think it should say, "The DNC does not,(comma) as a policy,(comma) get involved in Democratic primaries."

A lot of people have said that I use too much punctuation, but I find it almost amazing that so many people, even here at DU, don't seem to know how or when to use commas and other punctuation. (period):evilgrin:

It's an annoying rule because it does muddy meaning, so I get around it by using em dashes. I would have written " -- as a policy -- "

I should have added that I was C+ or maybe a B- student in English class. That's what make me crazy about the people here who don't use any punctuation, and usually only on giant paragraph.

or oppose any candidate in the primaries, nor influence the race in any way.

The 'as a policy' phrasing is not as clear as it could/should be, IMO.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

drudge, i mean...

He's such low-life parasite, he needs to be taken down, if not totally, at least enough so that he remembers he can't just make this sort of crap up.

Let's give them a real reason to hate that industry. Sue Drudge and his ilk out of business.

...to figure out who put Drudge up to this falsehood, and then put both Drudge and his source through the wringer. There's no way Drudge didn't know he was promulgating a lie.

Drudge may even have to sell his hat.

Why is this even news? The media and government lie to us---,,,as a rule---,,,so much so that the country as a whole is often divided about what constitutes reality. There are so many of the lies I'm sure we all wish would be challenged. So why bother with this which seems so trivial? Am I really missing something significant? :shrug:

It's part of a larger strategy to try to dupe evangelical blacks into voting against godless liberals. Or rather, create the impression that they're doing this to help "explain" why exit polls don't match "ofishyl vote counts."

Sure, they should sue a few neofascist members of the Euphemedia too. Perhaps they'll make Drudge a pilot project.

But with Drudge they're also sure to get some buzz about it. And no damaging pushback. Raising his profile as the martyred face of right-wing media can only help.

And it could also help nip this latest election theft tactic in the bud.

==

...controls the debate." We can't re-take control of the Government, until we control the debate.

If you want to ever regain control of the Government of this country, influential RW liars, like Drudge, must be eliminated by whatever legal means we have.

This would allow "us" to get dragged into another distraction where we are anything but in control. It is reactive not proactive. Really, I do take your point. And I think it leads to a more interesting discussion than this incident, namely, how exactly do we take control of the debate? How do we lead our country to reject, on its face, any further elections that are not verifiable? How do we withdraw our Consent and complicity in a broken system operating without regard for laws (see 750 signing statements, domestic spying, free speech zones, lost presumption of innocence, etc.)? We are not a Free People. Peaceful revolution is necessary, NOW! This is the debate we must control.

Blueprint For Peaceful Revolution

I'll leave you party hearties to worry about Drudge; I couldn't care less.

The real sin is that the party is so desperate for elected bodies (and corporate cash!) that it can't weed out its right wing flops, from Nagin to Lieberman. Get some control over these conservative stinkpots, would you?

Raw's link to it isn't working for me.

http://drudgereport.com/flash5no.htm