How Karl Rove’s top hatchet man got his McCain propaganda on Politico (this is good)

Sunday Oct. 12, 2008 08:27 EDT

Boys’ night out: “The Politico guys,” Rove’s top disciple and how our press corps works

--Glenn Greenwald

TIM Griffin has long been one of Karl Rove’s closest “protégés” and has been at the epicenter of many of the most significant episodes of Republican sleaze over the last decade — in particular, he has been a vital tool in the naked politicization of our justice system. Lately, Griffin’s relationship with Politico and its McCain campaign reporter, Jonathan Martin, has grown in numerous ways, and the benefits for both are becoming increasingly apparent, in the standard tawdry ways that typify how our press corps functions.

{snip} much, much more to read

It’s hard to overstate the extent to which “journalists” — and especially those who, like Martin, cover campaigns — identify with, socialize with, and revere the very operatives whose purpose is to manipulate and deceive them. It’s hardly possible to go any lower or get any sleazier than Tim Griffin — or Karl Rove. But not in the eyes of our intrepid journalists. Being close to them, spending the night shoving your face full of ribs while being feted by them, is as good as it gets —- even better than doing that with John McCain on his ranch. Unsurprisingly, the great speech by McClatchy’s John Walcott contains exactly the description of this sickness:

Why, in a nutshell, was our reporting different from so much other reporting? One important reason was that we sought out the dissidents, and we listened to them, instead of serving as stenographers to high-ranking officials and Iraqi exiles. I’m afraid that much the same thing may have happened on Wall Street. Power and money and celebrity, in other words, can blind you. Somehow, the idea has taken hold in Washington journalism that the value of a source is directly proportional to his or her rank, when in my experience the relationship is more often inverse.

That brings up a larger point, and one that I think is another part of what went wrong back in 2002, and what may have gone wrong on Wall Street. Instead of being members of the Fourth Estate, too many Washington reporters have been itching to move up an estate or two, to become part of the Establishment or share in the good times.

But it’s no fun spending Friday night in Little Rock with some low-level nobody dissident. Tim Griffin sits at the right hand of Karl Rove and has been a key figure in countless dirty GOP scandals over the last decade, and that makes Jonathan Martin feel really special to be close to that, praised by it, friendly with it.


read the entire story here: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/10/12/griffin/

Their GOP ties run deep over there... but Yahoo uses Politico with abandon (which is why I switched to MSN for my home page.) Glad to see Salon talking about this...

and, campaign reports which have extensive quotes that are helpful in piecing together what's actually been said at an event or an appearance . . . the rest is transparently to the right

without being questioned. It annoyed me to no end when I started seeing Politico hacks on Keith's show. All they are is re-branded Washington insiders.

It's a mess.

at a WH press briefing. Bush asked him where he got his info or something, I don't remember exactly what prompted it, but Gregory said Politico.com and Bush mumbled something and Gregory said it was a good site.

That was after I remember seeing a couple push polls on their site and some propaganda article that was not based on fact, and complaining to Simon about how skewed and unfair the site was so far.

House shill only his delivery disguises his bias to many who aren't well informed. He'll always use McCain's and Rove's tallking points as if they were fact but he's not in-your-face in how he regurgitates them. It's his gentile gravitas that allows him to get away with being a huge partisan.

night.

DUers have exposed them over and over as right wing hacks.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/searchresults.html?q=Politico&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com&sa=Search&domains=democraticunderground.com&client=pub-7805397860504090&forid=1&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&cof=GALT%3A%23008000%3BGL%3A1%3BDIV%3A%23336699%3BVLC%3A663399%3BAH%3Acenter%3BBGC%3AFFFFFF%3BLBGC%3A336699%3BALC%3A0000FF%3BLC%3A0000FF%3BT%3A000000%3BGFNT%3A0000FF%3BGIMP%3A0000FF%3BFORID%3A11&hl=en

I find Politico to be pretty balanced and accurate. Just saying.

and you'll do fine with Politico.

They've got the bucks and the access. The reporting, however, has to be weighed and judged for accuracy and intent, like all of the rest. There is a need for even more transparency. There really shouldn't be an argument about that.

this article
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14493.html

Is not one I would call balanced or accurate. They are close to AP territory with it. :-( Oh well.

which means never.

Same holds true for threads citing it as a "source" for their takes.

. . . you take what's out there and weigh it against what you know and what other sources are reporting. It really doesn't serve to block out FOX or Politico because they have resources and access that enables them to get the quotes and get the breaking reports that sometimes can serve our interests. You don't take them at face value, but, in the absence of other accounts, sometimes there is a need to (at least temporarily) rely on their reporting. That's not a defense of their organization as much as it's a resignation that we just don't have enough truly objective sources who are able to cover EVERYTHING and obtain access everywhere.

:kick:

Greenwald is great as normal.

a classic.

(the mutual-man-crush twins and Rove makes it a threesome) in this article.

"I told Mike and Jonathan that as high school football fans, they would love Friday night Drivetime Sports with Randy Rainwater because it is focused on high school football. They did. They enjoyed hearing the analysis of football in Junction City, Bearden, Searcy, etc. It made them want a Sonic Blast."

. . . aww! Three straws, no doubt.