SCANDAL!! "60 Minutes" DUPED! Flimsy Source May Ruin News Magazine!!
“60 Minutes” Was Duped!
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT HIT PIECE ON KARL ROVE!
This may be the end of the liberal news magazine!
— I had been trying to communicate with the Alabama Republican Party headquarters for two days since I last posted “60 Minutes” Too?!!… MAJOR SCANDAL Brewing Over Rove Hit Piece! yesterday morning. Finally I was able to talk with Communications Director Philip Bryan around 4:45 Friday evening. The ALGOP was moving offices and were just getting back online.
Here is what I was told about the outrageous hit piece on Karl Rove from last week’s “60 Minutes”:
The Question Remains– Who is Dana Jill Simpson?
“Considering her past stories — none corroborated by a single human being — 60 Minutes should never have interviewed her in the first place.” –Eddie Curran.
** Dana Jill Simpson from small town (Rainsville) Alabama, went on “60 Minutes” and told an outlandish fable about her so-called interaction with Karl Rove.
** Karl Rove strongly denied the charges on Wednesday.
** Yesterday, the Alabama GOP demanded that “60 Minutes” show proof of the allegations or retract their story.
Former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman was convicted on 7 charges and is currently serving time.
On Friday the Alabama GOP had this to say about the bogus hit piece on Rove:
–The Alabama GOP still knows very little about Dana Jill Simpson since she came on the scene last year.
— She says she was a “Republican Party Operative” but no one has ever heard of her.
— Dana Jill Simpson has never been hired by the ALGOP. She never was paid by the ALGOP. The Alabama GOP is not familiar with Simpson. Her local county Republican Chairman is not even familiar with Dana Jill Simpson.
— At best she is a low level campaign volunteer.
— There has not been one shred of evidence given to back up her claims.
The end of “60 Minutes” as we know it…
Here is what independent journalist Eddie Curran wrote today about the “60 Minutes” scandal (This is posted at the Alabama GOP website):
Your big witness – Doug Jones – was not at trial and he was totally wrong. I suggest you call him and ask him to provide the documentation to support what he told you with such an impressive degree of authority. Don’t rely on his memory – ask him to provide you with the documentation. This is what real reporters do and what an audience expects of 60 Minutes.
Dana Jill Simpson: I assume you are aware of her constantly expanding and evolving stories. That you even put her on television after reviewing these ever-evolving tales is incredible. Furthermore, you absolutely had to know of her association with the Siegelman and Scrushy legal teams that began, at the latest, in February of last year. Among other things, she has testified to doing what would appear to be an illegal credit check report on the judge who presided over the case.
We reporters in Alabama, no doubt because we’re dumb rednecks or being paid off by Republicans, have from the beginning seen Simpson for what she is: a very lonely person with a very – and this is your word – vivid imagination.
It would appear – or at least, CBS made it appear – that this particular Rove claim (there have already been several by her relating to her allegations that Rove was involved in the Siegelman administration)”) was new. This was suggested by Scott Pelley’s surprise, which I trust was not feigned.
As anyone who has ever worked in a newsroom knows, it is almost a daily occurrence for someone to come by or call and spin the most amazing stories. A few, a very few, are true. A decent reporter can usually tell the difference in about a minute.
The crazy ones are treated politely and ushered out the door as soon as possible. Considering her past stories — none corroborated by a single human being — 60 Minutes should never have interviewed her in the first place. However, after that mistake, once she started on the Rove tale, Pelley, the producers, the janitor, someone, should have pulled the switch.
This leads me to ask the following questions of the journalists at CBS:
After Simpson delivered these explosive and entirely uncorroborated accusations (again, all of her stories are uncorroborated) did 60 Minutes ask Simpson where she followed Siegelman, as in what cities and on what dates?
Having done so, did 60 Minutes conduct a simple Nexis search of stories during that period? After all, Siegelman’s trips and actions were covered almost daily by the press, especially the AP.
And also asked her:
Who funded this top-secret mission? She does not live anywhere near Montgomery and one assumes that while carrying out this top-secret assignment she incurred hotel, travel, and meal bills. Did you ask her if she had any records of these bills? Is there anyone alive who can corroborate this?
–Did you ask her: How was a big redhead like you able to follow Alabama’s governor for months without being seen by the governor or his security?
–Did you follow him by car? Hide in the bushes? Hover above in a helicopter?
–You claim that this was not the first “intelligence” assignment given you by Rove.
–What were the others?
You said you met him working on past campaigns. Which campaigns and can you provide us with a single person who also worked on these campaigns who can confirm that you worked on them and that, furthermore, you met Rove while doing so?
Pelley, with a wink and a nod, noted that Rove worked in some Alabama campaigns. This is widely known. They were judicial races in the mid-1990s. I was in Alabama at the same time and, remarkably, never ran into Rove. I doubt Simpson did either though. However, if we are to trust your broadcast, you made no effort to check this out. You simply tossed it out that Rove had been in Alabama, as if our state is the size of Mayberry.
There is m
uch more HERE.
Powerline has a twist on the story that involves The New York Times.
More from ALGOP Communication’s Director Philip Bryan:
— CBS has not returned our emails and did not give us the opportunity to give our side of the story.
— They did not ask us any questions about the story before they ran it.
— They did not respond to our emails demanding equal time.
— They did not show any proof to back up their charges.
— Simpson says she had phone records but that the phones were disposable and now she does not have the records.
— 52 US state Attorney Generals want to have the government take another look at the case.
— Don Siegelman was convicted on 7 charges, 25 were dismissed.
UPDATE: Ouch! Commenter SMGalbraith- “Geezus, Keith Olbermann has higher journalistic standards than ’60 Minutes’.”
UPDATE 2: Commenter thegreatSatan did some research– “Wouldn’t you think a big GOP operative would have at least given money to the GOP over the last few election cycles? Searches for ‘Dana Jill Simpson’ turn up nothing at Opensecrets.org.”
UPDATE 3: (Saturday) Scott Johnson at Power Line has more more questions for “60 Minutes” on this flimsy hit piece.
UPDATE 4: John Hinderaker at Power Line breaks down the hit piece on Rove and destroys the “60 Minute” arguments.
It appears that every story nutty Jill Simpson has told so far has not panned out including the story that she talked with the crooked governor:
Actually, every single person whose name Simpson invokes as she spins her stories says that she is either lying or deluded. Even Don Siegelman. Simpson says that she signed her affidavit after repeated urging by Siegelman, whom she spoke with several times on the telephone. Untrue, says Siegelman. As the Justice Department wrote in a letter to John Conyers’ Judiciary Committee:
The alleged conversation described by Ms. Simpson has been denied by all of the alleged participants except Ms. Simpson. Indeed, even Mr. Siegelman states that Ms. Simpson’s affidavit is false as it relates to him. Moreover, according to Ms. Simpson, she met with Mr. Siegelman and his co-defendant Richard Scrushy for several months before signing the statement at their urging. She also claims to have provided legal advice to them. She contends she drafted but did not sign a motion filed by Mr. Scrushy seekung to have the federal judge removed from the case.
All of which is sheer madness. There are only two alternatives: either Ms. Simpson is a liar (or perhaps insane), or else every other person with knowledge of her allegations, including a former Alabama Supreme Court Justice and Don Siegelman himself, is lying. Yet CBS offered Ms. Simpson as a credible witness without disclosing these basic facts.
Also… NewsBusters had more on the hit piece earlier in the week.