The Hightower Report Makes A Leap Of Faith

In The Austin Chronicle the left-wing partisan Jim Hightower makes a leap of faith in his Hightower Report.  He attributes the Schiavo memo, which remains of uncertain origin, directly to Senate Republican leadership.

"This is about defending a life," George W.'s press flack declared piously. Well, for Republican political operatives, it's actually been about politics, for she has represented a golden opportunity to curry favor with the Christian right-wing, which seized upon Terri's case as a rallying point for their opposition to the right-to-die-with-dignity movement. As her case was being rushed to Washington, the GOP Senate leadership circulated a secret, one-page memo to its members, gleefully noting that their power grab over the case would pay big dividends with the party's core supporters.

Unfortunately for them, the memo was leaked to the media, and their crass opportunism was revealed. Distributed right out of the offices of the party's Senate leaders, the memo says...

Does Mr. Hightower know something that Howard Kurtz, the NY Times, ABC News and the Washington Post do not know?  None of those organizations and individuals will now go on record and say definitively that this is a Republican memo, produced by and distributed by Republicans.  Michelle Malkin reports that even though a number of media outlets gave the WaPo as the source in their reporting that the memo came from party leaders, the Post no longer stands by that.

The Post's Allen said "the blog interest has been stoked by secondhand accounts" that the paper's story referred to Republican talking points. "We simply reported that the sheet of paper was distributed to Republican senators and told our readers explicitly that the document was unsigned, making clear it was unofficial," he said. "We stuck to what we knew to be true and did not call them talking points or a Republican memo. The document was provided by an official who has a long record of trustworthiness, and this official gave a precise account of the document's provenance, satisfying us that it was authentic and that it had been used in an attempt to influence Republican senators."

So the Post's Allen won't name the official (was it a Democrat, or a Republican? - at least give us that) who gave him the memo, and now says "We stuck to what we knew to be true and did not call them talking points or a Republican memo."

Perhaps if Hightower has conclusive evidence he should share it with the world.  We would be very interested in the people he's interviewed that can confirm this for the rest of us blockheads.

Or, just maybe, he's assumed that his interpretation is correct because that is his partisan bent.  I'm betting on the latter.  But if the Republicans did something this stupid then, fine, expose the individuals, and let the chips fall where they may.

Comments

[Bonddad]

From today's Raw Story

As the fracas over of who authored conservative talking points on how to capitalize on the tragedy of Terri Schiavo continues, new research seems to bolster the assertion that the memo was authored by Republicans, RAW STORY has found.

Conservative blogs have raised doubts about the memo, which was first reported by ABC News. They say the memo may have been created as a Democratic “dirty trick,” noting that ABC’s transcription of the memo differs from an image of the document received by RAW STORY from a source on Capitol Hill.

But unlike the more serious discrepancies highlighted in President Bush’s National Guard files, these differences appear to have been the result of running spelling and grammar check.

To ascertain whether the document might have been distributed in two editions, RAW STORY ran the text of the ABC News memo through spelling and grammar check in Microsoft Word. The corrected result was the same as the one this site received from our source in Washington.

More significantly, however, a closer examination of statements made by Republican congressmen reveals that Republican members used similar points before the Schiavo talking points memo was leaked, though critics say such statements are consistent with those who are seeking to intervene in the Schiavo case.

Some believe the author may have been a staffer of Sen. Mel Martinez (R-FL), whose office used some of the points drawn from a conservative organization’s website in a press release ten days before the memo was leaked. RAW STORY has discovered additional indications which support this hypothesis.

John Hinderaker, who first took umbrage with the memo on his conservative blog, PowerLine, says he has been told the inoffensive parts of the memo came from Sen. Martinez’s office. He says thinks someone may have tacked on more controversial parts—such as “this is an important moral issue and the pro-life base will be excited,” in an effort to sully Republicans.

“I think it’s clear that the inoffensive parts of the memo (four paragraphs) came from Mel Martinez’s office, either directly or via the TVC site,” Hinderaker told RAW STORY. “Martinez says he knows nothing about the political “talking points,” and I see no reason to doubt him.”

Martinez’s office did not return a call for comment Wednesday.

“To me, the most likely scenario is that the purpose of the memo was to get the political points in the hands of the media, and whoever created the memo just cribbed the genuine four paragraphs to give the political points some context and camouflage,” Hinderaker added. “I freely acknowledge, however, that that is speculation.”

Whoever wrote the memo, however, appears to have intimate knowledge about the bill referenced, which Sen. Martinez himself had authored.The talking points note his Democratic Florida colleague, Sen. Bill Nelson, refused to become a cosponsor of the bill.

“Martinez was in charge of finding co-sponsors,” said one Washington insider who asked to be kept anonymous. “His office would be one of the very few who would know who had agreed to sign on, who was still deciding and who already had flat out said no.”

Others note that the memo singles out Nelson by name, as if the author was concerned more with home state politics than the issue itself.

Still unexplainable, however, is why the talking points list “S 529,” when the bill in question was “S 539.”

Martinez also used similar points in press releases and an opinion piece published before the memo was leaked.

Talking point #5: “The bill is very limited…”

MARTINEZ ON 3/8: “It is a very narrowly written piece of legislation…” [Martinez Press Release, 3/8/05]

Talking Point 8: “This legislation ensures that individuals like Terri Schiavo are guaranteed the same legal protections as convicted murderers like Ted Bundy.”

MARTINEZ ON 3/8:It ensures Terri has the same federal legal protections as convicted murderers. [Press Release, 3/8/05]

MARTINEZ ON 3/16: “In essence, this legislation would give incapacitated individuals like Terri, who have been given what amounts to a death sentence by the courts, federal habeas corpus protections to ensure that she receives the same due process protections as convicted murderers given the death penalty.” [“Legal Refuge,” Oped, National Review Online, 3/16/05]

One Democratic Senate aide said flat-out that suspicions had grown around Martinez.

“Where there’s smoke, there’s fire,” the aide said. “It’s starting to look like Martinez might have had something to do with this.”

The sponsor of the Martinez’s legislation in the House, Rep. Dave Weldon (R-MD) also used the language similar to the talking points in press releases and in a quote given to the Washington Times.

Talking Point 8: “This legislation ensures that individuals like Terri Schiavo are guaranteed the same legal protections asconvicted murderers like Ted Bundy.”

WELDON ON 3/8: “Terri Schiavo, and men and women like her, deserve the same due process rights thatdeath row inmates are granted. When a court is making a life or death decision for a disabled person who has been charged with no crime, shouldn’t they be afforded independent counsel to speak on their behalf?” Weldon said. [Press Release, 3/8/05]

WELDON ON 3/18:Rep. Dave Weldon, the Florida Republican who led the effort in the House, called it “baffling” thatconvicted murderer Scott Peterson “will be afforded a review of his constitutional rights” before his execution, “but we cannot get the same for Terri Schiavo.” [Washington Times, 3/18/05]

WELDON ON 3/21:“By passing this bi-partisan bill tonight, Congress has sent a clear message that Terri Schiavo deserves the same due process rights to a federal court review that death row inmates receive.” [Press Release, 3/21/05]

One Republican member, Rep. Chris Shays, (R-CT) had no questions about the memo during his appearance on Hardball with Chris Matthews Mar. 24.

“I mean, when you have a memo,” Shays said, “that basically gives the impression that it’s politics.”

Other Republicans, including the leaders of the House, Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) and Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL), also used similar points in appearances and statements before the memo appeared in print.

Talking Point 3: “This is an important moral issue…”

DELAY AND HASTERT ON 3/18: “House Republicans knew we had a moral obligation to act, and we did just that” [Washington Times, 3/18]

DELAY ON 3/20: “The legal issues, I grant everyone, are complicated, but the moral ones are not.” [Press Conference, 3/20]

Talking Point 8: “This legislation ensures that individuals like Terri Schiavo are guaranteed the same legal protections asconvicted murderers like Ted Bundy.”

DELAY ON 3/18: “Well, what we’re doing in the bill that passed the House and a bill that passed the Senate is exactly what we’re we would do for death row inmates.” [Scarborough Country, 3/18/05]

PowerLine’s Hinderaker calls such quotes “meaningless.”

“These were (and are) arguments commonly used by those who have tried to keep Terri Schiavo alive,” he said. “They are not unique to the memo in question and are not, in fact, even reminiscent of that memo, for the most part. And, of course, the only “talking

points” that anyone is interested in, the political ones, are not repeated.”

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) has called for a Senate Rules Committee investigation into who produced and distributed the memo.

“The distribution of anonymous materials on the Senate floor is troubling,” Lautenberg wrote in a letter released to RAW STORY last week. “Those who would attempt to influence debate in the United States Senate should not hide behind anonymous pieces of paper.”

[Giacomo]

Well, that's a long cut and paste. Let me see if there's any hard evidence there.

"To ascertain whether the document might have been distributed in two editions, RAW STORY ran the text of the ABC News memo through spelling and grammar check in Microsoft Word. The corrected result was the same as the one this site received from our source in Washington."

This would prove it came from Republicans...how?

"More significantly, however, a closer examination of statements made by Republican congressmen reveals that Republican members used similar points before the Schiavo talking points memo was leaked, though critics say such statements are consistent with those who are seeking to intervene in the Schiavo case."

So the memo contained similar points to those made by Republicans in their arguments for the Schiavo law. There are two rational explanations for the content similarities. One is that the memo was written by Republicans. Another is that it was written to look like it came from Republicans. And this is in the "inoffensive" portion of the memo.

"Some believe the author may have been a staffer of Sen. Mel Martinez (R-FL..."

Anonymous sourcing. Nice.

"Others note that the memo singles out Nelson by name, as if the author was concerned more with home state politics than the issue itself."

And this proves it came from Republicans...how?

"One Democratic Senate aide said flat-out that suspicions had grown around Martinez.
“Where there’s smoke, there’s fire,” the aide said. “It’s starting to look like Martinez might have had something to do with this.”"

Well, a Democratic aide wouldn't have any reason at all to pin it on the other side, would he?

Then there are a lot of quotes that reference similar issues in the memo. Again, this proves that the memo, not the quotes, came from Republicans...how?

As Hinderaker said, "They are not unique to the memo in question and are not, in fact, even reminiscent of that memo, for the most part. And, of course, the only “talking points” that anyone is interested in, the political ones, are not repeated."

So, a left wing site, Raw Story, believes the version of the memo that reached Senators originated in Sen. Martinez office. With. No. Hard. Evidence.

Typos were later corrected before Raw Story obtained them. A question: Why would a Republican who allegedly produced the memo have bothered to issue a second version of it, with typos corrected, if it's presence was embarassing to him?

Unfortunately this proves nothing. All it suggests is that we still don't know who produced the memo.

[Bonddad]

"a closer examination of statements made by Republican congressmen reveals that Republican members used similar points before the Schiavo talking points memo was leaked, though critics say such statements are consistent with those who are seeking to intervene in the Schiavo case."

Could you please explain how a group of geographically disperse people could miraculously use the same words to describe the same event? Was there telepathy involved?

[Giacomo]

So, what you're saying is, statements made by a number of Republicans, some well before the release of the memo, using their strongest arguments in favor of their position, which happens to also be the position advocated in the memo, proves who wrote the memo.

I'm sorry, it doesn't. It is certainly possible the memo was written by a Republican staff member. This may even be the most likely explanation. And if it was that person is brutally stupid, as I've said, and should probably be canned.

It is, however, also possible that someone was paying attention to the arguments Republicans were making, got a list of those points from the TVC website, added at the top the naked political calculation talking points, and circulated it to try to embarass Republicans.

Do I know for certain which is true? Not yet. And neither do you.

Now could you please explain why if Republican staffer put this memo together and it got into circulation the typos were cleaned up by the time Raw Story got it? Did that staffer think that the typos were more embarassing than the content? Perhaps Raw Story could inform us regarding who gave it to them.

[Bonddad]

It's called an editorial decision.