Andrew Breitbart Accuses ABC News of Lying

Wingnuts • Views: 18,341

I wonder if the ABC News producer who thought it would be a good idea to invite Andrew Breitbart to appear on ABC News’s election coverage is starting to regret it, now that Breitbart is accusing ABC News of lying?

Probably not. They had to know in advance that featuring a proven liar and fraud would make a lot of people upset, and the publicity is exactly the response ABC News wanted. It’s all about the eyeballs.

Jump to bottom

29 comments
1 [deleted]  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 11:19:38am
2 Varek Raith  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 11:20:25am

re: #1 MikeySDCA

FoxNews?
;)

3 Kragar  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 11:20:30am

ABCNews is probably glad for any publicity they can get. They've been in the middle of some bitter infighting over there for the last few years about their news service tanking.

4 darthstar  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 11:21:08am

Like I said yesterday, Breitbart may be the first pundit hired and fired from a network BEFORE he even gets on the air.

5 Obdicut  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 11:21:40am

It's like hiring a prostitute to serve drinks at your party rather than have sex with anyone.

You still hired a prostitute. And he'll probably still try to turn tricks at your party.

6 rwdflynavy  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 11:23:03am

re: #5 Obdicut

It's like hiring a prostitute to serve drinks at your party rather than have sex with anyone.

You still hired a prostitute. And he'll probably still try to turn tricks at your party.

No ifs ands or buts, your spending the night with Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute!

7 darthstar  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 11:25:14am

Heh...he's just another yahoo in the stands:

n a statement sent my way, ABC spokesman Jeffrey Schneider hit back. "Any confusion about Breitbart's role is of his own making," he said. "A simple reading of the email he posted makes it quite clear that he had only ever been invited to be a guest on our online town hall." That seems right, though the "on air" statement seems questionable.

Ooh...he's going to be on the INTERNET!!! Maybe.

8 Killgore Trout  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 11:29:27am
9 Obdicut  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 11:32:09am

Alright. I've got a ton of work to get done, so I'll see you all later.

10 manny  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 11:48:31am

I know you like to write about the increasing nuttiness of politics so I thought you'd find it interesting that 9-11 trooferism, long thought to have been beat back to a few cranks and charlatans, is an official part of the platform of the Colorado Democratic Party: [Link: coloradodems.org...] Page 31. Very sad.

11 engineer cat  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 11:50:47am

ABC accuses Breitbart of moving his lips

12 researchok  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 11:52:32am

re: #10 manny

I know you like to write about the increasing nuttiness of politics so I thought you'd find it interesting that 9-11 trooferism, long thought to have been beat back to a few cranks and charlatans, is an official part of the platform of the Colorado Democratic Party: [Link: coloradodems.org...] Page 31. Very sad.

Pretty outrageous. They may have dressed it up, but it is about trooferism.

More sad than anything else.

13 mikefromArlington  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 11:53:02am

ABC accuses Brietbart of being a journalist!

14 Eclectic Infidel  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 11:57:34am

Andrew Breitbart is not a mature adult. Has he procreated at all? Because he's setting a terrible example as to how adults should behave in the public arena.

15 RadicalModerate  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 12:00:26pm

re: #10 manny

I'm assuming that you're referring to this section:

Whereas many disturbing facts were consciously ignored by the 9/11 Commission; Be it resolved, therefore, that
the CDP calls for the establishment of a truly independent Grand Jury and public investigation into these and
other anomalies in order to find the truth of the September 11, 2001 attacks, so that we have a greater probability
of preventing attacks of this nature in the future. [Eagle 16/3]

That isn't trooferism.
That is more about the 9/11 Commissions' glossing over of Bush44's completely ignoring prior intelligence specifically saying that an attack against the US was coming, and soon.

16 Varek Raith  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 12:01:18pm

re: #10 manny

These?

We hereby declare that the investigations into the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the illegal invasion of Iraq, Abramoff and other lobbyists, the Hurricane Katrina response, and other major issues were inadequate and warrant review. [12/9 PC 2010]

Whereas many disturbing facts were consciously ignored by the 9/11 Commission; Be it resolved, therefore, that the CDP calls for the establishment of a truly independent Grand Jury and public investigation into these and other anomalies in order to find the truth of the September 11, 2001 attacks, so that we have a greater probability of preventing attacks of this nature in the future. [Eagle 16/3]

17 goddamnedfrank  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 12:04:50pm

re: #10 manny

I know you like to write about the increasing nuttiness of politics so I thought you'd find it interesting that 9-11 trooferism, long thought to have been beat back to a few cranks and charlatans, is an official part of the platform of the Colorado Democratic Party: [Link: coloradodems.org...] Page 31. Very sad.

You seem to have deliberately omitted the part where that statement has a whopping 36% support. They simply asked a question of their platform committee and it turned out to be very unpopular, 13 for, 23 against and 5 abstentions. It is therefore not an "official part of their platform."

18 Varek Raith  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 12:08:10pm

re: #17 goddamnedfrank

You seem to have deliberately omitted the part where that statement has a whopping 36% support. They simply asked a question of their platform committee and it turned out to be very unpopular, 13 for, 23 against and 5 abstentions. It is therefore not an "official part of their platform."

That, and it doesn't sound like trootherism to me...

19 goddamnedfrank  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 12:08:35pm

re: #17 goddamnedfrank

Oops, I missed the following question. Okay, they did support a call for 9/11 investigations, stupid.

20 Varek Raith  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 12:09:51pm

re: #19 goddamnedfrank

Oops, I missed the following question. Okay, they did support a call for 9/11 investigations, stupid.

I'm not certain it's the type of investigations the right will assume they are.
But, if it is, yeah it's dumb.

21 goddamnedfrank  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 12:12:21pm

re: #20 Varek Raith

I'm not certain it's the type of investigations the right will assume they are.
But, if it is, yeah it's dumb.

Either way it doesn't really accomplish anything except to reopen old wounds, not a fan.

22 Varek Raith  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 12:17:27pm

re: #21 goddamnedfrank

Either way it doesn't really accomplish anything except to reopen old wounds, not a fan.

True, very true.

23 manny  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 12:20:26pm

re: #19 goddamnedfrank

Oops, I missed the following question. Okay, they did support a call for 9/11 investigations, stupid.

Thank you for following that up -- I appreciate it. Frankly, I didn't believe it myself when I read it.

24 Charles Johnson  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 12:43:09pm

re: #10 manny

We hereby declare that the investigations into the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the illegal invasion of Iraq, Abramoff and other lobbyists, the Hurricane Katrina response, and other major issues were inadequate and warrant review. [12/9 PC 2010]

Whereas many disturbing facts were consciously ignored by the 9/11 Commission; Be it resolved, therefore, that the CDP calls for the establishment of a truly independent Grand Jury and public investigation into these and other anomalies in order to find the truth of the September 11, 2001 attacks, so that we have a greater probability of preventing attacks of this nature in the future. [Eagle 16/3]

I don't agree that this qualifies as "Trutherism." If it had said this...

The CDP calls for the establishment of a truly independent Grand Jury and public investigation into the Israeli and American government's participation in the September 11, 2001 attacks...

... then it would be Trutherism. Simply calling for more thorough investigations can be defended logically without resorting to conspiracy theories.

I don't agree with them that another investigation is warranted, and I think their prime motivation here is political - to try to find some dirt on the Bush administration. But it's not Trutherism.

25 nines09  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 12:53:02pm

I guess someone should remind ABC about lying down with dogs. If ABC had any cojones it would release a media wide comment on a "momentary lapse of reason and sanity" and promise to never promote liars and haters again. I'll wait. I'm sure it's coming./

26 manny  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 12:54:05pm

It was sponsored by a 9-11 troof organization called "Architects for 9-11 Truth" which holds, among other things, that "nano-thermite" brought down the Trade Centers: [Link: 911blogger.com...]

27 Charles Johnson  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 1:06:43pm

re: #26 manny

It was sponsored by a 9-11 troof organization called "Architects for 9-11 Truth" which holds, among other things, that "nano-thermite" brought down the Trade Centers: [Link: 911blogger.com...]

That article doesn't support your claim that the 9/11 Truthers (and I agree, those are Truthers) are the "sponsors" of the bill. In fact, I wouldn't put any credence in any claims coming from such a website - why do you?

28 manny  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 1:30:04pm

Because the language of the party's platform is that which AE9-11 truth has used in the past. 'truly independent grand jury', 'consciously ignored by the 9-11 Commission' (itself a damnable slur worthy of rebuke by any reasonable person). Also, the Colorado left has been a hotbed of trooferism in the past; it was a Colorado PBS station that ran Press for Truth, for example.

Tell you what -- you've cited Screw Loose Change blog positively in the past. Check in with those fellows and see what they think? [Link: screwloosechange.blogspot.com....]

Alternatively, drop an email or place a call to [Link: colorado911visibility.org...] and ask them who testified, and when.

29 ClaudeMonet  Mon, Nov 1, 2010 9:55:44pm

I am incredibly sick of this conspiracy bullsh**.

F*** the Troofers and their right-wing pals, the Birthers. They have no evidence for their claims, and their reaction when confronted with that inconvenient truth is the usual conspiracy theory BS of, "The complete lack of evidence is proof that the conspiracy is working, widespread, blah blah blah".

This kind of crap has been going on forever. JFK was assassinated almost 47 years ago and we still hear about it being a conspiracy among (pick the ones you like) Nixon, LBJ, Southern Democrats, the Cubans, the Soviets, the Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines, Texas oilmen, Republicans, aliens, and of course The Joos. RFK, MLK, UFOs, 9/11, President Obama's birth certificate, and who knows what else, the list is endless. If these paranoid loons spent half as much time on trying to improve the world as they do trying to fit square facts into the round holes of their theories, the world would be a vastly better place.

The simplest theory is usually the truth. If the conspiracy buffs can't deal with that, perhaps they should seek residence in some alternate universe where Occam's Razor doesn't apply.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh