Political Punch

Mr. Tapper,
I just read Mike Stark blog saying your blog about Nancy Pelosi, aka Air Pelosi, was misleading. I know, I'm way late on this story, but I wanted to check to see if what Mikes said was true, and I thought no way was ABC going to go all Faux News on us. I mean I thought ABC would not hesitate to fire a mere blogger for misstating facts and then not apologize for or correct said misleading statements.
But then, it turns out, you are no mere blogger,. No sir. You also served as ABC News' senior political correspondent during the 2006 elections and will do so again in 2008. Wow, a real Journalist. Now I was sure you would address your misleading statements because after all a reputation for integrity and honesty is vital to a real Journalist.
But then I went to your blog, and there it wasn't, in black and white, the truth about who requested the airplane was missing from you words.
You wrote: "..about the request by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif... is attributable to:.... the fact that Pelosi and her aides don't know anything about military aircraft, otherwise they would have simply requested the C-37-A,..."
You said "request" and "requested" in regard to Pelosi and her staff when in fact you knew, or at least an honest to god Journalist should have known, that it was in fact the Sergeant at Arms who made the request.
The Sergeant at Arms said quote: "The fact that Speaker Pelosi lives in California compelled me to request an aircraft that is capable of making non-stop flights for security purposes, unless such an aircraft is unavailable... I regret that an issue that is exclusively considered and decided in a security context has evolved into a political issue."
Given that the facts were known - or at least knowable to an actual Journalist - at the time, why didn't you know the facts at the time? I mean I'm no Journalist, but then again maybe neither are you.

The Speaker has said she would fly commercial. The Sargeant at Arms of the House requested the aircraft in question. So it DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE RANGE OF A G5 IS. It doesn't matter because Madam Speaker DID NOT MAKE THE REQUEST FOR A LARGER AIRCRAFT. ABC snooze and the rest of the "media" are merely trying to smear Ms Pelosi.

Aoy!! Enough already!!

Why do you continue to push this tripe about Pelosi? The House Sergeant at arms put out a PRESS RELEASE stating that HE, not Pelosi, required the plane in order to ensure her security.

Yes, bravo to Jake and ABC for presenting "the facts." Except for the part where the sergeant-at-arms distributes a press release claiming the he, not Pelosi, made the request.

I've pored over the post and can find no allusion to the one piece of documentary evidence that proves the charges against Pelosi are a calumnious lie.

To the question: Whatever happened to the journalists in this country? The answer is that the companies they work for have been purchased by mega wealthy people - and we all know that mega wealthy people control things - not the government and not the journalists working in the media. The so-called journalists and talking heads making their living by ignoring facts. The spread of misinformation would come to a grinding halt if their paychecks were to disappear. As Deep Throat said: follow the money. Who signs Rush Limbaugh's pay check? Who signs Matt Drudge's paychech? Who signs Bill O'Reilly's pay check? That - and there apparently are no people working in the media who possess the quality of courage. Rent the movie "The Insider" and you will understand what motivates news organizations. Hint: it is not ethics.

Boy, I hope there's enough outrage remaining after this bogus story to address the Pentagon's manipulation of evidence, which has resulted directly in the murder of tens of thousands of people, including thousands of Americans.

To those still knocking Pelosi over this: are you people even paying attention?

SHE DID NOT MAKE THIS REQUEST. PERIOD.
What part of this do you people not understand.

You see, here's what happens when people speak without regard to facts. We now know, based on today's news:

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not request a larger plane for personal use to travel cross-country without stopping, Bill Livingood, the House sergeant at arms, said Thursday. Livingood said the request was his."

So this was, literally, a non-issue. What a joke that this was treated as "news" in the first place and that people actually offered an opinion without knowing the facts. WHEN WILL WE LEARN OUR LESSON?

"Hey, JJ Reed She already has EXACTLY what Hastert had, but that's not good enough for her! Get a clue, Nancy."

Yes, but Haster lived in Illinois, she lives in California. A bigger plane is needed to guarantee they can get there non-stop. But don't trust me, read the statement by the House Sgt At Arms, he ordered the plane for that reason. Jake, why don't you print that?

What happened to all the journalists in thi country?

Why does everyone keep repeating the same falsehood? SHE DID NOT REQUEST THIS PLANE, THE HOUSE SRGT AT ARMS REQUESTED IT. End of story. This is so ridiculous and so obviously biased.

Get a grip, It's a military PLANE. IE it's going to refuel at a MILITARY BASE!!! What no confidence in the security at American military bases.

Folks, the Speaker of the House has gotten a plane since 9/11 due to the fact that he or she is second in line in presiential succession. Hastert had a plane too.

The bottom line is that this is a total non-story that has been ginned up by the right wing noise machine. Apparently we're going to have one of these every week -- Obama's "madrassa" education, Hillary's alleged sliming of Obama, Edward's house sale, etc.

As for the "faux" populist outrage about these liberal big spenders with their own planes, most politicians in fact fly commercial -- I live in DC and have been on flights many times with congressmen and senators. Always in coach too if I recall correctly.

Get a grip. She needs a bigger plane. The other guy, whatever his name is lived in Illinois. Pelosi lives in California. This is all because she is a women who operates like a man, therefore she is the bitch. Pelosi, please stand your ground.

This is a great way to avoid talking about the wisdom of the troop surge. Between the size of the speaker's plane and the passing of Anna Nicole Smith, the media will be so preoccupied GW may avoid notice when he invades another country.

the majority of Americans probably did not even know that the Speaker received this perk ~ not until a Democrat who happens to be a women was supposed to be afforded this. Republicans! Waa Waa Waa boys! Give her the damn plane!

Do we need to tax the people, so politicians get more pork... I don't think so... Shame on her.

Nancy doesn't need anything more than what she's got. Period. All this "3rd in line needs more security" crap is just that. Crap. Repub/Dem I don't care. We don't need to spend 10's of thousands of dollars flying the Speaker of the house around. When was the last time a Speakers life was in danger? Been any assasinated lately?

And what Drudge reports? It's articles from all over the web. Is he lying? Doubt it. Liberals/Democrats love to bring down Republicans when they say or do something trivial.

Pay back is hell.

What is wrong with these people complaining about the Speaker needing a larger plane? I do believe the voters said enough is enough of these conseravtive attacks. I personally think she needs a plane to get her back to Washington should there be an emergency facing the Country. Her safety is important to this Country just as the Safety of the President and Vice President. Stop the attacks people the Country is tired of the partisian attacks this country has far more important issues to deal with like health care, immigration so get on with your life and do something worthwhile than cry about some larger plane for the Speaker Of The House. She was not the one who requested the plane in the first place so get your facts straight before going off half cocked. STOP THE MADNESS!

ABC should be ashamed of itself for pushing this Drudge drivel. Anything to take the focus of the failure of your precious war, I guess.

first the impeached ex judge now the plane? She is starting to act like a cheap politician. I have seen more class back in the days of Hines, Daley and Hague than she is exhibiting

She did not request the plane. Wilson Livingood is responsible for her safety. He initiated the entire request to the air force. This is some of the worst news reporting I have ever seen. ABC is irresponsible for using a headline that totally disagrees with the concluding paragraph of their report.

According to the ABC story, it's because Pelosi is an elitist snob. But I'll go for H) Because when the publication of a religious cult known for fabricating stories says jump, ABC is compelled to obey.

As you do when a website with a long history of spreading smears leaks a story, as you do when the graduate of an organization devoted to getting propagandists into the Hollywood system writes a piece of revisionist history on 9/11.

PHONY ISSUE

I thought the news story was responsible and the critics justified pointing out the cost of operation of the C-32. I certainly understand the Madame Speaker need for security and the associated cost that comes in transporting our public officials. However, was glad to read that her office is open to least cost options regarding cross-country transportation and security. Now in saying that, the tip of the iceberg is not so much Madame Speaker Pelosi request for the use of the C-32 but why does the Pentagon have such a lavish class of plane available in inventory at taxpayer’s expense? Why cannot the First Lady, Vice President, and our public servants travel on secured air-transport that has least cost operation to the taxpayer? What other lavish benefits do our Federal public servants exploit and bank rolled by the American taxpayers? Unfortunately, we have a Washington DC culture of Federal bureaucracy with workers enjoying above average entitlements all paid by the American taxpayer. How many Federal workers in all branches of government do not pay into Social Security? Yes, there is more to this story then a simple request to use Pentagon -owned a C-32 plane bankrolled by the American Taxpayer -

The gulfstream 500 Military (C-20) has a range of 8500 nautical miles. Driving, not flying from Washington D.C. Dulles airport to San Francisco's airport is 2,819 miles; that means the aircraft can fly between Washington D.C. and San Francisco 3 times before refueling.

Thank you Media for not answering the most basic question of her argument. What is the current range of the aircraft Madam Pelosi has?

What arrogance for that woman and the media to think everyone is that stupid. But, I guess she knows the media won't report the real story.

Let them eat cake!

As a former aircrew member w/ the 89th Airlift Wing, I find her request a bit excessive. Refueling stops for DV flights are far shorter than stopping at a commercial airport for one. Two, her flights home should NEVER interfere with operational support requirements. Three, she's not the first to use or abuse this service. There is a very long list of congress persons, senators and first ladies. I actually lost a training opportunity for a student aircrew member (the stewards do cook but all crew members are on the jet primarily for flight safety and require extensive training) because a congressman insisted on bringing his wife and son (who was an active duty airman and came along listed as a baggage handler AND received full TDY pay and per diem at actual costs) on the overseas trip. Nice stay in Venice and we brought back great souvenirs. I'm not sure what work was done there however! And yes, he was a Democrat... Point being, Pelosi would not be the first (and probably not the last)to make the most of this "perk."

Emotions seem to rage over government excess and special treatment for the annointed, I mean elected ones. When an excess is pointed out the resulting firestorm burns hot and fast then evaporates. If we could come togeather on the issue of excess and transparency it would go a long way toward responsible government.

Just another example of how the libs LOVE to spend the taxpayer's money. How arrogant! And puh-leez, let's not start dragging out the women's lib card. Pouting that she can't have her way JUST because she's a woman? Give me a break!

How come the media won't mention the simple fact that the Gulfstream500 military version (C-20) has a range of 8500 nautical miles? She could nearly fly from Washington D.C. to San Francisco twice without refueling. Her argument that she only needs the Boeing 757 for its range doesn't hold water but it appears the Media will hold that water for her.

Unbelievable!

Another example of simple honest reporting set aside for political agendas. Use some common sense people.

NO!!! NO!!!! A thousand times NO. She is power hungry and arrogant. I am tired of the democrats sticking it to our troops and demanding special treatment and the rest of us can hardly pay our bills. Who does she think she is.

How come the media won't mention the simple fact that the Gulfstream500 military version (C-20) is a range of 8500 nautical miles? Her argument that she only needs the Boeing 757 for its range doesn't hold water but it appears the Media will hold that water for her.

Unbelievable!

You forgot

h) The so-called liberal media who happily parrots anything the read on Drudge regardless of the merit of the story.

She is third in line to the presidency, she should have the same protection that the Preznut and Vpreznut have. Also, what did the republican speaker have? Is she getting harassed because she is a DEMOCRAT and a WOMAN? Once the preznut and vpreznut are impeached and sent to prison for war crimes she will be the president!

There is a real story here -- when is some news organization actually going to request FOIA records of (1) the passenger manifests from Hastert's flights, to see which other Congressmen and political donors flew along; (2) any rules, regulations, or guidelines provided by the Pentagon to Hastert, to see whether there is differential treatment; and (3) evidence, if any, of reimbursement to the U.S. Treasury from Hastert's passengers.

An October 9 Chicago Sun Times article shows that Hastert had his plane make a separate stop to pick up Congressman Shimkus before picking him up in Aurora during the page scandal -- why did the taxpayers pay for that? And if approval of the House Ethics committee is really required for other Congressmen to fly, what evidence is tehre that Shimkus got it?

Why does she need a larger plane? Just because she lives in CA. People fly across the US every day and have to make connecting flights what's the differnce! I did not realize that the Speaker had a plane. I always thought it was the President and Vice President. She's trying to say it's because she is a women! Lady get over it and fly in the plane that we are paying for. That's it in a nutshell that the tax payers are paying for. If she wants to pay her own way let her. Why does the family get to ride on a military plane? Yes, her family that lives with her should, no one else. Let them buy a ticket like anyone else. This is what is wrong with our goverment, they get all the extras and the tax payer has to live with their spending. Cut their pay, expense accounts, have their wives and husband hold down a regular job, send the kids to day care and we will see our taxes cut. They need to get back to the real world.

Gloria

Wow - so she has to stop to refuel - at an Air Force Basae along the way - the last time i checked AFB's are some of the most secure facilities in the world, so the security issue is out the window. She should be afforded the SAME aircraft the the past Speaker had access to - no more no less. If she has such a large group to shuttle back and forth then fly commercial. Get in line with the rest of us, and experience the joy of the TSA search.

I love all these strong opinions despite the absence of the facts. Never stopped the right before; that's how we ended up in Iraq, correct?Now even Tony Snow is acknowledging that this is a non-issue. Save your energy for something important, like when Jon Kerry tries to be funny again.

First of all, let me say this was not a story.

The republicans are so desperate that they have nothing better to do then push this ridiculous story at the American people and of course the media bites and runs it. I mean the Republicans LOST billions of dollars in Iraq, they are the most careless, irresponsible party. I can not even believe how they are destroying everything in their path.

She should get what Denny Hastert got, no more, no less.

I like America.

Hear that giant sucking sound? It's the liberals draining your wallet.

Hummm.. We lost 35 billion dollars in construction money in Iraq...what's a mere $22,000 per flight? She probably want the frequent flyer miles too. Get a grip and fly commercial, or better yet..pay for it yourself!

Oh, please. There are people in the USA starving you have some nerve. If getting to see the family is so important, have them visit you on commercil planes, or buy your own.
So tired of the ELITE, they don't have a clue about the people of the USA and their struggle to feed and cloth there families, and not in ARMANI. You should be ashamed. And you wonder why the people have lost faith in the politians.

the patriarchy ate my post again

I cast my vote for "g", with liberal doses of "a", "c", "d", and "f". Speaker Pelosi should have no less courtesy shown her than Speaker Hastert did, which means she should have a suitable plane available for her to return home without having to stop and refuel. But the ignorance of her staff about military aircraft, along with the conservative attacks and the lazy reporting (hello, Fox News!), probably doom any chances of her getting the kind of plane she wants and needs.

Hey, JJ Reed She already has EXACTLY what Hastert had, but that's not good enough for her! Get a clue, Nancy.

She wont accept what Hastert had eh,

Can you say PRIMA DONNA

Next she'll be asking for her own Marine 3.

She wants more then what she needs. Security is not in question as a fuel stop would be at a USAF base. Andrews only has so many planes and the only dedicated ones were designed for the Prez/Vice office. She can just get the congress to provide the Pentagon more funding to procure and maintain a specific aircraft just for the SPEAKER (he or she). That would be the end of that.

If politicians had to fly commercially and go thru the same hassles that the public they supposedly serve have to, they'd probably do a better job representing us.

Gee, it's not like there is anything more important to talk about. Lets just smear the Dems.

The Speaker of the House has use of a military plan for security reasons. Speaker Pelosi has stated that for security reasons she has requested a plane that can travel from DC to San Francisco non-stop. The Speakers has also stated that she does not care which plane she uses as long as it will get her where she needs to go without stopping to refuel. This sounds like a perfectly reasonable request considering the previous speaker set the president for it. Give her use of the plane and move on to something else like impeaching the president. That would be fun.

Yeah, she is so concerned about the environment. How much extra fuel PER FLIGHT does she want to burn????

Dear Madame Speaker,

Do not let your new title seeks a new pork. The private jet service is assigned to the House Speaker, not to you personally. If you have to stop for refueling, so be it. If you want to fly non-stop (to your constituency), why not fly commercial first class?

oh christ, the whining on the right -- dems aren't allowed to have the same stuff as R's! she can't have what denny hastert had! how dare she ask!

Just some more of those San Francisco values...

Ok...Pelosi curently has a Gulf Stream G5 and she thinks she needs more of a plane???? She says she is concerned about security...SHE REFUELS AT AIRFORCE BASES! Another Democrat that wants to increase taxes because there is not enough money for the government....how about the cost increse for a bigger jet with larger fuel tanks...just a thought.

The coverage of this story really ticked me off - but ABC really presented all the facts with some really good reporting. Well done.