Does the Honorable Speaker still not get it that the country is exhausted by scandals, appearance of scandals and, more importantly, the "above the law" attitude of Congress?
I love the potential for government to do good. I am dismayed at how insular Washington is, and how so many Members of Congress have decided to become the Ruling Class instead of elected representatives.
The Speaker and Rep Pelosi post the question, "how dare the FBI (executive branch) get a warrant (judicial branch) to search a Congressman's office (legislative branch)?"
I ask, how dare they NOT????

mr ross

that's what abc news knows?
that's not what you reported last night. he's either under investigation or he's not. well, which is it??
it's extremely condescending, to treat us like five-year olds by taking the so-called "story" to all kinds of tangents. do you still stand by your story? is he or isn't he under investigation? the dept of justice says no. time to bring your "sources" to bear.

The $25,000 was on Hastert's bribe menu for writing the letter. The other $1,000 was a tip.

Heres an idea quit spinniing this and admit the error. If not I hope Hastert does prosecute. This type of "reporting" has to be purged. Your Jobs are to report accurate news...not spin news already proven inaccurate.

Bryan Ross is going to go the way of Dan Rather - I'll watch Britt Hume and the Fox all stars to get the truth. Ross what a disappointment and know trying to shift blame. Hastert is blaming ABC and the Ross report and that rediculour QA with Vargas and George - I won't watch ABC again!

Where is your retraction on the Haestert story??? Bad reporting,
when you do not get confirmation
from the Govt. agency YOU claim is investigating the Speaker. Another Dan Ratherlike reporting disaster.

Uhmm Brian, I wouldn't exactly call Democracy 21 who is supported by George Sorros "Non Partisan".

It also seems that what ABC knows has sure changed alot from your first post.

You used to know that "Hastert is being Investigated" Then you knew "Hastert was in the mix" now you know that the FBI is "looking" at a letter signed by over 30 congressman and that Democracy 21 wished someone would be investigated.

Seems like another left wing site "got out in front of the news cycle"

Once again, ABC News gets it wrong. Brian Ross is clearly more interested in advancing his own career than in objective reporting.

Dennis Hastert IS NOT under investigation, end of story here.

I watched your report on Mr Hasterd Wednesday night and was given the impression that it was only a matter of time for the indictment. However as I listened to Mr Hasterd on Chicago's W.G.N. the next day and the Justice Dept. I concluded Mr. Ross got it wrong. Tonight he refused to give an apolgy So apparantly he'll be like Mr Rather and loss his credibility and become the butt of jokes .

Same old Republicans. Same old party of Nixon and Agnew. Gimmee, gimmee, gimmee! And they say history doesn't repeat itself! - Hell, we even got bugging and wiretapping, just like the bad old Nixon days of Watergate and the Columbia Plaza.

What I want is a photo gallery of the mugshots of all 57 or 81 or whatever the number is of Republican congressman that Abramoff was funding.

Re: Hastert story. Does anyone wonder why we doubt the reliability and objectivity of MSM? If reporting on a story needs to be changed, write a new story that makes it clear what new knowledge justifies what change, don't just try to blow it past us. That is insulting, and in these days of the 24-7 blogging it has zero chance of success. It is pretty discouraging to be reminded that the bright people we rely upon for information are either not smart enough or not ethical enough to figure this out for themselves.

Mr. Ross: It is reporters like you that have changed Americans' opinions of their news media from that of trust to that of disdain.

The change in the tenor and content of your story in the last 24 hours is remarkable in what it reveals about you as a journalist and ABC News.

Liberals, conservatives, moderates and the unlabeled are ever more distrustful of "the media" and their shadowy, anonymous "sources."

Maryann, Fox News commits more fabrications on their news programs than any other network does in a year. No one makes a big deal because outside of the far right wingnut section of the party, no one takes Fox seriously as a news source. If you watched the documentary "Outfoxed" with an open mind, you would call Dan Rather and apologize for being so blind.

I have to chuckle at how the right wingers love to try to obfuscate the main issue by blaming the messenger. The fact is that we have a letter that was signed by a number of members of Congress, including the speaker, which is intended to influence a decision by the secretary of the interior to be favorable to the interests of an admitted criminal. This was shortly after said criminal hosted a fundraiser for the speaker. However, determining whether Congress is up for sale under Dennis Hastert is not nearly as important as semantic nit-picking on how to best describe the investigation of this letter.
The Bushies aren't satisfied with a media outlet unless its "news" is thinly-disguised PR for the GOP such as we see on FOX.

I honest to God hope you guys get served with papers for liable tomorrow. What you are doing here is far worse than what Dan Rather did during the fake document cover up.

It is this kind of irresponsible journalism which leads many Americans to turn off the tube when it comes to news (or go to other sources).

I noticed that the story on Jefferson (who is under investigation for taking bribes) is no where to be found. Coincidence? Nope.

It appears that some may not like the fact that Mr Hastert may be 'playing the game'. Just a coincidence? Politicians, especially, should know that if wouldn't look good in the headlines it's probably not the right thing to do.

Lack of credible reporting is the hallmark of Faux News. That's not where one gets anything close to objective reporting found in the 'mainstream media'.

Brian dont throw in the towel yet Dennis Hastert has some explaining to do, the 100,000. Why does he think he is above the law ( how dare they). Its time to disband the good old boys system.

Mr. Ross I would say your reporting on this Hastert story has been "Mapled & Rathered"

Am I wrong?

This is totally unfair prosecution by innuendo by ABC News. Hastert deserves the benefit of the doubt and this kind of information should not be in the media. Now prosecutors may even have trouble getting a Grand Jury to bring charges if that's warranted.

What part of the truth in reporting do you not understand. Self serving fabricated news is NOT news but fiction. Your hip shot reporting on Hastert was nothing but a made up piece. Your bias is obvious and paramount, I hope he sues ABC and you personally. GET LOST!

ABC has been a disappointment lately. It seems they may be connected to Air America Radio.
I, for one, have had enough.

Senior Ross:

Me thinks you committed a Rather large booboo, si. Me thinks when you are in a hole you stop digging, si.

I think thou doth protest too loudly. Representative Tom DeLay cried fowl when he was being investigated and proclaims his innocence. Representative Randy Cunningham proclaimed his innocence and said it was all partisian politics. Dan Rostinkowski was innocent until he went to prison. Nixon was innocent right up until he resigned from office. People should not be so quick to dismiss this story. All politicans proclaim they are innocent and the other party has a vendetta against them. The Republican party in Washington is corrupted by power and money. Don't be so quick to denounce this story. Time will tell if it is right. Corruption is a cancer in our government. It can't be ignored or it will certainly grow.

"Don't be so quick to denounce this story. Time will tell if it is right." -- jerry

Time will tell if it's right? My goodness, that's not something you should have to say about a news article.

The rest of your point was what? He's a Republican, so he must be guilty? Well, at least in scolding the GOP for claiming bias, you proved their point.

Mr. Ross,

The more that you spin, the more you validate Rush Limbaugh's theory of the "Drive-By Media".

Speaker Denny seems to love cash and power more then he loves his country.

What is Denny hiding? Let's talk 'turkey', Mr. Speaker...$200. at a time.

This is not surprising given the insistence of the so called main stream media to shout loudly (even if it is not true) about a Republican and speak ever so softly (if at all) if it’s a Democrat. Just compare this to how they are handling William Jefferson D-LA in which ALL the major networks didn’t even broadcast his party affiliation. ABC news is now on the same level as a worthless tabloid without the entertainment value.

Let me add my voice to those who believe that the use of anonymous sources, undefined terms (mix), implication/innuendo, and reckless disregard for on-the-record evidence, add up to a complete loss of credibility for Brian Ross and ABC.

If I were on the jury, I would find this an extreme case of libel.

Whenever Clinton or Gore were found to have accepted money from someone who was questionable or turned out to be corrupt that was enough for right wingers to shout that Clinton and Gore were corrupt, even if there was no evidence that Clinton or Gore did anything in return. I wonder how they'd react if a high-powered Democratic lobbyist who admitted to doing what Abramoff has done had given money to Clinton days before Clinton made a decision favorable to the lobbyist's client.

I have one question for the right wingers denouncing this story: Do you really believe that the FBI shouldn't look into a Congressman accepting money from a corrupt lobbyist and then writing a letter on behalf of that lobbyists clients days later. That doesn't necessarily mean he did anything wrong, but it seems to me that

I have come to the inescapable conclusion that unless you have been living in a cave for the past ten years, you have met Jack Abramoff, been fed or entertained in an establishment he owns, know someone who knows him, or gone to a political event he funded.

Case in point: I ate at a restaurant with a friend a couple of years ago, and I found out later that the place was owned by Abramoff. Does that make me guilty of political corruption?

The point is, Abramoff is everywhere. Just because someone knows him or even because they've gotten contributions from him doesn't mean they're politically corrupt. Of course, you can't tell that to ABC, or it would kill their ratings. Hastert has already agreed to return the contributions he received from the guy. Cunningham and DeLay never did that.

To pilsener:

Completely agree. Using anonymous sources as grounds for a "news" story is simply unethical. Bob Woodward is the only journalist who gets away with that, and he only gets away with it because he's done it so often that its just a foregone conclusion that he's using anonymous sources when he writes. This is going to kill Ross's credibility, and if it doesn't, it should.

"The more that you spin, the more you validate Rush Limbaugh's theory of the 'Drive-By Media'."

Rush formulated that theory while he hiding the illegal drugs he bought from maid in a toilet tank.

Ed, while I can appreciate your argument that Republicans and Democrats should be consistent in their criticism, the fact is that the DOJ said Hastert is not being investigated and ABC News said he is. If you see how wrong it would be to condemn Clinton in this manner, how do you not have the equivalent point of view regarding Hastert? Do you want truth or just that truth which helps the DNC?

The MSM does not care about the truth and it is obvious to all.

Fake but Accurate. The MSM motto.

Watching and listening to the right wing "dittoheads" collapse is music to my ears. "Hush Bimbo", Bill "Oh Really", and "Shun" Hannity have used lies, half truths, and misleading nonsense to brainwash a whole mass grasping for any straw they can cling to as their talking points are crushed to ZERO...their amount of truth is now ZERO

As I and others have said here before, it is very likely that both statements are true. DOJ is in the process of reviewing everything Abramoff told them and evaluating all their evidence. Anyone who knew Abramoff's reputation before the scandal would be surprised if Hastert's name didn't come up in the interviews. But it is also reasonable that DOJ would not consider someonen "under investigation" or even "part of the mix" until they have evaluated all the information they have, determined whether the alleged activities would be a crime, etc. I would be very disappointed in the FBI if they didn't look into the relationship between Hastert and Abramoff, but I would also be disappointed if they said someone was part of an investigation before the information they have warrants further investigation.

I thought it was appropriate that the appropriate authorities investigated when the Clinton administration was involved in something that seemed suspicious or had a relationship with somewhat who proved to be corrupt. The existence of smoke doesn't mean there's a fire, but you should look.

So I repeat: Do you believe that the FBI should not look into Hastert taking official acts that benefited a corrupt lobbyist days after said lobbyist hosted a fundraiser for him?

Ron,

Just curious. how many reports exonerating Clinton on Travelgate or Filegate or Whitewater did you have to see before you thought Republicans should let it go?

Ross, enough is enough ... you don't seem that dumb to carry on this charade .. either you support your 'STORY' or not ? I believe you've been had and why can't you just admit yr mistake? the MSM has been requesting Bush do the same for the last couple of years ! so what say you ?

"Do you believe that the FBI should not look into Hastert taking official acts that benefited a corrupt lobbyist days after said lobbyist hosted a fundraiser for him?"

It would depend on Hastert's position before the fundraiser. From what I hear, it was the same. If not, he should be investigated.

"Just curious. how many reports exonerating Clinton on Travelgate or Filegate or Whitewater did you have to see before you thought Republicans should let it go?" --ed

One. I was never a Clinton basher, nor am I a Bush basher.

I have a pretty good filter for the BS that comes from both parties, and this story is just full of it. You ever wonder why a Hastert-hater in the FBI would jeopardize an investigation that could bring down Hastert? Well, he wouldn't. That seems like a pretty big red flag to me.

Hmmm, Seems like this Leak was timed just about right to start discrediting Hastert just before he and the House Republicans Slam the Senate Immigration Bill. I wonder...

We all need to have our "BS Filters" replaced. Very few things in life, especially in politics, are facts. The only thing that any of us accomplish is talk--talk based on our idea of how things are. None of us has the "whole story". That includes journalists. That includes the FBI. That includes everyone posting on here.

To those who disagree with the use of anonymous sources: Think about all the situations in life where anonymity is necessary. Would you report a cocaine dealer on your corner and say "Oh, yeah, tell 'em that it was me, John Smith at 1234 Main St."? At least in cases like Hastert's, something could eventually benefit the decision-making process in this country. Unlike Linda Tripp, who was "credible"--as in she produced exactly what she claimed she had--and look what happened to her. Her credible information did little or no good for the American people. With anonymous sources, I would hope that journalists and readers could use their heads to evaluate credibility--not denounce it altogher.

My guess is that the fundraiser in question is not the first of its kind to benefit Hastert, and definitately not the first to be thrown by Abrahoff for a politician. Are such coincindences truly coincidently? Doubtful, especially if you have taken the initiative to read and educate yourself on political history anywhere in the world. Nations are built on relationships unbeknownst to the public. I do however hope that the fundraiser-letter incident wasn't the only reason for investigating Hastert.

As for a retraction--would you retract a statement you believed to be true?

And Ron, I often wonder why any government-related organization or individual does what they do. I'm sure that investigation-jeopardizing, Hastert-hating FBI agents exist and have their own agendas. Remember Deepthroat?

I thought ABCNews was the "Most Trusted" source for news. Guess you are proving that one wrong. Why don't you get your facts right before you go big time with a scoop that all the other news outlets know are false, and choose not to run with.

Where were you when Gore was taking money via China from Buddist Monks?
Why is it you only report on the bad things about Republicans?
Why are you not an equal opportunity assaulter?

Aside from the semantics "investigations" or "in the mix" I really don't care about the wording, what I care about is the lack of honor, dignity and honesty with some of our “representatives”, these guys are acting as tho they are above the laws they created or inherited; that the real issue.

We have a right to know if one branch or its members are acting criminal. Theres only been one body historically that has brought this to light more often and it sure wasn't Govt. Branch 1 or 2 or 3..... it was the media.

The Speaker's friendship with lobbyist Abramoff should be under investigation that's the bottom line regardless of what the media is reporting...oops i used the words “investigation.”

The Bush kingdom is falling apart and his royal subjects are being exposed for the gold they have taken from the kingdom. Hail town cryer spread the word "the Knights of the Bush round table are being exposed by honest news reporting".