George plays it right down the middle. No bias there. LMAO!!!!

And so it goes. At this point, Mr. Stephanopoulos will begin to feel the daily pressure of having to explain himself. I do not know whether the story is true or not. In todays world it does not seem to matter. Mr. Stephanopoulos once worked for the Clinton Administration and was sure to have been privy to the character destruction that was the favorite weapon of Mr. and Mrs Clinton. He will feel the results, even if innocent, of questions being repeatedly asked and the allegations that are implied. I hope that somebody in the press keeps up the pressure if only to teach all the MSM a lesson. There is real damage done when reporters ask questions.

If indeed Mr. Stephanopoulos has been taking part in these calls, whether they are just daily calls between friends or they prove to be of a more political nature he will have lied directly. I hope that somehow someone can get phone records under the freedom of information act and can get to the bottom of this. It is more than unseemly if it is true and the investigation should continue.

Re-read Harris's original piece (linked above), it says this:

"Carville calls White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel. Emanuel calls ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent George Stephanopoulos. A bit later, CNN commentator Paul Begala, who is not quite the early bird that his friends are, will complete the circle with a rapid set of calls to all three."

So in Clintonian fashion, Stephie is truthful when he says 'no conference call', and 'no I didn't call so and so'. It's a daisy chain of calls where you put one party on hold, bring on another, and then release hold and link them.

And another quote: "Different versions of this round-robin chatter have been taking place, with few interruptions, every workday for nearly a generation."

Twenty years or so; that's pretty definitive. The credibility of Politico's John Harris has been directly challenged, and I'm sure he will respond. Watch for it!

Bleeping BS.....so tired of what's going on. It's crazy....we're weeks if not months from a tea party so much bigger and more necessary than ever before.

Notice how George's response doesn't refute the fact he talks to the White House daily.....just that he talks to many new sources daily....B freaking S.  I'm an independent, and wish at this point that Obama patterned his economics after Clinton....he at least understood and stoked the fire of capitalism.

Bleeping BS.....so tired of what's going on. It's crazy....we're weeks if not months away from a tea party so much bigger and more necessary than ever before.

Notice how George's response doesn't refute the fact he talks to the White House daily.....just that he talks to many new sources daily....B freaking S.  I'm an independent, and wish at this point that Obama patterned his economics after Clinton....he at least understood and stoked the fire of capitalism.

Hannity was spot on about the media dying. In the case of ABC, they died when Peter Jennings died.

The last bit of journalism at NBC was in the form of Tim Russert. At least he tried to be fair, & he was a likable guy. The NBCnews family has nobody I would want to end up paired with on the golf course.

CBS, has never been fair, between Uncle Walter & Dan Rather, I could care less about them.

As for CNN, Bernie Shaw retired after the 2000 election, & also got rid of "Crossfire", they have been an also-ran ever since.

"The Fairness Doctrine = Jim Crow laws for Conservatives".  Jim Quinn from "Quinn & Rose"

Way back when Clinton was elected I was a middle aged, not very well read liberal.  Based on the movie War Room I admired George S.  But early in Clinton's administration George and a few other young Turks were called before a congressional committee.  I was very disappointed and angry as I watched him testify about some then recent event.  Time after time as he was asked direct questions about what had happened he repeatedly replied that he had no recollection.  He, of course, was lying. He was telling bald faced lies to save himself and his boss a few minor hassles.  The man has no respect for truth or decency.  There is never any reason to believe a thing he says unless some acceptable external source supports his account.  The low cur will lie at the drop of a hat.

Technically speaking, George Stephanopoulos is correct. A conference call, according to the Wikipedia definition is where the original caller can hear everyone else in the group but he is the only one who has audio input. What Stephanopouos probably participated in (according to reports of the "conference calls") was really "group calls." According to Wikipedia, group calls also involve multiple parties but ALL can participate with their audio inputs. 

So, yeah, Stephanopoulos was technically correct but he knew EXACTLY what you were talking about, Kerry. In fact, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he also looked up the "conference call" definition in Wikipedia in order to wiggle out of giving a direct answer via semantics.

George's reply sounds a little bit too familiar to me. He says that there have been no conference calls. He's answering the question as asked. That doesn't mean that there haven't been individual calls or any type of contact with Carville, Begala, and the rest of these Clinton lowlifes, regarding "strategy". Before this is over, the current White House will set new lows in conduct. It's only been 6 weeks.....but the handwriting is on the wall. These people are reprehensible. That's what happens when you get PR types to run a campaign and subsequently a White House.

This guy was the chief liar for the Clintonistas for YEARS, yet we are somehow supposed to believe he is an "objective" journalist.

Right.

-Dave

Our clueless political leaders are about to drive us all over a cliff. The time to HITM is now-before we go over.