The story began with Larry Johnson of No Quarter, who heard about the existence of such a video from five sources, all Republicans. The sources said that the video showed Michelle with Louis Farrakhan, and that Karl Rove was holding it in reserve for just the right moment.
From there, the story was picked up by Republican operative Roger Stone and pro-Obama FOX broadcaster Bob Beckel. Both claimed to have heard about the tape from their own sources, which may or may not be the same as Johnson's. Stone said that a TV network possessed the tape; soon after he spoke, a rumor spread that the network was ABC.
Last night, a site called HillBuzz supplied a highly detailed account of the tape, which supposedly was made on June 28, 2004, at the Sheraton Hotel in Chicago. The occasion was a Women's Luncheon held as part of the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition Conference. HillBuzz illustrated its story with an eye-opening photograph of Michelle Obama (then the wife of an aspirant to the U.S. Senate) and the wife of Louis Farrakhan.
Perhaps (I reasoned) Johnson's sources misinterpreted a reference to the wife as a reference to Farrakhan himself.
HillBuzz went on to provide a surprisingly detailed of what Michelle Obama said on that occasion. (More on those details later.) Larry Johnson reprinted the HillBuzz effort approvingly -- although, needless to say, he does not bear responsibility for the words written by others.
It occurred to me that we may not need a video to learn what occurred at a public event. Eyewitness testimony would do nicely. The event was emceed by ABC 7 broadcasters Cheryl Burton and Karen Jordan, and ABC had videotaped the entire luncheon.
Thus, I made it my duty to track down Jordan, Burton, or anyone else who was there.
This task proved difficult -- so much so that I started to get suspicious.
And tired.
When I began this quest, in the early A.M., I was propelled by partisan enthusiasm and the thrill that comes when one feels oneself to be on the verge of a breakthrough. Twelve hours later -- after an epic search for anyone in that room on that date -- I stopped being certain and simply became desperate for a solution. Any solution.
Dining on crow, if it came to that, would be a relief, as long as the mystery found closure.
Finally, a representative of ABC News 7 in Chicago got back to me. Here is the official reply:
ABC 7’s Karen Jordan and Cheryl Burton emceed the 2004 Rainbow-Push Women’s Luncheon. Other employees of ABC 7 attended along with hundreds of Chicago area civic, professional and media representatives. No one recalls Michelle Obama speaking at this luncheon and our archived video does not show Michelle Obama.The last bit is much less probative than you might think.
While ABC News did cover the entire event, they did not keep the raw footage for very long. The only bits they retained were the brief clips intended for use on the news that night. The clips showed speakers Shoshana Johnson and Jesse Jackson Sr. (I questioned the ABC News representative carefully on this point.)
However, we have no reason to doubt the integrity of Jordan and Burton. We must trust their recollections.
Does that settle that?
Conceivably, Michelle spoke informally after the proceedings had wound down, and after Jordan and Burton had left the room. Such things do happen. Some of my readers will consider this suggestion a stretch, others will not.
Should we conclude that the sources who told Johnson, Stone and Beckel about an inflammatory Michelle Obama video are hoaxing? Not necessarily: Those sources are not responsible for the things written on HillBuzz. Or so I presume...
We must now consider a cognate mystery. Just who is responsible for HillBuzz?
The proprietor of that site divulges neither name nor contact info. He or she will not allow comments. Few other sites, even within the pro-Hillary blogoverse, link to HillBuzz. The site seems to have popped into existence of its own accord.
Consider, once more, the HillBuzz description of Michelle's alleged rant on June 28, 2004:
For about 30 minutes, Michelle Obama launched into a rant about the evils of America, and how America is to blame for the problems of Africa. Michelle personally blamed President Clinton for the deaths of millions of Africans and said America is responsible for the genocide of the Tutsis and other ethnic groups. She then launched into an attack on "whitey", and talked about solutions to black on black crime in the realm of diverting those actions onto white America.The reference to the Tutsis and Africa has no parallel to any published or broadcast statement made by Johnson, Stone or Beckel. This description is new stuff. And it indicates that the writer has interviewed someone who has actually seen the video tape.
And yet -- if a tape exists, it almost certainly was not taken at the event described by HillBuzz! So just where did HillBuzz get those references to Africa and black-on-black crime?
Before calling the mysterious proprietor of that site a hoaxer, I would prefer to allow some time to pass. Perhaps an explanation will come.
So, this day began with excitement and ended in perplexity. I'm glad to have tracked down the eyewitnesses -- otherwise, the HillBuzz version of events might have lingered for days or weeks or months. Still, the story did conclude with some magenta in cheek.
Has the entire "Michelle video" story been disproven? Nope.
We're back to where we were on Tuesday morning. She may have spoken intemperately on some previous occasion. One could argue that she was more likely to speak without thinking before her husband ran for the Senate. One could also argue that someone has fibbed to Johnson, Stone and Beckel.
Yes, I'm frustrated and annoyed to have been misled by the HillBuzz report. The level of detail in that report convinced me that this investigative trail would lead somewhere.
A friend assures me that when dining on crow, one should use plenty of barbecue sauce. Less gamy that way.
34 comments:
"HILLARY CLINTON TO SUSPEND CAMPAIGN ON SATURDAY"
The operative word being (of course) "SUSPEND", not END. Obama has a simple solution to the "whitey tape". Disown Michelle.
Rezko is another problem. Facing a life in prison he will assuredly take the "deal". Bill and Hillary have known this since New Hampshire.
<>_<> HIDE AND SEE
Somebody writing on the Volokh Conspiracy site actually went to the Rainbow/Push headquarters, and he, too, came up empty and figured there was nothing to the HillBuzz "story."
It makes one really wonder who is behind the HillBuzz site.
I've been there too...both Volokh and Rainbow. Rainbow/Push doesn't seem to sell any videos of that vintage.
Joe, it's too early to say you have been misled by HillBuzz.
You yourself said that ABC only kept clips of their video.
I'm not saying that they are telling the truth...I have no idea, you have no idea, so we are back to where we were, and nothing more IMO.
But ever since this first started, I've wondered why Republican sources would let anyone know about it - Hillary is clearly the more formidable candidate, so why leak news of its existence? I find the "anti-McCain forces" explanation hard to swallow; I find the "Larry made it all up" explanation impossible to believe, so that leaves only one other logical explanation - Larry was setup.
Of course, it could be true as well. Yesterday something really weird was going on with Internet Archive (IA) when I was home at lunch digging...when I searched on rainbowpush.org, IA came back with an error message saying its server was down - but I was able to perform searches on other sites with no problems. I tried rainbowpush.org again, same error message. When I got home from work, I tried again, and rainbowpush.org worked...
However, something seems very odd about the results - in the past when I've dug into site archives, the * was always used properly...representing a change from the previous capture, while dates without a * were always the same. However, take a good look at the IA results - for example, all those dates in 2004 with no *, yet many are different from each other.
I can't explain it, except to say the error message yesterday at lunchtime fueled my suspicions, while the odd results now that IA works for rainbowpush.org make no sense to me.
John
SluggoJD
Many thanks for your hard work and persistent research.
I am thankful that there is not much to this story. I hope there never is. Thank you Joe for trying to get to the bottom of it and being forthright about what you found out.
I wish you would be nicer about Obama and work for his election ( and maybe Hillary as vice president ) and desist from the hate you direct his way. It would be great if we could all unite to elect a Democrat as president and help heal this country. I hope we can.
joseph -
you researched the matter when others would or could not.
you chased rumor down.
you told your readers what you were doing all along the way.
you could not have acted with more integrity.
there is no crow you need to eat.
be proud of what you did
and of the nearly academic (i.e., intellectually honest) manner in which you described it to your readers.
Very interesting! Caution in such matters is always advisable.
Just visited Hillbuzz site for the first time, which has details on what he/she did (supposedly) to track down the story.
In such meetings, several events may be held simultaneously (and one cannot be at everything) or the people at ABC may have left early or skipped a particular meeting. So I agree that we can accept what the ABC folks say is true, but that does not completely end the matter.
I think this Hillbuzz quote is the key: "Michelle Obama appeared as a panelist alongside Mrs. Khadijah Farrakhan and Mrs. James Meeks."
If she was truly a panelist, one presumes she spoke (temperately or not is a separate question). If this is incorrect, then maybe she did not speak at all (or at most informally).
Can we track down a program for the meeting to see if Mrs. Obama was truly on a panel? Hillbuzz says he/she did track down a schedule, but I did not see one in the quick view I made of the site.
Using Google, I found a contemporary reference. No details but this looks like a big conference:
http://coffeehousestudio.blogspot.com/2004/06/annual-rainbowpush-conference.html#links
For what it is worth.
djmm
I checked a bit on HillBuzz, and I am nearly 100% certain the writer is a woman who lives in Chicago, is a real Clinton supporter, and is good at doing research. I believe those who want to stay anonymous should be allowed to do so, so I'll leave it at that. If it turns out she's pulling dirty tricks for another campaign I'll reconsider, but I highly doubt it. (No, I'm not the blog writer, I'm just a web nerd. The Internet Archive can be wonky and overloaded with traffic, but there's no way Rainbow/Push could have scrubbed their IA data, all they can do is stop the IA from indexing their site currently.)
The HillBuzz writer is making some educated guesses based on what she has found in local libraries and what she has heard from others in Chicago; she is not intentionally trying to spread disinformation. She suggests if this happened it may have been at a closed-door event. I advise all to remain skeptical about the existence of this video until there is real proof. If this is all made up I would attribute that to wild rumormongering in Chicago and not a deliberate effort by the HillBuzz writer to start nasty rumors.
"The reference to the Tutsis and Africa has no parallel to any published or broadcast statement made by Johnson, Stone or Beckel. This description is new stuff. And it indicates that the writer has interviewed someone who has actually seen the video tape."
Joseph, you are to be commended for your great efforts, and for your honesty in reporting what you found. Or did not find, in this case.
However, the above quote stunned me. Just how, exactly, does your conclusion follow from the facts?
As far as I can tell, "it" indicates nothing more than the writer you reference simply telling a different story.
I'm not saying it indicates otherwise, either. But you don't have enough information to draw that conclusion.
You do such good investigation, but you are so driven by this obsessive hatred of Obama that it clouds your judgment. It's been so painful to watch that I hardly ever visit anymore. And you haven't let up a bit. It's all Obama hatred all the time. Poison.
Scott, what you said. In triplicate, at least.
I'm sorry, but the HillBuzz description DOES differ from what came before. I'm not saying int conflicts, but it adds material previously undiscussed.
As for hatred -- do you recall the title of Mike Wallace's 1959 piece on the Nation of Islam?
Found a complete schedule and Mrs. Obama does not seem to be listed as a panelist:
http://web.archive.org/web/20040608211357/corona.tpsgi.com/rpc/Conference_Schedule.htm
There were workshops and discussions on problems in Africa, and President Clinton was part of the conference, which might have sparked something, but Mrs. Obama is not listed as a formal panelist.
Found a write up as well. No mention of Mrs. Obama, for what it is worth:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_4_106/ai_n6153551
djmm
Yeah, I saw that, but Michelle was listed as a special guest or something like that. My thinking was, it was a conference for women, so I don't think Jesse would have monopolized the whole affair. Of the women there, who would speak? Shoshanna Johnson is not a professional speaker and probably did not want to talk for very long. The other women in that photograph were (most of them) kind of elderly. Elderly people talk slowly. So really, it made sense -- to me, earlier in the day -- to presume that Michelle had seized upon her chance to play raconteur.
Or is that raconteuse?
You have become a pathetic fucking tumor!
Grab your Dixie Cup,and book a flight to Jonestown.
You threw it all away!
What a resume!
Vaya Con Dios!, El Puto!
Ty Davis
Mesa, AZ.
(Copied and Pasted)
Correct -- the article says "Shoshana Johnson, the nation's first Black female POW and former Iraqi captive, urged people to register to vote in the November 2 election. "All I ask for my country is to register and vote. How can we show another country how to be a democratic society if we sit back in this democratic society and don't vote?""
She was not listed as a panelist either and as you point out is not a professional speaker (so far as I know). Maybe all the women in that photo sat as guests of honor and spoke at the lunch. Apparently Rev. Jackson's speech used to be available at the site:
http://web.archive.org/web/20040722150104/www.rainbowpush.org/FMPro?-db=RPOfrontpage.fp5&-format=rainbowpush/frontpage/results.htm&-lay=front&constant=1&-find
"The RPC &CEF ANNUAL CONFERENCE
Rev. Jackson's Keynote Address:
The Challenge to Build a More Perfect Union
click here"
but when I did, Wayback could not find it:
http://web.archive.org/web/20040722150104/http://www.rainbowpush.org/FMPro?-db=rpodata.fp5&-format=rainbowpush%2fdata%2fdetailspeech.htm&-lay=main&-sortfield=date&-sortorder=descend&category=speech&year=2004&-max=20&-recid=33066&-find=
djmm
odd....she is listed on this one
http://web.archive.org/web/20040811233750/corona.tpsgi.com/rpc/Conference_Schedule.htm
Ty's remark should explain why I fight. Obama did THAT to my party.
Even though I'm not a democrat. I rather see Hillary get the nomination and even win the general.
And no im not part of Rush's Operation Chaos Nor do i like Mccain. I don't think im even going to vote.
A few months ago before that pastor tape came out I was OK with Obama winning. Then i started to see a different Obama right before that tape of Wright. The way he handled the controversy sealed the deal. I knew right then he was playing everyone a fool.
It's not hard to believe a tape like that exists and the republicans have it. I mean look at the church they attended for 20 years. The mission statement they had was unconceivable before they changed it.
The detail to the rumor and the event it took place makes it even more believable. Do i think she spouted off in front of news reporters? No i think it was a more private event or a event she felt comfortable speaking, Probably happen like some suggested just a different date or place. The church makes more sense.
They have dirt on him i just know it and the MSM does too. No election comes without surprises. They will hand this election to Mccain just like the Necons handed him the nomination.
The media might be shining a light on him right now but i think they know he has no chance or some are just too naive to see it.
Joseph, thank you so much for all the work you are doing. You are putting al the professional "journalists" to real shame. (I hesitate to use the term journalists at all, since they all digust me so deeply now.)
They are throwing mud at you, don't give in. The O-people are getting really angry now, even local radio dudes (who only think they matter, but nobody knows them 50 miles away) are having wars among themselves now. I am just appalled. The whole thing seems so obvious for any thinking person - how can the msm not get that? Or: hoe can they be so spineless to play along, if they see through the game?
Everyone seems to have drunken the koolaid, and I am scared to watch that.
Anyone knows the movie "Stepford Wives"? No no, not that stupid wanna-be-funny remake from 2004, but the real creepy original from 1975? If you don't, rent it! This whole thing looks to me like that story! (I don't want to give things away here) People you thought you knew turning into bots overnight.
Obots everywhere, and no common sense left. If you say anything against the Holy One, you are a racist. End of discussion.
I hope Hillary will have the strength to sit this out. The country needs her so badly. That is what I wrote to her via her website. (I hope everyone reading this also went to her site and left encouraging commnets for her?)
A completely different idea my husband and I were discussing last night: what if McCain would put Hillary on his ticket? That would destroy the Dems, wouldn't it?
I know, Hillary might be a better woman than I am (and NOT do that), because I certainly would go with McCain ("a woman scorned", or so?). She might be more rational and/or loyal than me. Ok, maybe that is why I would make a real bad politician...:-))
Anyway, thanks Joseph for your great work, and please do not feel you have to appologize for anything. You are decent and honest, and that is not found outside anymore. Thank you!
albgardis said...
"A completely different idea my husband and I were discussing last night: what if McCain would put Hillary on his ticket? That would destroy the Dems, wouldn't it?
I know, Hillary might be a better woman than I am (and NOT do that), because I certainly would go with McCain ("a woman scorned", or so?). .."
So tell me again who is drinking the koolaide?
Is that what you want, to destroy the Dems?
Have you considered that you are all being Roved. First he starts the viral meme. Then at some point later after many have 'convinced' themselves of it's existence, due to their internal needs to justify their irrational hatred, he produces a fake, drops it a week before the general, before the forgery can be proven, the election swings to some degree. Haven't we seen this already? And yet here we are falling for the same old song and game. Yeesh people, grow up, and stop being such haters. But then some folks just aren't happy unless they are unhappy.
Richard Murdoch said recently "Its going to be a landslide for Obama"
Let's see what your tangled mind can twist out of thise few words
Destroying the Dems is preicsely what I want. Destroy and reconstitute. Solve et Coagula, as the alchemists used to put it.
What used to be my party has nominated an unconscionably evil manipulator. To a degree, I can live with that. WHat I cannot abide is the sick, sick cult of personality surrounding this personage. What I cannot abide is what has become of the progressive movement.
The Dems have been taken over by what we might call the Kos wing. I -- we, for there are many of us -- are going to destroy this version of the Democratic party. ONce Obama fails, the older and better party can be reborn.
Carter, Kennedy, Kerry, Edwards, Richardson, all have been taken over by a prog blog?
And when Hillary endorses Obama she also is evil?
What's up, you fucking bigot?
its okay if you can't abide progressives joey
we can't abide you either
This doesn't apply to Scott: These comments (and I get many such) do much to explain why Hillary became the more popular candidate in the last third-or-so of the primary season -- why she won the popular vote, and why she stands a much better chance in the electoral college. The Obots simply don't know how sick they sound -- how repulsive they are to normal people.
I mean, earlier today I deleted a comment that was SO freaking bizarre as to be beyond imagination. This clown actually talked as though Obi is the Messiah. Literally: The Messiah. And he was praying for me to open my eyes and accept the new Christ.
Scott: All of the people you cite have bowed to political pressure before. They're used to doing so. The blogs are only one manifestation of that pressure, but it's the one I point to most often, because it's the world I live in.
In Kerry's case, I think there's a liberal white guilt thing going on. I'm still angry at him for not going for Edwards.
They will all one day recognize that Barack Obama was the worst thing to hit the Party.
Michelle does apparently have some deep-seeded anger and anomosity towards Bill Clinton. From the New Yorker:
“I want to rip his eyes out!” she said, clawing at the air with her fingernails. One of her advisers gave her a nervous look. “Kidding!” Obama said. “See, this is what gets me into trouble.”
If I were one of her advisors, I would have given her a nervous look, as well. What gives?
Joe, What political pressure does Carter need to bow to. How about Kennedy? And Caroline?
How do you know that the majority of freaky email you get is actually from Obama supporters? We don't even know who Hillbuzz is. Hell!... we don't know who you are and you don't know who I am. Who is we?
IScott: think Carter was possessed by whatever demons first instructed him to pick Brzezinski. (God, I hate spelling that name.) All I can say about Teddy is that he made a worse choice than did his nephew.
Do you really think the Psych-O-bots are McCain secret agents? Hmmm...
Okay, I have to admit, the thought has crossed my mind as well.
I mean, the sheer VOLUME of shit they send me is boggling. Only about a quarter of the commentary sent to this blog actually shows up on the page. The other stuff -- and I'm speaking sincerely here -- it isn't like your material, Scott. Your messages are reasonable, even when they tick me off. But the stuff I delete is nuttier than a jar of Peter Pan. And it just keeps coming and coming!
You really think those messages could all be a huge fake-out? I dunno. I can't see the purpose of such an elaborate operation.
I don't know either. But I do know you cannot
( should not ) trust what someone says online.
I think you know there is a huge amount of disinformation being put out there on all subjects,
by our government, paid blogers, CIA etc etc etc.
Let alone people messing around and saying anything just because they can.
Here's Obama addressing the video, in an intv with CNN's Candy Crowley:
"You know, I think, Let me take the second one first. And we've seen this before. There is dirt and lies that are circulated in email and they pump them out long enough until finally you, a mainstream reporter, asks me about them. And then that gives legs to the story.
(reporter: I don't want to give legs)
"And you know if somebody has evidence that myself or Michelle or anybody has said something inappropriate, let them do it.
(reporter: as far as you know its not true?)
"I think, I think I've answered the question. I think this, you know, this is the same kind of nonsense that we started with the madrassahs in which CNN had to fly to Jakarta to disprove it, and frankly my hope is is that people don't play this game. It is a destructive aspect of our politics right now. And simply because something appears in an email, that should lend it no more credence then if you heard it on the corner. And you know presumably the job of the press is to not go around and spread scurrilous rumors like this until there's actually anything, one iota of substance or evidence that would substantiate it."
By the way, the idea that the GOP may be pushing all this divisiveness is a good one, in my opinion. Dave Neiwart has a good take, not on the idea that the Rovians are behind it, but how the right-wing talking points became game in a Democratic contest here.
"pro-Obama FOX broadcaster Bob Beckel"
An Obamabot pushing this story would tend to make it seem more credible.
If Bob Beckel were actually 'pro-Obama'? Is he really?
Post a Comment