Dana Milbank’s Very Thin Folder
It was a very thin folder Dana Milbank held in his hand–his shield against the DFH blogger who got to ask a question. "A full list of documentation of me holding the Bush White House to account," he explained it as, in addition to a copy of an email Nico Pitney wrote the night before Obama asked him a question at a press conference.
Milbank’s folder might be so thin because he apparently finds his three to four, 750 to 800 word columns a week a taxing burden. Funny … that sounds like Monday lunchtime to me.
But forget, for a moment, the embarrassing thinness of Milbank’s folder–the columns where, he says, he held Bush accountable. I’m more curious why he brought his thin folder to confront Nico Pitney, whose sin (after all) is that he got to ask the President a question on behalf of Iranians. Nico wasn’t the one criticizing Milbank for not holding Bush accountable (though he did remind viewers that Milbank was rather interested in how Obama looked in a swimsuit).
Reading pretty much everything that was written about Bush on a daily basis, as I did, one could certainly see the major themes emerging. But by and large, mainstream-media journalism missed the real Bush story for way too long.
(To be fair, Milbank explained his thin folder as a response to others at HuffPo–not Nico–who had accused Milbank of not holding Bush accountable.)
Now, Froomkin did not name Milbank personally. But I can’t help but observe that a very testy Milbank whipped out his thin folder this week–the week when Dan Froomkin was fired because he refused to stop criticizing the crappy coverage of both Bush and Obama. I can’t help but notice that Milbank came prepared to defend himself aganist precisely the charges that Froomkin has leveled–that those covering Bush on a day to day basis "missed the real Bush story for way too long."
This entire exchange, it seems to me, has more to do with the WaPo’s thin skin about Froomkin’s charges than it has to do with Nico’s question.
Which sort of makes you wonder whether Milbank didn’t "collude" with fellow WaPo columnist Howie Kurtz, who apparently had no thin folder of his own even to show.
From Crooks and Liars Nicole Belle (emph. added):
I’m shocked, shocked I tell you, to find that there was no mention of Froomkin on Reliable Sources today.
That explains why all the Village people were giving each other high-fives when the Post canned Dan Froomkin. ‘Cause commenting on the media – about what a poor, inane, self-serving job it does in covering the news – is so good for us and soooo bad for them. As if hiding how bad a job they do will help retain readership.
Here’s hoping McClatchy or Jane or Arianna hires Dan and he continues to pump out first-rate journalism.
Why doesn’t FDL or Huffington hire Froomkin? I might toss a few nickels this way.
Id actually like to see the contents of Dana Milbank’s very thin folder–the list of columns in which he says he held Bush to account.
I’m betting his list on Bush is shorter than my list on Obama.
Of course, I haven’t confined myself to 3-4 750 to 800 word columns a week.
I’m sure the paper in Dana’s very thin folder was printed on both sides.
In a very small font.
With very narrow margins.
And lots of abbreviations and acronyms.
I think he should just lay it out there for all to see. If he’s so confident, and all…
He’s probably doesn’t want to show up Russert and Woodward, who each got a shoutout from Dan.
Doesn’t this remind you of Rove’s lawyer waving around what he said was Patrick Fitzgerald’s “exoneration” of Rove, but of course refusing to share what the letter actually said?
Bob from HI
currently in AZ
Hi Bob, it also reminds me of McCarthy’s I have here in my hand…
I just watched this clip on Spencer’s blog. I thought the show looked quite amateurish. All three squished into one side of Howie’s diner booth while he hogs the other side. Very weird staging.
You know I didn’t even recognize Dana. He seems so nice and gentle on KO’s show. Here he was incredibly territorial. And a geek for shaking a file at Nico. the woman was just damn jealous.
I think BO was trying to emphasize new technology and highlighting the role it is playing in Iran. As Nico said, he still dodged the question…lol.
There were several comments posted about Milbank’s reaction to Nico, at CNN.com, in the ‘Political ticker’ section. Most of them were less-than-favorable to Milbank and the other journamalists who are feeling so offended.
A small and thin folder. Exactly how Mrs. Milbank describes him.
Stick a fork in Mr Millbank
“I’ve got a folder…” Wow, Dana sounded a whole lot like Karl Rove there, and got me thinking back to the Rove v. GOP staffer altercation at a DC steak house…
You’re not in good company, Dana.
Yeah, I remember Dana, out on the limb with black sites, torture, Khaled el-Masri …
Oh, different Dana. Sorry. Google Dana Milbank with “torture” and the number one hit shows how devoted he was to holding
BushPelosi accountable. Ok, sorry again.Google Milbank and Iraq War and you get Dana fearlessly going after
BushCheneyRumsfeldFranksTenetCambonePowellRoveDoug Feith.Then there was Milbank’s in depth handling of the Bush torture lawyers and their torture techniques.
What a guy.
okay, this is only a vague memory… but once upon a time there was a “committee hearing” re: some Blair and Bush memos… about the run-up to the Iraq “war” (Downing Street memos I think they were called) that had to be held in a basement, because Sensenbrenner stiffed them. The only other bits I can remember right now are 1) Ray McGovern was there and 2) Milbank wrote a totally dismissive column about it after and 3) I knew at that point Milbank was a total asshole. Can anyone prompt my memory?
Does this help narrow down your search? I’ll keep looking.
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2545
okay, I’m guessing it must have been after that column alluded to in the link (6/8/05) — I just wish I could remember which House committee is was that had to have a semblance of hearings in the basement b/c of Sensenbrenner. I’ll try to follow up later- late here! Ordinarily I would be more google diligent, but I am really tired. I would/ will look for basement flag hearings Milbank.
okay! I found it
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01570.html
does this link work?
I remember that too – thanks for finding the link.
**********
BTW, EW, I’m sure Milbank has a clip you can link to of him taking on Gannon, right?
You alluding to something like this?
http://bigheaddc.com/2007/05/0…..is-a-liar/
OK! Good work!
I like how he whipped out a manila folder.
Not a 40GB flash drive chuck full of material.
Both thin on content and very, very old school. Sadly passé.
The other matter which appeared but wasn’t addressed in this exchange — and yes, likely staged with advance collusion — was the piercing of the wall of mainstream media journos’ professionalism. They never criticize each other because they may need each other. This is one of the reasons Froomkin was cut, too, he was poking holes in this veil.
Remember the groupthink process during the Libby trial, where they compared notes on what was said? They need each other for that, and Nico hasn’t paid his dues; Nico’s an outsider for this reason, who continued to make hay on this fact today with his in-your-face confrontation of groupthink-conventional-wisdom-professional-ethics crap.
This is one the key reasons why the Iraq War went down; the media circled up the wagons, from owners to reporters on the line, nobody willing to pierce that veil and hold the other guy accountable. It’s why the reporting on the economic crisis didn’t happen until it was too, too late; the guys with the info are in bed with the banksters, and piercing the veil would cut them off of their sources.
That’s why the Jon Stewart rebellion was so damned shocking to Bob Novak; who dares to poke holes in the veil, dammitall? It just isn’t done.
Here’s to more sharp knives and more Nicos. Stick it to ‘em.
dana gimmick was self-referential.
dana milbank IS a small and thin intellectual folder.
go read bob somerby (http://www.dailyhowler.com/index.shtml) for milbank’s rap sheet of stupid and inane commentary over several years.
and remember – milbank is a yale skull and crossbones.
how stupid can a skull and crossbones member be?
i leave it to you, dear reader, to judge.
and being a “skull and bones” means what exactly? It does not in any way seem to show leadership or intelligence. IMO all it means is that they are all part of a secret boys club-no girls allowed-full of rich kids who are living off the money made by their ancestors. a bunch of pretentious airheads who spend their lives as drones rather than being productive. Those who rise to higher office, political or business, seem to confirm once more the “Peter Principle”. The original founders of “skull and bones” might have been very smart but the current members remind me more of useless empty headed rich boys who waste not only their lives but actually cause harm to any who find themselves having to work under them.
peter @ 5
no peterr, it was printed in vewy, vewy large type.
(loved your comment the other day; can’t get it out of my head),
As Elmer Milbank was kind of a proxy for the village media complex perhaps we should refer to him as the Fuddsucker Proxy.
Hey EW, what’s the chances Milbank shows up at PDF09?
Heh.
no kiddin’ .. you are very productive …
gannon ..that’s a good jab Mary .. lol
the msm’s information is like the drunk who uses a lampost for support rather than illumination
Kurtz kind of seemed to enjoy setting Nico up with that “Do you think it jealousy?” question (ha! and Nico doubled-down with hypocrisy … love it :-). Millbank is probably as big a dick to his coworkers as he is to everyone else.
The WaPo has managed to put itself in a very awkward position. Having explained that it couldn’t afford Froomkin after a first-quarter loss of $54 million, it will soon have to insist, when reporting a second-quarter loss of, say, $70 million, that the firing of Froomkin had nothing to do with it.
And when it has to let Milbank go, and he can’t find a job anywhere else, he’ll blame it all on Froomkin.
Froomkin drew blood, and the wound won’t heal.
Yeah — we should definitely watch the upcoming WaPo financials to see the outcome of this latest in oh so many wise strategic decisions. ha.
As for Dana’s injury, I submit it’s self-inflicted.
Bigger question:
Why and how was it that the show’s booking department stacked the deck with two partisan hacks attacking a blogger in close proximity from both sides? Does the mainstream media’s bias get any more obvious? Could Millbanks have been any more in Niko’s personal space? Was this all just a happy coincidence, or carefully stage-managed? Did Millbank meet with Rove in advance?
There is no “Liberal Mainstream Media,” only the perpetual effort to promote that lie.
the money shot from pitney comes at the end, it really should have been the bazooka right at the beginning of the dialogue, that money shot is [paraphrased];
“if it was a set up why would the president duck the question”
and that line right there makes this a non story
Actually, this is the media ownerships’ (Goldman/Rockefeller/Federal Reserve, etc.) way of sending a message straight to the White House…
“Don’t call on bloggers, don’t raise their profile, don’t lend them any credibility or provide them access to our controlled airwaves. This is not what we hired you to do!”
plunger, I have to admit, while you are right concerning the purpose of the critisism, pitney did bring this on himself;
he wasn’t paying any attention to the president at all, he choked, and read his script even though the president stepped on his lines
so pitney does fine for himself after the fact but did terrible for himself on the spot
With Millbank, as mentioned up-thread, Niko should have used the Gannon incident by way of comparison, as that was implicitly the equivalency the right wing is trying to draw, without dredging up the entire ugly gay hooker reality of it by name.
When presented with the perfect opportunity to blast the Bush Administration for the obvious partisan potted plant in their midst (a gay hooker with night time White House visiting privileges no-less), Millbank said nothing.
THAT is the story…not the fact that the Obama administration sought a question from the blogosphere inside Iran, and used Niko as a conduit for a question offered by someone other than Niko – an Iranian.
But it’s not like Nico has a lot of practice with asking the POTUS questions. What’s the excuse for seasoned press veterans who don’t ask the tough questions?
Given time, Nico will surely get better, and maybe the rest of the WH press gaggle will snap out of it and remember what their jobs are – the grande dame Helen Thomas is still there to show them, after all.
I’m thinking we’ll see a whole lot more of Nico. Hopefully on Rachel tonight.
And Obama and Alexrod knew exactly what they were doing with this.
O/T, or back to the Bailout. While unemployment continues to climb, thousands have lost their homes and declared bankruptcy, etc., here’s a corporation that has done quite well.
How GE made billions from the bank bailout
BY PROPUBLICA Published: June 29, 2009 Updated 2 hours ago
“GE has long straddled the fence between banking and commerce — allowing it to profit from the federal bank bailout without falling under banking regulations. But as the Obama administration seeks to tighten financial regulation, the world’s largest industrial company will have to make a choice.”
http://rawstory.com/08/news/20…..k-bailout/
“Very thin”, or “very small”? I think “very small” makes your point better, wink, wink.
Very well done video showing all the times Gannon/Guckert was called upon at Bush press conferences:
http://crooksandliars.com/davi…..ion-imagin
You know what’s the most obnoxious part of each of those clips showing Gannon lobbing a softball question at nearly every one of those White House press conferences?
EVERYBODY in the room, including the press secretary, knew or should have known that Gannon was
– a pseudonym;
– not a military guy;
– moonlighted as a man-whore;
– and only had credentials from a two-day, fifty-dollar journalism certification program run by a key conservative operative.
And yet he was accorded all the same respect and deference as any other member of the media.
None of them questioned his legitimacy because Gannon never questioned theirs, a quid pro quo.
let the screaming begin
They split 5-4 along predictable lines.
From HuffPo:
Milquetoast mountebank.
For all we know, Milbank’s folder was empty. He used it rather like the 1950’s Sen. Joe McCarthy used his purported list of Communists in the State Dept. and elsewhere in the USG. He knew precisely how many there were; it’s just that his number kept changing moment to moment. A gullible press stopped asking whether there were any and started asking how many there were.
Poor Dana: he was relieved when his “blogger” competitor was fired, but he still can’t keep up with the competition. And I just know he’s paid a lot more than the $80-90,000/year number the Post’s Ombudsidiot kicked around as Froomkin’s paycheck.
Size queen.
did dana really call pitney a dick during the segment?
Loved Pitney’s jab about Milbank asking Obama about how O looks in a bathing suit. Hahahahaha. That, Mr. Milbank, is the crux of the problem…not that Obama told Pitney in advance that he would be called on.
Milbank is utterly clueless about his own culpability in the ruin of print media.
Dana had a “hand in the cookie jar” look when Nico reminded us all of the bathing suit questions. Just like a little kid.
This story demonstrates the faux perception that the WH reporters and their employers from the MSM have some sort of right to preeminance. They suck and their employers suck. I have no love for Cheney but I recall the outrage by these same asshats, led by David Gregory, when Cheney released his statement to the Texas press instead of to the clowns.
Monks v. Gutenberg. Milbank was hardly the only MSM figure who got all pissy about Pitney’s getting prominent face-time with the President to ask SOMEBODY ELSE’S QUESTION. Pitney was doing something the MSM doesn’t usually do well (tho the Times’ the Lede did just fine).
To call Pitney a plant is just plain stupid & inaccurate since both he & the President made clear that there had been contact between the White House & Pitney prior to the President’s calling on him. The Bush pseudojournalists, on the other hand, were plants — the Bush White House & the so-called journalists made unacknowledged deals to elicit certain pro-administration questions.
Media who work primarily on-line can expect folks who get their stuff all printed out on pieces of paper to continue this kind of attack for a long time to come. Remember who won in the Monks v. Gutenberg case. Those illuminated pages were way prettier than Gutenberg’s crass Bible, but Gutenberg’s cheesy product was so much more accessible, affordable & usable. Decision Gutenberg.
Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com
The hypocrisy is incredible, since the mainstream media was taking its queues from Nico, having been put to shame by him and the volume of work he was doing to both aggregate content and to solicit, edit, report content from sources inside Iran and out.
The readers understood the value of Nico’s work, measured by the five million hits his work received in a short window of time. But that’s five million hits the other corporate outlets didn’t receive, so they’re whining.
The internet is a meritocracy; while not all of the content is of the highest caliber, that which the people want will merit the most attention. They don’t get it, they think they should receive the attention of the public without investing the effort which the average reader can readily discern.
I really don’t get this snit-fit from the MSM. Why do they think they have the right to dictate to the President about the questions he takes? Just don’t get it. What a bunch of little twits.
there’s ever and always potential for cya override to kick in.
patience.
Nothing to get. It’s not rational, it’s not defensible.
Journalism prof/expert Jay Rosen often says about American conservatives and the Republican Party, “The base is not reality-based.”
You’re observing the slow revelation that the mainstream corporate media in this country, like the former power to which it cleaved, is also not reality-based. Their business model has been under siege for years — more than a decade, if we want to use the hard numbers — and they are just noticing as they are being laid off and finding their lunch eaten by dirty f*cking hippie bloggers who’ll actually do the hard work of the Fourth Estate.
as one who has long commented on Milbank’s self identification as dandy or fop – none of this surprises me
even with that in mind, when I saw the smoking jackets pic over at Howie’s place, I thought it was some snarky photoshopping
Oh hecque. Where’d that cute lil’ gremlite go. I know it must be around here somewhere. *glances at
routerroto-rooter*%let grousing gremlites be, child%
&yes all-wise mastodontist&
“I did not have texts with that folder…”
ROFL … *bows to the Master*
Milbank’s wiki entry identifies him as a member of Skull & Bones. Perhaps this connection helps explain the thinness of his folder.
except that howie did ask the really burning question of nico, the one that had to sting milbank like a nettle:
“so, do you think this is all just jealousy on the part of the WH press corps?”
that had to hurt.
schadenfreude is just so deliciously decadent.
Jeezus, Amanda Carpenter takes the biscuit. There’s something wrong with calling on Nico because he’s a leftist? WTF, conspiracy! The president called on a possibly sympathetic journo. OMG. Bush would never have done that, obviously.