A blog prophylactic, if you will.
Here's the story as it's shown up at the AP:
Republicans are accusing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of including a provision in a water redevelopment bill that could benefit property her husband owns in San Francisco.Their details:
The smear begins. She inserted the project to boost the rental income for her husband's buildings nearby.Pelosi's measure would authorize $25 million to improve San Francisco port areas, and also would put some areas off limits to navigation so cruise ships could dock.
Her investor husband gets rental income from four buildings in a nearby commercial district.
That's probably all you'll hear from Jack Kelly, Ruth Ann Dailey and maybe even Mike Pintek.
The AP story, though, has more information. Up front (as in, the second paragraph):
Aides to the San Francisco Democrat denied any connection, noting that the waterfront improvements were requested by the Port of San Francisco and the four rental properties in question are at least a mile away.But we all know the response, right? OF COURSE her aides would say that! Doesn't necessarily mean that it's true, right?
Well, Greg Sargent over at The Horse's Mouth (a blog that took apart Ruth Ann once before) made one phone call and found out from Brad Benson, special project manager for the Port of San Francisco that:
"The port initiated these requests. They came entirely from the city and county of San Francisco. [The requests] were generated at the staff level. The port initiated our request through the city and county of San Francisco. Our requests were funneled through the mayor's office on up to Speaker Pelosi's office...If anyone is claiming that Pelosi initiated these requests in some way, that's completely false."That about does it. Doesn't it?
We'll see. Never underestimate the local rightwing pundits on their ability to disregard reality.
1 comment:
Hey, David. Did you ever think you may actually be supplying them with stories for their columns? LOL
Post a Comment