Was Emily Fired?

The incident on MTP is still etched in my mind.
It was one of the most telling and bizarre moments in the saga of the Bush Regime.

I truly thought that I was witnessing a coup d'etat!

Now, I see next to nothing about it in the press or television.

What's happening with this story?

Emily should have been fired immediately. She needs to get on television and explain to the American people why she stopped a high government official from talking. I don't mean the spin, I mean the TRUTH!!!

I am very suspicious of Emily.:spank:

..crystalized the last four years for me -- deceit, manipulation, authoritarianism, and obstruction.

All of that packed into the 20 second clip of nothing but a palm tree.

That Powell was "running overtime" and she was just trying to keep him to the specified time. I don't buy that "storyline" but that's what was being discussed on the news as I drove into work this morning. I've not heard, nor read, anything further on it.

Powell arrived 45min late..MTP had to reschedule their schedule so Powell would make the show.

Emily probably got a raise.

n/t

and to be told nov 5..............

yesterday I saw it on every news broadcast that i watched. It was great on Letterman.

and she helped organize the GOP thug-a-thon that prevented the Miami recount in Florida. There is no way this bitch will be fired, although I doubt Powell will tolerate her presence.

In other words, she is a spy in Powell's office.
This is becoming more interesting to me by the second.
It was clear that Powell had no control of her in public so she must really run his office.

She still needs to be put on the carpet! Why don't they have her on the talk shows?

...that shut down the recount in Florida??? The ones that surrounded the building, beat on the doors and windows and spent hours harrasing the recounters until the vote was stopped??? Emily was part of the "Brownshirts" sent down to stop all recounts. Emily was, at that time, a staffer for bugman delay.

on edit: Emily won't be fired, she is probably powell's "minder," you know the one that make sure he "stays on the message."

Or whatever they were called.
Didn't the Hitler Youth surround the Reichstag while the German legislature was going to vote on the Enablement Act? (My history's a little rusty.)
This is no different. The repugs said this was "the will of the people" when the entire crowd of people surrounding the building were bused in by the GOP. And a good chunk of them worked in prominent repug senator's offices.

...there was the Sturm Abteilung (SA) or Stormtroopers, who wore uniform brown shirts as a symbol of party affiliation and unity. They'd disrupt other parties' rallies, beat up Jews in the street, and were gennerally the "gangster thug" rank & file of the Nazis during their rise to power. (Of course, once he'd gotten power Hitler screwed them over, but this type never learns.)

My knowledge of WWII and the events before it are not as extensive as I'd like them to be. But I do know how the brownshirts treated the Bauhuas.

The original brownshirts often interrupted meetings of Hitler's political rivals, so the comparisons with the Miami riot is very accurate.

is getting way to big.

There are two choices here:

1) You still don't undersand. I don't know that subtlety and how to tell situational differences can be taught. I'm no SpEd teacher.

2) You do not wish to understand, so you generate a ludicrous straw man.

Whichever the case, I felt I must call you on it. Apologies if you are offended, but I am speaking my feelings and I hope you don't consider this a personal attack as that was not my intent.

people that have a message contrary to his Admin. "Extrapolate to
a ridiculous degree" seems to be pretty standard fare around here.

I've just been reading about Moore's film and google's decision so I may be mixing apples and oranges but I really didn't think this was this was final exam time.

Relax. Do you work for google or something? What's with the Spec Ed reference? Chill out.

And extrapolating ludicrously to the n-th degree, as you did with your "this must mean Eisner is a Brownshirt, too" comment.

Ridiculous. And whether you know it or not, such extrapolations (well, get nto the qualittative differences between speculations and extrapolations shortly) are the Mother's Milk of Busheviks trying to either diqualify discussion by making a ludicrous, over-the-top assertion or by doing nearly the same thing in an attempt to solicit ludicrous responses.

My apologies if you were offended, but it is how I feel and I am not going to stop pointing it out, be it inadvertant as yours likely was or deliberate.

Finally, while I do agree that there is quite a lot of speculation (common in Totalitarian Societies where Trustworthy Information is nonexistant, or trending rapidly towards it as it is in Imperial Amerika today), on DU, there is a qualitative difference in speculating that there is something fishy about the Wellstone Crash or the faulty 9-11 Timeline and using that as a Straw man Springboard to say "well, that must mean Michael Eisner is a Brownshirt."

Actually, in my opinion, Eisner is most akin to the Wealthy German Industrialists who financed and indulged Hitler, never realzing that he had plans for THEM after NaziPower was 100% secure and unchallengable.

One wonders what the Busheviks will do if their Imperial Power become 100% secure, insulated, and isolated from the Voice of the American People?

Personally, I don;t want to find out.

Now I hope I have explained why I got pissed at yoru (in my opinion) thoughless, nonsensical comment.

I have also explained the difference between nonsensical n-th degree extrapolation and speculation in a nation with no Free Press.

And there is no "chilling out" while our beloved nation is ground 'neath Tyrants Totalitarian Heel.

None.

Is "minder" just another word for "Masser"?

they can't even answer a straight forward question without spinning it....

She got a raise.

that the episode would be "edited" is rather chilling. I can't believe that when I watched it live I thought that Russert was overeacting. Never underestimate these people...

...last night on Hannity's radio show that he felt it was a misunderstanding about time. The interview had run long and there were other scheduled...that Russert gives Emily the benefit of the doubt that she thought the interview was either over or either Powell or Russert wanted to stop the taping for an edit (not an uncommon practice on a recorded interview...whatif Timmy coughs or Colin blows...)

Russert pointed out, as did Olbermann, that Powell not only called for the camera to come back, but answered the question straight up...and it was one hell of a question. Powell all but admitted he was fed lies by the regime and "regrettably" told those lies to the U.N. If anything maybe Emily did us a favor.

It's amazing how people can jump on someone they don't know for reasons that all the parties involved seem to say was a misunderstanding. It'd be something if Emily decided no more, no how, no way...or if the feed from Jordan all of a sudden disappeared (more likely a way to end an interview when the heat gets too hot).

the "he's going to talk for 5 minutes" comment by Emily, I felt that she was one of those people that Mike Moore was constantly battling with in "The Big One". Her job was to get Powell from interview to interview.

But this neither explains nor condones her grabbing the camera and trying to end the interview on her own. This kind of thinking, i.e. "Screw you, I work for George W Bush" (apologies to Mel Brooks), has permeated all levels of the White House staff.

The key here is the fact that the interview was being recorded...not aired live. Again, it's not unusual for an interviewer or interviewee on a hook-up of that type to stop the taping because they didn't like how a how their answer came across, how they looked, etc. Many times this falls into the "minder".

I'm just passing along explanations for discussion purposes. I have no idea what was going on with lady or why she did what she did. This is the Top talk show, and the regime was turning to Colin to do some serious damage control, why would a RoveCo. minder want to interfere with that?

We can get into the role of a minder in a candidate or politician's life...and they all have 'em...and how their control of the access to and from the candidate is a bad thing, but this doesn't look that way...and I've watched the tape several times.

Russert says that he was getting a "wrap" during the previous question (done by HIS Producer) and Emily definitely heard that through her earpiece.

My question...what would cutting off the interview so abruptly on such a high profile show prove?

Were they using a remote camera for the interview or did Emily physically grab the camera away from someone and end the interview?

If it was a remote, why did she take it off of Powell? Since the Interview was being taped, why not just move in and tell Powell they had to move on to Fux News Sunday since they were already running late?

In my opinion, Emily is a handler that gets people from place to place. It was pretty arrogant of her to move the camera though, and that attitude seems to permiate the Shrub White House.

From what I can tell, interviews and watching the video...it wasn't a remote camera...first since the pan was jerky, second, Russert mentions there was a cameraman and third, there's usual a tech on site for such major hook-ups...especially a union shop like GE/NBC.

Taping is used for both sides benefit...whatif the satellite goes bad during a question? It puts some certainty in these broadcasts, as well as something for Russert to promo ahead. This is done exactly to avoid the "wall of time" problem you describe. Here MTP gets 9:00-9:30...Faux 9:30-10...also, since different networks use different birds, it makes coordinating those feeds easier as well.

I didn't see an arm in the camera and there hasn't been any post here or elsewhere that said she was the one who moved the camera herself...as opposed to giving the cameraman the high sign to pull off Powell. Again, I think we're reading more than meets the eye as Powell did answer the question. If he didn't like the question, he could do what members of this regime do all the time. Just answer what they want to and play out the clock. Powell does that as good as anyone.

As one whose interviewed politicians galore, I've met my share of zealous Press Secretaries who not only micromanage everything their candidate says or does, but wants to know every question you're going to ask...or even better, to "suggest" what questions to ask. It's one of the goofiest jobs in the world...if you've got the nerves of a high-strung cat, that is.

Cheers!

On Edit: It must not have been a big deal to a lot of the media as its play was limited on Sunday and became a joke by Monday. Most newsrooms probably saw this as another "blooper" that happens all the time with a remote hook-up.

As she did in Miami.

And WE FREE AMERICANS haven't forgotten, YOU NAZI WHORE!

From what I saw, Emily drew a lot of attention to the last question, and Powell defended himself and Bush with his answer. He blamed it all on the CIA, said he had been given bad information by the CIA, and he and Bush made their best decisions based on that info.

Powell continues to claim his innocence, and thus, Bush's. He's not being minded by Emily, he's being aided by her.

This is one of 3 articles in the ROMENESKO website. The spokesyakkers are backing her up, saying she was just juggling 5 interviews and that G.E.RUSSERT hogged time away from the other 4. She's still a witch (in the worst, non-Wiccan sense).

http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/images/I35680-2004May18

*******QUOTE*******

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34743-2004May17.html

Despite an outcry among media types, the State Department yesterday offered its full support for controversial press aide Emily J. Miller, who shocked both her boss, Colin Powell, and "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert when she ordered a cameraman to stop filming an interview with Powell that ran a few minutes over schedule Sunday in Jordan. ....

In just six months on the job, Miller, 33, who controls access to Powell, seems to have made more enemies than usual among the reporters who cover the State Department. "Her manner is brusque, abrasive, demeaning," said one, asking to remain anonymous so as not to be frozen out of interviews with Powell. "She's not doing the secretary a service; she's doing him a disservice." ....

About six weeks ago, Boucher investigated reporters' complaints about Miller's conduct during a pool-camera shoot. "There were one or two places where she was too aggressive," he acknowledged. "We all make mistakes sometimes."

In 2001 Miller was working as press secretary to then-Majority Whip Tom DeLay when she lashed into Post Magazine writer Peter Perl while he was doing a profile of her boss, screaming: "You lied! . . . You betrayed him! You twisted his words! . . . We don't know you. You don't exist. . . . You are dead to us." A DeLay spokesman told us yesterday, "Tom thinks Emily did a fine job for him."

********UNQUOTE*******

and the rest of the good ole boys.

I hope Colin realizes that she is not protecting him IMO. She is protecting the Republican party and she is an abrasive bitch.

He needs to FIRE her! Anytime a boss has to speak in that manner to a "trusted" aide, the Aide is not in Colin's corner. Emily is in her own corner and in the back pocket of the NEO NEO CONS.

Colin you are such a disappointment. If that is the way that Emily can treat you in public, God help what Bush can/is doing to you behind your back.

Give it up Colin! Give it up!