Sean Hannity was all excited last night about his latest finding that he thought demonstrated the Obama campaign had illegally coordinated with its SuperPac, Priorities USA, on a controversial ad featuring a steelworker tying the death of his wife to the loss of his job - and family health insurance - at a plant closed by Bain Capital. But unfortunately for Hannity – who kept sensationalizing the ad a little more each time he brought it up – guest Ann Coulter seemed more interested in attacking the Romney campaign over its reaction to the ad than she was in exploring how to throw the book at Obama.
Hannity began by alleging that the Obama administration “closely coordinated” with Priorities USA in producing the infamous ad. That, Hannity said, would be a “blatant and very serious violation of federal election law.”
I don’t know what kind of coordination did or did not take place. But I do know that Hannity's "evidence" looked about as persuasive as the 1990 hug he unearthed that "proved" Obama is a black radical. I also know that Hannity repeatedly misrepresented the ad by saying it “blames Mitt Romney for the cancer death of a steel worker’s wife.” Later, Hannity said the ad “features a man who claims Governor Romney and Bain Capital are responsible for his wife’s death.” Later still, Hannity upped that to say that the ad “accused Mitt Romney of murder.”
But the ad doesn’t say any such thing. In a thoughtful and enlightening piece on Mediaite, Tommy Christopher notes that the conclusion of widower Joe Soptic “isn’t that Mitt Romney is at fault, but that he ‘doesn’t realize’ and ‘is not concerned’ with the human fallout from his business deals,” i.e. that the loss of health insurance can be fatal. Furthermore, Christopher notes, “On that score, I haven’t heard anyone, even Mitt Romney, ever argue that Bain Capital did everything possible to avoid layoffs. His one and only job was to make maximum profits, even if that meant peddling R-rated movies. That’s a perfectly defensible position, and it would be nice if Romney would defend it, rather than simply complaining about how mean Bill Burton (of Priorities USA) is.”
You can watch the full ad and read the script here.
Hannity’s big “smoking gun” was a a clip he found of Soptic telling virtually the same story in the ad on a conference call with Obama spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter. Hannity gleefully presented it as a contradiction to Cutter’s claim that she didn’t know the details of “when Joe Soptic’s wife got sick or when she died.” But the details in the clip provided by Hannity were only that Mrs. Soptic got lung cancer “a little while later” and had to be put in a county hospital “because she didn’t have health care and when the cancer took her away, all I got was an enormous bill.” There was no evidence that the conference call Cutter and Soptic partook together had anything to do with the ad and the only extra detail about Mrs. Soptic’s illness was that what killed her was lung cancer.
But clearly, Hannity hoped his guest, former attorney Ann Coulter would jump on this big “get” as some kind of proof that the entire Obama campaign, if not the entire White House should be sent directly to jail. “What did Obama know about this ad and when did he know it?” Hannity asked hopefully near the end of the segment. Just like he asked during “Sestak-gate” in 2010. Just like he anticipated during Fast and Furious. I suspect this “smoking gun” will end up in the same heap of oblivion.
Coulter said agreeably, “There could well be” illegal coordination. But, she immediately added, “The bigger issue is how repulsive this ad is.” She called Obama “a liar” and said that the ad “shows the true colors of the man.” Of course, it takes one to know one. And if there’s one thing two-time voter-fraud suspect Coulter knows something about, it’s lying.
Hannity now upped the charges in the ad again. “They would have you believe, do you believe that Mitt Romney could cause you to get cancer?”
But unfortunately for Hannity, Coulter took her eye off attacking Obama in order to attack Romney instead. She suggested that the ad would be “the turning point” in the campaign were it not for the response of Romney campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul. In an open admission that the Hannity show is all about promoting Republicans and their causes, Coulter said there was “no point” in doing the show if Saul was going to be such a “moron.”
Her response was not that it was despicable, not that Bain had, that, that Romney had left Bain five years earlier (not completely true) or that the (wife) died five years after the plant closed and didn’t even get her insurance from her husband (because he lost it when the plant closed), (Saul’s) response was, ‘Well, if she had lived in Massachusetts with Mitt Romney’s health care plan, she would have had health insurance.’
Anyone who donates to Mitt Romney and I mean the big donors ought to call Mitt Romney and say if Andrea Saul isn’t fired and off the campaign tomorrow, they are not giving another dime. Because it is not worth fighting for this man if this is the kind of spokesman he has… There is no point in your doing your show, there is no point in us going to a convention and pushing for this man if he’s employing morons like this. This ad is the turning point and she has nearly snatched victory from the jaws of defeat (sic).
But take heart, Seanie-Poo. I’m sure Kimberly Guilfoyle and/or Peter Johnson, Jr. would be ready, willing and eager not only to bring charges against President Obama but to convict him at the same time.
Plus, it seems, once again, that thereâs NOTHING wingnut noisemakers like Hannity donât want to impeach President Obama over â whether itâs the use of Air Force One, making a recess appointment, or signing health care reform into law.
But, things like wiretapping US citizens without warrants, outing a cover CIA agent, or condoning offshore âenhanced interrogationâ â all of which just happen to BE illegal? Pshaw â thatâs just the âUnitary Executiveâ in action . . .
Hannityâs Latest Scheme To Impeach Obama: The SuperPAC Ad âBlamingâ Romney For Death Of Steelworkerâs Wife
Well, as is mentioned, it was the SuperPAC that made the ad, not the campaign . . . does this mean the rMoney campaign is now responsible for all ads made by super PAC’s on the right?
Plus, it seems, once again, that there’s NOTHING wingnut noisemakers like Hannity don’t want to impeach President Obama over — whether it’s the use of Air Force One, making a recess appointment, or signing health care reform into law.
But, things like wiretapping US citizens without warrants, outing a cover CIA agent, or condoning offshore “enhanced interrogation” — all of which just happen to BE illegal? Pshaw — that’s just the “Unitary Executive” in action . . .
“THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN IS THE MOST SLEEZY, SHAMEFUL CAMPAIGN I HAVE EVER SEEN IN MY LIFE.”
You must be very young . . . or you would have noticed the 2004 campaign, in which a decorated Vietnam veteran [John Kerry] was forced to defend his service against an AWOL member of the Texas Air National Guard [George W. Bush]
It’s so much fun watching the GOP party tear itself apart. Pass the Popcorn.
Oh, and folks: I still have a blog at http://notnowsilly.blogspot.com/ can be reached on facebook at http://www.facebook.com/headly.westerfield or Twitter at http://twitter.com/Aunty__Em
Come join the fun.
If this is true, it seems like a question that should be asked is why Bain backed out of their pension funding promise. Why is the focus on Cutter and the “details” that she clearly did not know instead of why Bain didn’t keep its word to the workers? Yeah, yeah, I know, FOX “news” isn’t going to answer that question.
Yeah, that seems to be the consensus on FOX “news”. In a segment discussing the PR effectiveness of this ad (and Romney’s “Obama is gutting Welfare” ad), the F&F stooge named Kilmeade ridiculously referred to this ad as the “Mitt Romney gave my wife – killed my wife and gave her cancer” ad.
From what I see on F&F this morning, F&F is also running with the accusation that the Priorities USA Super PAC and the Obama campaign are “illegally” coordinating activities. Hannity would be so proud. However, there was a bit of interesting interaction on the curvy couch over it. Daddy Douchey was really pushing hard Hannity’s idea that there is indeed collusion because Stephanie Cutter (of the Obama campaign) hosted a conference call with Mr. Soptic (the man in the ad who lost his wife) where he told his story. Douchey was smugly acting like it was a real gotcha moment – but, after hearing the audio of the conference call, even Camerota noted that it didn’t sound like Cutter knew any details because, in that conference call, there were NO actual details. LOL! But you could tell that Daddy Douchey didn’t much like Camerota going there and he tried to downplay what Camerota had accurately noted.
Then F&F played audio of Cutter saying that they are not allowed to coordinate with Priorities USA and that she didn’t know any of the details about Soptic’s story. Once again, Camerota noted that Cutter didn’t really know any of the details about what happened to Soptic’s wife. And again, Daddy Douchey didn’t want to go there so he desperately started saying stuff like “yeah, but she knew the basic details of the story” and then he got rather scrambly/rambling trying to defend his point. While Douchey was doing his spinning, Camerota forced a smile and a nod but she certainly looked a bit irritated that Douchey was trying to shut her down when SHE was the one who was correct.
Btw, while Douchey was trying to get the viewers to believe that Cutter knew the details (despite the fact that the supposed smoking gun audio gave none of the details that he was alleging Cutter knew- ha!), the on-screen chyron (that was clearly directed at Cutter) read:
Umm, lie much?
Aide spoke to man in ad & denies knowing
Too bad that chyron wasn’t directed at Douchey who spent most of the segment trying to get the folks to believe the tall tale that he was trying to pimp.
Btw, regarding collusion between PAC and campaigns, if F&F and Hannity has their panties in a wad because Cutter was on that conference call (that, unfortunately for right-wingers, doesn’t really prove their point), then they must have surely been ticked off at the possible collusion mentioned in these links, right? Oh, not so much, huh?
As far as Coulter losing it over Andrea Saul and the Romney campaign – bwaaaah! That was hysterical! What was that thing you once said, Ann? Something about how “if we don’t run Chris Christie, Romney will be the nominee and he will lose to Obama?” LOL!
1. Obama is a black Muslim socialist.
2. Obama is a liar.
3. Obama broke the law.
With the events of yesterday Mitt may find himself painted in a corner where he may have to pick as a running mate a right wing extremist like Paul Ryan to energize and excite the Tea Party base. Someone like Tim Pawlenty will do nothing for the ticket. He’s so dull he could put a pot of coffee to sleep.