Frankengate update

The Air America story is developing quickly, even by 'net standards. Here's a snapshot:

David Lombino of The New York Sun is carrying the ball. Today's installment tells us that Franken was unaware of the loans made by Cohen. (It's worth pointing out that if Franken encountered an official who claimed to be unaware of a scandal in his bailiwick, his statement would be treated with skepticism and derision - in the name of comedy. Sauce for the goose.)



Franken said Air America's current owners discovered the transfers during a 'foresnic investigation' (months ago) of the previous owners' finances. However, a spokesman for the NYC Department of Investigation, Keith Schwam, told Lombino that if Air America knew this before the city's probe began, "They neglected to tell anyone at DOI or in the city about it."

This affair may put an end to Franken's political aspirations.

Compare Franken's current statement with Air America's first statement (noted in our original post): "PIQUANT (the network's current owners) had no involvement whatsoever with funds from GLORIA WISE BOYS &GIRLS CLUB. PIQUANT neither received nor expended any of the sums that are the subject of the City's investigation of the CLUB." Franken admits that Piquant was well aware of this unethical transfer of funds, while Piquant focuses on the 'not on our watch' aspect - true enough, as far as it goes. Piquant's statement, however, does not mean it has no responsibility here. (It also begs the question - why didn't Piquant know about these sums before they bought the network? Why wasn't this 'forensic accounting' part of 'due diligence'?)

Piquant's claims (again from the Sun) that 'all money will be returned' also must be met with considerable skepticism, since Air America is currently being sued for back wages.

Silflay Hraka, the father of all Carnivals, thoughtfully compares the way this scandal is being handled and the way Franken and his peers handle news regarding Rove, Halliburton, etc. (This reflects our original point.)

Some blogs are complaining that MSM isn't getting more involved, and crying 'bias'. However, with the Sun and the Post involved (and a CNN mention), one can hardly claim a MSM blackout. With a blogswarm now forming, wider MSM interest is inevitable. Because of the blog-piling-on. some bloggers are gloating and generally behaving uncharitably (which won't clarify anything). Others are stonewalling (ditto). It's unfortunate that matters such as this are divided between 'conservative' or 'right wing' and 'liberal' bloggers. It's time for some new classifications. How about 'Bloggers who are concerned about corruption wherever it exists', and 'Bloggers who are concerned about corruption when it advances their own agendas'?

Leftist excess here (see the 109 comments). Right-side hubris there. And Impolitic says, 'Don't you people have any real work to do?' With so many blogs jumping on, we'll have to muddle through more heat before we see some light. But the traffic generated by this many blogs, even if they do not provide clarification, does provide incentive (an audience) for some to seriously pursude the matter. This issue will be with us a while.

We're less concerned about whether the MSM will show up at the party than whether NY Attorney General Elliott Spitzer will do so. (It may be that Spitzer will wait until the completion of the DOI's inquiry before becoming involved, but we have not yet heard any statement from him.)

As is increasingly the way of these things, a blog is widely credited with breaking this story.

We're interested in observing the emerging blog/MSM ecosystem here, where blogs dig up stories, drive interest and create opportunities for smaller MSM outlets (such as the Sun) to make a name for themselves while a story is still off the larger outlets' radar. The process is messy, but healthy in terms of getting news to come to light. Those screaming for immediate, blazing New York Times' headlines will have to wait and see how the story pans out. This is a process.



Our friend Danny (for our part, at least, but we may well have lost that status with him) at SloppyDawg strongly disagrees with the way this case is being handled. Please see his comment on this post, and this post on his site.

Danny has a valid point - there's no evidence at this time to suggest that Franken knew what was going on with Air America. But if "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot", Franken is an idiot differing only in physical dimensions. He got in bed with this situation, and he didn't know what was going on until a blogger told him. Franken's living depends on his mockery of public figures, based on their associations with (or mere proximity to) fools, wrongdoings, and general sleaze. Shall we now employ a different measure for him?

{UPDATE: Clear legal evidence emerges demonstrating that Franken knew exactly what was going on. Danny never commented on this development.}

We continue to follow the story.

Categories: Corruption