Hannity Spoonfed Left-Field Debate Question To Stephanopoulos

UPDATE: ABC News' has disputed this account of events, saying that the impetus for last night's Weather Underground queries stemmed from an April 10th post on Jake Tapper's "Political Punch" blog: "The article was the basis for the question and George and Charlie had discussed it in advance of the Hannity interview."

___

The unseen influence of Fox News wormed its way into tonight's nominally ABC-hosted debate, when Senator Barack Obama was asked to account for his tenuous connections to former Weather Underground leader William Ayers, who famously began a New York Times article with this statement: ''I don't regret setting bombs...I feel we didn't do enough.''*

The question was posed by George Stephanopoulos, who neither conceived of the question himself, nor disclosed the primary source of his donated inquiry: Fox News talking head Sean Hannity.

The blogosphere has been up on this from jump street. On Tuesday, Democratic Underground was among the first to note that Stephanopoulos was "Taking Notes From Sean Hannity for Tomorrow Night's Debates":

Hannity asked George what kinds of questions they'll be asking at the debate tomorrow and they discussed a few things. When Hannity asked about the first question below about Ayers and whether George had plans to ask such a question, George replied, "Well, I'm taking notes now Sean." It did actually sound like he was pausing to take notes. And Hannity continued to feed him more:

1) Ask Obama about his relationship with Ayers and WeatherUnderground and Axelrod's comments, "They're friendly"

2) Ask Obama why he attended the Million Man March

From there, DailyKos jumped on the story like a pissed-off mouse on cheese, breaking an important update along the way:

ABC contacted UIC for a photo of Ayers to be used tonight. Granted, this may be simply for the sake of having it on hand, but it seemed pretty clear that it IS going to be coming up in the debate.

Story continues below

advertisement

Perhaps unused to receiving such a strong dose of the harsh stuff from the media (or unprepared - is there no one at the Obama campaign that's reading DailyKos?), Obama passed on the opportunity to knock ABC for asking the question. He offered a game enough response, noting that he was on friendly terms with Republican Senator Tom Coburn, who once advocated for the application of the death penalty to the providers of legal abortions:

OBAMA: Do I need to apologize for Mr. Coburn's statements? Because I certainly don't agree with those, either. So this kind of game in which anybody who I know, regardless of how flimsy the relationship is, that somehow their ideas could be attributed to me, I think the American people are smarter than that. They're not going to suggest somehow that that is reflective of my views, because it obviously isn't.

MSNBC's Keith Olberman was one of the few in the traditional media to note the Hannity connection to Stephanopoulous' question.

[WATCH.]

*An interesting point about this Ayers article: an extra dose of damnation has been laid on this statement because the article in which it appears carries the dateline of September 11, 2001, as if to say the statement is trebly offensive because it coincided with that tragic day. But these criticisms are insincere: obviously, the article was slated to go to press before the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, and was available at newsstands in advance of the attacks as well. As our own Rachel Sklar pointed out tonight, no one from the New York Times was covering any other beat on September 11th other than the terrorist attacks.

Comments

[SFkid]

Obama did a magnificent job of fielding the one sided questions. Amazing, not a SINGLE question to Clinton about Mark Penn or Columbia, while they tried to eviscerate Obama. That was NOT journalism. George Stephanoupolis should be fired for cronyism.

[HopeandChange]

He has been a "crony" for the Clinton's for the past 8 years as well. Why are you upset now?

[ymax08]

What in the world was George (prior employee of Clinton/biased should not have been a commentator) and Charles thinking?? They actually repeated questions grafted by FOX News Sean Hannity. That was so unprofessional. The first 50 mins were dedicated to GOSSIP! What happened to the economy, NAFTA, war, education, healthcare?? They actually rushed thru questions on economy! Instead we watched for 50 mins as George and Charles tag teamed Obama and Hillary would jump in with the occasional kick to groin! It was truly a 'debacle' not a debate. Charles and George should keep their day jobs and leave the debates up to real political journalists who will ask the questions that people like me want answers to! Like how will they help the mortgage crisis, teachers pay and police enforcements. I was really embarrassed that I encouraged my 16 year to watch this debate with me he learned nothing and he felt that all 3 (George, Charles & Hillary) were basically ganging up on Obama...and he is only a TEENAGER.

[huffposeur]

okay. like half the people who post here my knickers are in a twist because sean hannity spoon-fed a question to wee, little steffie. how come nobody's wondering how many of the other questions he asked were spoon-fed to him by bill clinton or howard wolfson???

[ymax08]

No one in the media has questioned why a former Clinton staffer and supporter was part of this debate. It stands to reason that in all ‘fairness’ an Obama staffer should have been part of the commentator panel also. This ‘debate’ was extremely biased, prejudiced against Obama and lenient for Clinton. Those may seem like harsh words ‘biased, prejudiced and lenient’ but they are the truth. As a voter I was disgusted with the gusto and glee with which George, Charles and Hillary verbally attacked Obama. It was sad and it made me feel like I was watching a 21st century modern main stream lynching.

To be clear on this – I don’t have a problem with the questions that were posed. I have a problem with how Obama was targeted and profiled (tarred and feathered) as ‘accomplice’ to the crimes of the past or words of various associates. It was demeaning, demoralizing, unethical, unprofessional and dehumanizing…I thought he was about to get arrested! Hillary should have just sat at the panel desk with George and Charles. This is why George and Charles were booed after this debate was finished. It was a prejudiced panel and the commentators were unethical, unfair and unprofessional. I think we now have a new political term “Clinton Pundits” aka extreme Clinton left wingers.

Last night was an ambush. So I decided to donate my first $25 to the Obama campaign.

[ymax08]

The ‘debate’ was a set-up to incriminate, expose and assassinate Barack Obama’s character. This attack was aimed at the super delegates and also the public. Did Charles & George really think that we the people are so stupid we would not see through the propaganda? For Hillary Clinton to call ANYONE an elitist is just ridiculous. This is the same woman who once said after Bill Clinton’s loss “Screw middle class America! What have they done for you Bill?” Not to mention that she & spouse have made over $109 million in last 7 years. Hypocrisy at it's highest.

ABC brought forward the Wright story and now they are pushing Ayers story. George & Charles were basically trying to paint Obama ‘guilty by association.’ If this is the case then as Obama pointed out Hillary Clinton should just drop out of the race as Bill had pardoned 2 members of the infamous Ayers organization. I did not hear George or Charles make one comment about this they let it drop because Obama had made a strong valid point.

[lowry99]

I can tell you don't care about the truth, as if you do an internet search on anything you've written in your comment you will find, Obamaton Clone X42P22 that your talking points are already saturating both of teh internetz.

However it is worth pointing out that the pardons were for women who were serving jail time, both had served more than 15 years. On the other hand Ayers' case was entirely dismissed and he has remained unapologetic about the bombings, saying, as you heard, "We didn't do enough."

I understand the policy of "consider the source" but you clones ONLY consider the source and NEVER answer the charges.

[rfk68]

Bravo, chap!

Regards,
Sean Hannity

[rwilliams1961]

I've wondered out loud (repeatedly) to my wife and to empty rooms why ABC took this path, and only one possibility comes to mind: the super delegates.

Hillary has been pounding the supers with the idea that Obama has hidden skeletons and, thus, he's unelectable. What ABC did, whether intentionally or accidentally, is bring all the skeletons out for him to respond to and they asked Hillary if he was electable.

As far as PA goes, last night was a bad night for Obama. As far as Obama and the super delegates go, it may have been a good night.

Dunno.

"So, supers, you could with that?"

[TP2]

I don't think it was a bad night for Obama. I think, despite her best efforts at being "polite", Hillary came across as the insincere politician trying to fling as much mud as she can. I really don't think this is going to help her in PA.

[lowry99]

You are incorrect.

1) she came across as competent and qualified
2) he came across as hesitant and inspecific ("um...um")

her numbers in PA are already going up.

[lowlycitizen]

These questions did not form from a vacuum... they do represent the pulse of what would be asked of candidates come election time, and whether people agree with it or not, those questions will come.

I am a Clinton supporter, but I would vote for whoever the nominee ends up to be, but I must say that i was not impresed by BO's performance last night. He did not seem comfortable being scrutinized and that worries me. This heat is nothing compared to what's about to come.

[CostaMesaJoe]

"This heat is nothing compared to what's about to come."

Indeed.
Which also applies to McCain (WHO HAS MUCH MORE BAGGAGE).
I can't wait until the spotlight is back on his record and his dealings.
Especially with his penchant for calling his wife a c*nt - and it will come out.

Would love to hear Hannity's apology for that one.....

[Janet Carter]

Amen. Wonder how Hannity will spin McCain's filthy mouth and calling his wife a c*nt in public. I feel there will be a bunch of skeletons flying out of McCain's closet once Obama get's this nomination locked up and the REAL debates begin.

[lowry99]

My prediction, and I am anti-McCain:

every time he says something that makes you want to spit out your latte in outrage, his numbers will go up. You'll run around chirping about it like Chicken Little and his numbers will go up.

Stick to the issues.

[JavaCityGal]

This was not a debate, it was a debacle. All the questions were carefully prepared for HIllary, and she knew them in advance. The questions were prepared in cohoots with Faux News to be a hit job on Obama, most of us knew this, it was all over the internet 12 hours before the debate.

Considering that Hillary was carefully positioned to have the upmost advantage, and that Obama was being attacked by three against one -- I think he did surprising well. He stood his ground, and just kept swinging from whether the attacks where coming from. If Obama can handle this WWF like "debate" and mult-thronged attack like this, he's SO ready for the Republicans. I have even more faith in him than I did before.

[NappyRoots100]

I'm sorry, who feels comfortable when they are being scrutinized?

[lowry99]

Hillary does. When her back is against the wall she gives her best performances, while Obama becomes indecisive, reticent and inarticulate.

[desmirl]

Little George asks stupid question. Adult Obama responds with intelligence and flair. Move on, folks. Nothing to see here but a grease splatter.

[sillyseason]

Hannity Says...

Sean Hannity, the closet neo nazi, says we should judged by those we associate with. In that case, Sean, you're a hate filled, neo nazi.


Hannity, the closet Neo Nazi - Video: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=hoLFSSyKyPg

Hannity, the closet Neo Nazi - Article: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050620/blumenthal

*

[bsworld]

How about that. Make sense to me!

[LannyMacD]

While the debate last evening was an atrocity, this could be a good thing for the Democrats, especially Obama. The debate is being universally panned and considered a hatchet job. This is going to cast the two candidates in a sympathetic light, especially Obama, who was tag-teamed for much of the first hour. The inanity of the questions was recognized. The patience of the candidates was duly noted as well. Out of this mess comes a renewed suspicion of the corporate owned media and a higher regard of the candidates who have to fight the hidden agendas of that corporate agenda driven media body. Clinton won for her answers on the softball questions that were tossed her way, but Obama won because of the blatant attack he was subjected to and managed to remain statesman-like while bing mugged. Clinton faired well, but Obama will win large with Americans who are fed up with status quo politics and tired of the level of stupidity displayed in the media. For a candidate preaching change, the dirty corporate politics displayed last evening will support those claims in spades. ABC did both candidates a favor last night, but unwittingly did Barack Obama the greatest favor.

[anghiari]

These guys(networks, reporters, political pundits and shakedown artists) hate that they have lost the power to influence elections in the old way. Alternative media i.e. blogs, youtube and the internet have given the power to the people and the Obama campaign is the quintessential example of the traditional media's death rattle. They hate that they cannot manage Obama's political fortunes this election. They hate that every time his constituency sees such radical bias as was demonstrated last night against Obama, we go and give him some more money to beat them. These guys know if Obama doesn't win.... alternative media won't get as much play in how they have changed the landscape of how voters communicate. And they think they will be able to tamp down the huge success of the alternative media. So they want Hillary to win to maintain the status quo. Guys like George, Jake Tapper and Mark Halperin, are no longer the wunderkinds, but middle age guys who can't keep up. They want to kill the messenger ...Senator Barack Obama...who has told voters to take back their government and in the taking we have learned that media is generally worthless in this country. So we pay no attention to the specious behavior of a george, mark and particularly jake. This campaign by Obama and his brilliant campaign team has scared these guys so much they have begun to behave like Hillary!

[CostaMesaJoe]

I can't stand the sanctimonious way Hannity carries himself with.

I'm sure Hannity is already trying to come up with a manifest of who might have entered Obama's childhood treehouse.

Hannity and O'Reailly think they have a clear ride back to the White House - but the dirt on McCain hasn't even been disclosed yet. I can't wait to see them on the defensive instead of sitting around with their thumbs up their @sses and taking shots.

[argent1]

The Ayers story surfaced last fall. What Sen Coburn said is not the same as what Mr. Ayers did. What Geraldine Ferraro inferred is not like what Rev. Wright incited. Clinton killed Vince Foster of course, all the evidence of that never came up during the debate, and why did Bill feel compelled to cheat on Hillary so much -- that question was never asked, so Keith, keep asking, the public needs all the information out. (and why haven't you married yet?). Thanks to Olberman's quick elitist private schooled mind he was able to backpeddle the story about Ayers to Fox Noise insurgents. Humble pie may be hard to ingest for the news slanting anchor - but he has enough GE stock now to retire comfortably. MSNBC has gambled on Obama winning it all and their ads are starting to reflect a younger commercial market, but MSNBC still relies on the Viagra/Cialis money that keeps the cable station erected. Olberman is now overinflated and it is sad to see him losing air and viewers and eventually becoming cancelled for more balance, more real investigative journalism. His reliance on punditry only is out of touch with main street.

[dooleynoted]

Keith is gaining viewers and you are losing it.

[argent1]

gaining younger audience losing older audience. more money but not for a better show.

[Ronp]

Argent1 your comment represents the epitome of ridiculous - enough of this stupid stuff. Coburn and Ayers both advocated murder. Ferraro and Wright incited nothing, cable so-called news media did that attempting to force public policy using repetitive and grossly out of context soundbites. Expend some work and review both their works created during their significant professional lives; you might actually learn something. You criticize the debate organizers for not producing evidence about Vince Foster, while in the same comment you fail to provide any yourself to support your accusation. The election is between Hillary and Barack, not Bill. What's most interesting and telling is how you haven't figured out FOX News - Fair and Balanced is an oxymoron. On and on rants and name calling seem to be the only tools available to you, Hannity, O'Reilly, etc. and are frankly tired. The clouds of hope our young people are expressing (which Barack Obama has touched) is in their sense of urgency. Awareness that future competition is not bigoted and narrow minded folks like yourself, but an increasingly more educated global society that can critically think and do the research to see through the stupid stuff. They understand great change is a product of those who dare to travel off main street. It's a matter of survival from a world created by those like yourself bent on prosperity at any cost and bystanders like me who failed to lift a finger to prevent you from destroying the planet. Sounds familiar?

[sillyseason]

Sean Hannity - A Closet Neo Nazi?

Anyone who knows the real Sean Hannity wouldn't be surprised why he had ABC ask Senator Obama the question.

Hannity is a coward that attempts to fool some people (many agree with his hate) under the disguise of conservative journalism.

Hannity is a closet neo nazi. Don't take my word for it. See him deny his association with an acknowledge neo nazi, and then get busted on TV is his lie.

Video: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=hoLFSSyKyPg

Who's his neo nazi friend?

Find out here: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050620/blumenthal

*

[MattGuillen]

What a bunch of dead-out hypocrites you all are!! Every single time Hillary's daughter has been pushed on some utter swill about her dad and Monica Lewinsky, what the F**k do you do? You laugh. AT CHELSEA! For not wanting to wallow in the mud with what to all evidence is YOUR brand of decent reporting.
At last, Obama comes off being the ball of slime he truly is. Responding to LEGITIMATE queries which reflect his attitudes toward terrorism (duh, aw shucks, Bill pardoned the guy--so, um, planting bombs against our country can't be SO bad...) and all you tools can do is whine "conspiracy" between Fox and Hannity and, and, and...
But of course, Chelsea is a WOMAN isn't she? As is Hillary? In which case any snot your reporters of choice smear on these folks is perfectly acceptable. You've just succeeded in demonstrating what a herd of swine--spineless swine--you really are.

[anghiari]

Matt, Duh! her father is the former President of the United States...he lied under oath and had his law license suspended for 5 years. He was stupping a 20 year old employee in the WH and the girl was the same age as his daughter? But she shouldn't be asked any questions ....????

[SouthernBlueBelle]

Face it once and for all. Bill Clinton lied under oath after being asked a question NO ONE had any right to ask him, other than his wife. GET OVER THIS!! MOVE ON with your life.