Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Did White House fire woman on strength of bogus Breitbart video?

By now you've heard about the story burning up the right: A U.S. Agriculture Department official says the USDA forced her to resign because Andrew Breitbart posted a video of her supposedly describing how she didn't help a white farmer 24 years ago because of racial reasons.

The woman has now said the video is bogus and that she said nothing of the kind, and she's hinted that the White House urged her firing.

So the question is this: Did the White House have this woman fired before the facts were known, all in response to what may prove to be a Breitbart-manufactured racial controversy? If so, this would illustrate an appalling White House willingness to "jump" when Breitbart says "how high," as Digby put it in a scorching post today.

I generally agree with Digby's read, but I want to urge a bit of caution here. The woman's public statements thus far don't quite say conclusively that the White House directly ordered her firing. There are still more facts to come out. That said, it seems unlikely that the USDA would undertake such a high-profile axing of the woman without consulting the White House first.

Here are the basics. The woman, Shirley Sherrod, was pictured in the video recounting to an NAACP gathering that as a worker in the mid-1980s for an organization that worked with black farmers, she didn't give all the help she could to a white farmer. "I didn't give him the full force of what I could do," she said.

More of the basics of this case right here, but the upshot is that USDA chief Tom Vilsack fired the woman, citing zero tolerance for discrimination.

Subsequently, Sherrold told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that the clip had been selectively edited, and that the real point of the story was that she'd learned from that episode that "race is not the issue" when it comes to helping farmers.

Sherrod also hinted in two appearances on CNN that the White House was behind the firing, which is what now has people in an understandable uproar. But what did she say, exactly?

In one of those appearances, she says inconclusively that Breitbart appeared to have scared "the administration."

In the second, according to CNN's transcript, she said: "I had at least three calls telling me the White House wanted me to resign." Asked who the calls were from, Sherrod said they were from was Cheryl Cook, the USDA deputy undersecretary.

I don't know what to make of this. The woman is not alleging, as has been widely reported, that she got calls directly from the White House. Rather, she's saying that she was told the White House wanted her out.

Again, it seems very unlikely that the USDA would take an action like this without consulting the White House, and if the White House ordered this, it's appalling. And even without the White House, if Vilsack did fire her just on the strength of a Breitbart video, that itself is unacceptable, particularly now that the NAACP is conducting its own investigation into what happened, and it's looking like the Breitbart version may be bogus.

As for the White House's role, though, I want all the facts before making a final judgment.

By Greg Sargent  |  July 20, 2010; 3:42 PM ET
Categories:  Political media  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Two more GOPers say unemployment benefits encourage folks to stay unemployed
Next: White House official: We didn't push for Sherrod's firing

Comments

Okay Greg, let us know when you get the facts, and if they're from an un-named WH official get a second verification please. I'm seeing a pattern but I don't want to jump to conclusions.

Posted by: lmsinca | July 20, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

What I find so interesting is the selective caution. Mr Sargent wishes to wait for the "facts" before condemning the white house but he has no problem intimating that his conviction is that the video is bogus.

Yes, I see the subtle but important difference here. yeah, sure.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | July 20, 2010 3:49 PM | Report abuse

What is exceedingly clear is that the WH, USDA, and NAACP did not have the facts before acting. Appalling all around.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 20, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

skip, I never said I know that Breitbart's version is bogus. I said the woman alleged it, and posted it as a question.

And will do lmsinca....

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 20, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Maybe this will finally discredit Breitbart once and for all for whomever he has any credit remaining.

Between this and the heavily edited pimp tapes that took down an organization, I'm not sure how Fox can continue to call themselves a news organization without issuing corrections.

They have aided and abetted in the systematic grossly exaggerated character assassination of individuals to push a political agenda.

And to think, that dunce Ed Henry and CNN wants to give Fox a front row seat in the WH press room. They should be put to the back.

Exactly what is it going to take for all news organizations to get together and condemn Fox for its blatant distortion of news? It's no longer the evening line up, it's a coordinated effort that goes on 24/7 there. Are they expecting Fox to self implode? Is that why they are all silent while Fox attacks them all all the time?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | July 20, 2010 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Antoher question - What is Sherrold's employment status? If she is career Civil Service, she can't just be fired one day to the next like that.

Posted by: Virginia7 | July 20, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

sue, I don't think we know for certain that WH was behind it...seems likely as I said but I want to reserve judgment for now

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 20, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Hey skippy, I'm sure breitbart would never mislead with selective editing.

Breitbart tells TPM: Sure, I'll release the entire Shirley Sherrod video -- if I can get permission.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/07/cant_we_just_see_the_unedited_video.php?ref=fpblg

Posted by: cmccauley60 | July 20, 2010 3:54 PM | Report abuse

And what about this, skippy?

Sherrod said the short video clip excluded the breadth of the story about how she eventually worked with the man over a two-year period to help ward off foreclosure of his farm, and how she eventually became friends with the farmer and his wife. [...]

“The story helped me realize that race is not the issue, it’s about the people who have and the people who don’t. When I speak to groups, I try to speak about getting beyond the issue of race.“

Indeed, the wife of the white farmer in question, 82-year-old Eloise Spooner, confirmed the story and called Sherrod a “friend for life.” She told CNN that Sherrod “treated us really good and got us all we could.” “She’s the one I give credit to with helping us save our farm”:

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/20/shirley-sherrod-video/

Posted by: cmccauley60 | July 20, 2010 3:57 PM | Report abuse

OT:

NRCC Chair Pete Sessions on whether or not Bush will be campaigning in 2010:

"He has not done anything up to now. He didn't even do anything his first week out of office," Sessions said. "He has not been involved, he does not do fundraisers."

"He's not interested," Sessions added.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/sessions-the-public-doesnt-want-to-talk-about-bush-and-he-doesnt-want-to-talk-to-the-public.php

Unreal. The Republican Party is a sad joke.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 20, 2010 3:57 PM | Report abuse

the brietbart video is easily shown to be bogus:

"The wife of the white farmer allegedly discriminated against by the USDA’s rural development director for Georgia said Shirley Sherrod “kept us out of bankruptcy.”

Eloise Spooner, 82, awoke Tuesday to discover that Sherrod had lost her job after videotaped comments she made in March at a local NAACP banquet surfaced on the web.

But Spooner, who considers Sherrod a “friend for life,” said the federal official worked tirelessly to help the Iron City couple hold onto their land as they faced bankruptcy back in 1986."

http://www.ajc.com/news/farmers-wife-says-fired-574027.html

the wh should apologize, even if they only signed off on the forced resignation.

and, now that brietbart has been caught again selectively editing video to create false impressions, as with the acorn videos, anyone in the media or government who gives them credibility should be mocked, ridiculed and never given the smallest measure of credence again.

seriously, as digby notes, falling for this huckster's bs two times is malpractice.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 20, 2010 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Hey Greg,

Wasn't you who was wondering aloud why Fox News was not featuring anymore of Breitbart's bogus hijinxs of late?

Posted by: bmcchgo | July 20, 2010 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Greg, according to Ben Smith at Politico. The WH denied making the decision and Vilsack took full responsibility saying that she would be too "controversial" to do the job at the Agriculture Department.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0710/Official_No_White_House_pressure_on_Sherrod.html?showall

Posted by: calchala | July 20, 2010 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Fox conspiring with Breitbart on all this garbage is one of those known unknowns.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | July 20, 2010 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Many of you skeptics seem to ignore one other fact. The Owner of the Production Company that produced the video backs up Sherrod too. He sent the video to the full video to the NAACP and is waiting for their permission to relsease it in full. I'm assuming that Brietbart can't release the full video without their permission either but, the person who has seen it says this woman is telling the truth and so does the wife of the farmer. Now, the Vilsack and the NAACP were wrong to dismiss this woman without all of the facts but, I too would like to know just how much the Whiteshoue knew about this woman being asked to resign. I split with digby on the Whitehouse's responsibility in this. I too will wait for the facts.

Posted by: roxsteady | July 20, 2010 4:04 PM | Report abuse

I have not been following this story, so I need some clarification:

Regardless of what the women said that she learned later on, about how people should be helped, regardless of their race or skin color;

Has she actually admitted that she did in fact withhold help from a farmer, simply because of his race and skin color?

If she did that, then she should suffer some consequences. Just saying that she would not do it now, does not let her off the hook, if she actually discriminated against the man.

So; a simple question; did she, or did she not admit that she discriminated against the man? If she did; should't there be some punishment for having done so?

Posted by: Liam-still | July 20, 2010 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Before people get all bunched up about the Obama administration's part in this stupid Breitbart hitjob, here is some ESSENTIAL background reading:

Black Farmers, USDA Agree to $1.25 Billion Settlement

A group of black farmers reached a $1.25 billion settlement with the U.S. Department of Agriculture over a longstanding civil-rights case that had cast a pall over the agency for decades.

In a conference call Thursday, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack said the settlement would close a "sordid chapter in USDA history."

"This is a very historic, emotional day for black farmers," said John Boyd Jr., president of the National Black Farmers Association who once traveled 200 miles in a mule-drawn wagon from Baskerville, Va., to Washington to raise awareness about black farmers. "But the [Obama] administration is going to have to help me finish the job."

[...]

Mr. Obama said in a statement released Thursday, "I look forward to a swift resolution to this issue, so that the families affected can move on with their lives."

The settlement is the latest in the Obama administration's push to focus on civil-rights issues and close out longstanding discrimination claims. In December, the administration proposed spending $3.4 billion to settle longstanding claims that the federal government mismanaged Americans Indians' trust funds.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704269004575073820593191804.html

So, before people jump ahead of the story and make it about the "White House's role," let's not do to the White House what Breitbart did to Shirley Sherrod.

The FACT of the matter is that the Obama Administration has sought to resolve the very problems that led Ms. Sherrod to -- justifiably -- feel that blacks were being treated in an inferior way by the USDA.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 20, 2010 4:06 PM | Report abuse

liam,

no. she said she realized it was about haves and have nots and the family now calls her a 'friend for life' and credit her with saving their farm and going to great lengths to do so.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 20, 2010 4:08 PM | Report abuse

"It's looking like the Breitbart version may be bogus"

You just proved what a biased clown you are, Gregory. You soft-peddle around anything to do with the White House, but you're calling Andrew Breitbart a liar. Nice. You are a biased fool, and I hope that the Post does to you what they did to another fool, your buddy Weigel.

Posted by: steelers_rule123 | July 20, 2010 4:10 PM | Report abuse

More background:

For black farmers, dealing with the USDA has been like turning the clock back 60 years to the pre-Civil Rights South of the 1940s. For example:

On three separate occasions, the white FmHA loan officer took Lloyd Shaffer's loan application out of his hand and threw it directly into the wastebasket. Once Lloyd was kept waiting eight hours, from the time the office opened until after it closed at night, while white farmers came and went all day long, conducting business.

Ben Burkett, Mississippi state coordinator for the Federation of Southern Cooperatives/Land Assistance Fund, borrowed from the FmHA from 1978 to 1985. He says it always took "four, five, eight months -- even a year -- to get a loan." It's supposed to take 30 days for a decision. Last time he applied for an operating loan in February. He didn't get it until July. By then it was too late to do any good. "I turned it down," he says. "Sent it back."

The FmHA told Sam Cooper that his loan to purchase new land for his cattle had been approved, so he spent $5,000 for fencing and was then told that they'd changed their minds -- no loan, no land, and Sam was out $5,000.

A white USDA employee in one Virginia county brought a loaded gun to work and used it to intimidate Phil Haney II, a black farmer asking about his USDA loan application. His punishment? A one-day suspension with pay.

http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/reclaiming-the-commons/second-chance-for-black-farmers

That whole article is WELL worth reading.

Hopefully what will come out of this racist Republican hitjob is that Ms. Sherrod gets re-instated, Breitbart loses all credibility, and the plight of African-American farmers receives significantly more attention.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 20, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

"Has she actually admitted that she did in fact withhold help from a farmer, simply because of his race and skin color?"

Nope.

She claims that the edited out portion was part of a bigger story she was telling that how in the end she was penitent and looked passed race.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | July 20, 2010 4:15 PM | Report abuse

I'm guessing steelersrule doesn't know that the ACORN tapes later turned out to be bogus. Which means he has the same relationship with facts that Big Ben has with gentlemenly behavior.

Posted by: oldabandonedbeachhouse | July 20, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Blah,

But did she say that for a while she did discriminate against the man, only to later change her mind, or did she never discriminate against him, and withhold some help, from the start?

There is a big difference, because if she ever discriminated against the man, then she broke the law.

Keep in mind; Republicans have been pushing the meme that President Obama only cares about black people, so if this women said that she had initially discriminated against a white man, while she held a position that required her to treat all equally, then the White House would be in the Republican Race Card Trick bag, if they kept her own.

She would become this year's Republican Willie Horton.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 20, 2010 4:17 PM | Report abuse

First (not so) breitbart told TPM that he would release the entire video if he could get permission ... now he says that he doesn't have the entire video.

Sounds like he knows that he has pushed this fraud film act once too often.

Posted by: cmccauley60 | July 20, 2010 4:26 PM | Report abuse

"There is a big difference, because if she ever discriminated against the man, then she broke the law."

? She was working for a non for profit. Not sure if that would apply even if she didn't give the family the fullest support. But, I believe she said she did.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | July 20, 2010 4:26 PM | Report abuse

liam,

she says she did what she had to do but didn't know how to do more because she didn't have the contacts in the white farming community she did in the black farming community, where she could encourage unofficial mutual help.

*but* she says she never discriminated and the farmer's wife sure backs her up on that claim.

aslo, sherrod says there were whites as well as the mayor of the town present in the room when she made the speech brietbart cuts short. as she said, why would she admit racist conduct in such a venue?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 20, 2010 4:26 PM | Report abuse

liam,

check out the media matters take here:
http://mediamatters.org/research/201007200047

and the ajc story here:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CB0QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ajc.com%2Fnews%2Ffarmers-wife-says-fired-574027.html&ei=wgZGTOaJE4GpngekurHXAw&usg=AFQjCNHgogcsGQwtZ0xwHsBbGgEiRfY2aA&sig2=VFBlFL7GiLBbORPsspvG6A

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 20, 2010 4:28 PM | Report abuse

"First (not so) breitbart told TPM that he would release the entire video if he could get permission ... now he says that he doesn't have the entire video. "

You (Breitbart) lie!

Posted by: mikefromArlington | July 20, 2010 4:28 PM | Report abuse

oops- here's the ajc link:
http://www.ajc.com/news/farmers-wife-says-fired-574027.html

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 20, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

FOXNews seems to have a very fair article about this:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/20/ex-ag-official-says-video-showing-white-farmer-story-excludes-key-context/

Posted by: sbj3 | July 20, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Liam, not to be lost in all this is the fact that regardless of her actions while working for the non-profit, the black farming community at the time *WAS* actively discriminated against BY THE USDA due to their race.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 20, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

White House official denies any role in firing Sherrod:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/07/white_house_official_we_didnt.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 20, 2010 4:31 PM | Report abuse

I looked at the video clip on Youtube. I think she was very stupid to have even start telling that story. She showed very poor judgment in recounting it.

She did say: "I did not give him the full force of what I could do". She then said that she assumed that he had been send to her by the dept. of agriculture, and that he would report to them if she had helped him, so she took him to a "white lawyer" and was going to let him take care of it.

I understand where she is coming from, based on her life experience with having witnessed so much discrimination against people of her race, but what she said at the start of the tape, is something that would be hung around President Obama's neck by The Republicans for the next two years at least, if she were kept on in her current position.

That is the cold hard reality of the situation.

The women has a good heart, and feels bad about how she first treated the man. That is clear, but politics ain't bean bag, and if she were to remain in her current position, she would allow the Republicans to use her over and over in their drive to make President Obama a President for blacks only.

That is what at stake here folks. You need to wrap your minds around that political reality.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 20, 2010 4:40 PM | Report abuse

liam,

i disagree. she's clearly recounting a lesson learned experience. why do you think the video was strategically cut off when it was.

politics ain't bean bag and all we need to do to counter the lies is show the *entire* video that will demonstrate how deliberately misleading the edited video is.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 20, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Fire Vilsack, ice Breitbart.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 20, 2010 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Let me guess: It would be irresponsible not to ask, right?

Posted by: CalD | July 20, 2010 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Dear Mr. Sargent: Since you say that you do not have all the facts, why did you not wait until all the facts are in? That would have been the right thing.

Posted by: philly3 | July 20, 2010 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Why does our pathetic lapdog media leave it to Breitbart to speak truth to power?

Thank God he does.

Posted by: thebump | July 20, 2010 5:29 PM | Report abuse

FOX News really has succeeded in creating a no-win situation for people who don't share their right-wing agenda.

If this woman hadn't been fired and this fact pattern had emerged, do you think the story would be "FOX News Screws Up, Promotes False & Potentially Libelous Video, White House Stands Firm?"

No, the story would have been something that made it sound like a reasonable person could believe this woman was a racist and that the Obama Administration was harboring racists. The reason this would happen is because reporting the facts would be "taking sides"--and as we have seen again and again and again, having the facts on your side means nothing to reporters. Remember when torture stopped being torture?

But since Obama DID fire her, it's all "Obama is a wimp, Liberals stink & kowtow to the right-wing."

Someone in the administration took a less than noble approach to a no-win situation and threw this woman under the bus. Well, WHATEVER. She was screwed either way.

The problem isn't that the Administration sucks, it's that the rest of the media treats FOX News like a legitimate outfit.

They have spent all summer promoting the Black Panther party as something we should care about. It's like Shark Attack summer, only this time everyone is being told it's not sharks but our fellow American citizens--the BLACK ones--who are out to get us.

This should be the last straw. Fox News promoted a video pimped to them by a known liar. They didn't do the basic research to make sure they had the story correct. They cost a woman her job. Libel is a hard charge to make stick, but this is a level of journalistic malpractice so horrific that she might actually have a case.

Maybe instead of being pissed at the Administration for making a bad choice in an no-win situation, progressive advocates should break from form and blame the people actually responsible for this--FOX News and the feckless media who enable this behavior

It's time to demand that FOX News not get Helen Thomas' seat in the White House. Bloomberg can have it, NPR can have it, but FOX News is simply not a responsible media outfit. They are beyond reckless--they are propagandistic, and they are purveyors of false information. This fiasco needs to be the last straw. Someone needs to stand up to this network and enforce some BASIC journalistic standards. We should demand that FOX not be considered for Helen Thomas' seat, and that it instead go to Bloomberg or NPR. Bad journalism can't continue to be defended, protected, and rewarded by those who consider themselves journalists.

Posted by: theorajones1 | July 20, 2010 5:38 PM | Report abuse

"I'm assuming that Brietbart can't release the full video without their permission either"

Why would you think this? Do you think Breitbart had the NAACP's permission to release the selectively edited part of the video? Then, uh, why would he need it to release the exculpatory part of the video?

Posted by: theorajones1 | July 20, 2010 5:45 PM | Report abuse

"Maybe instead of being pissed at the Administration for making a bad choice in an no-win situation, progressive advocates should break from form and blame the people actually responsible for this--FOX News and the feckless media who enable this behavior"

PRECISELY.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 20, 2010 5:56 PM | Report abuse

What a joke. We have an Obama Administration official firing someone in a knee jerk reaction. Kind of like the other Obamites who were against the AZ immigration law before they even read it.

But the only person to blame for this is MS Sherrod herself. If she hadn't been so eager to suck up to the NAACP and only tell half the story, this never would have been a big deal. She sabotaged herself by playing up to the NAACP. Lesson learned, one hopes.

Posted by: silencedogoodreturns | July 20, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Hey Mr Sargent, where did you learn English? How can the Breibart video be "bogus?" Bogus generally means fake. This was not a fake - it's clearly Sherrod on video saying words out of her own mouth.

It MAY be selective editing. It may be misleading editing. It may be dishonest editing. But that is not the same as "bogus."

Posted by: silencedogoodreturns | July 20, 2010 6:09 PM | Report abuse


Why doesn't WaPo do some investigative journalism of its own instead of carping about Andrew Breitbart? This article is nothing but rambling speculation.

Posted by: screwjob17 | July 20, 2010 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Hey, silencedogoodreturns and screwjob17 have it correct. Mr. Sargent's post is either poorly researched or an out-and-out lie. Quote "The woman has now said the video is bogus and that she said nothing of the kind, and she's hinted that the White House urged her firing." What trash! SHe is accusing the administration of demanding her resignation. The video may be clipped, not shown in full, but it is not a fake. Judging by the previous responses, most people are willing to have the same knee-jerk reaction that the President had. Kudos to Breitbart! Boo to speculative, opinionated articles from the WaPo.

Posted by: corrigancarol | July 20, 2010 6:53 PM | Report abuse

If she was innocent why did she resign? All this from the same people who demanded Trent Lott resign. I doubt that Sargent would be so concerned if it were a white person who said something similar about blacks. And, unless you can prove that Breitbart put words into her mouth, I doubt if there is any "context" that would explain her racism.

Posted by: combat18 | July 20, 2010 7:05 PM | Report abuse


Before the full story of Shirley Sherrod was aired on Fox News, I had quickly jumped at the 'apparent' racism coming from Ms. Sherrod, and added my contempt and disgust along with others.

For that I am deeply sorry, and apologize to Ms. Sherrod and all others who were hurt by my earlier posts.

Ms. Sherrod is a hero and should be apologized to by those much more important than myself.

prossers7

Posted by: prossers7 | July 20, 2010 7:39 PM | Report abuse

Nope.

If you commit discrimination for a single SECOND while performing your job duties as a federal, state, or public employee, then you SHOULD BE FIRED.

I listened and watched to her entire speech...and she admitted that she could have done more for the "white man," as she snickered and looked meaningful into the mostly-black audience.

Her admission was enough for me. She didn't perform the functions of her job impartially - which is function of a federal job.

I don't care if she repented, fell to her knees, and cried to the heavens...she is GUILTY and admitted it.

Enough of the liberal, Progressive excuse-making...yeah, Wallace - I heard your vomiting. The white woman who credits the black woman with helping her "save the family farm" has no idea of the help she COULD have received had she been black.

Sherrod admitted that she did more for her black clients.

Case closed.

Posted by: easttxisfreaky | July 20, 2010 7:52 PM | Report abuse

The woman's public statements thus far don't quite say conclusively that the White House directly ordered her firing.

~~~

The statement above may be inconclusive, but she believes that they are conclusive.

Now, the real question is, who contacted her and told her the WH wanted her to resign. Someone contacted Sherrod directly. Who was that person and what did they say to her directly?

I read in another post article that she said that she received several calls from from Cheryl Cook, USDA deputy undersecretary for rural development to resign. If it wasn't Cook who contacted her, then who was it?

Investigate.

Posted by: lcarter0311 | July 20, 2010 8:49 PM | Report abuse

Tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick..........Hmmmmmm.......Still waiting for "the facts" from the White House???,,,,,Tick, tick, tick,,,,,

Posted by: barrysal | July 20, 2010 8:51 PM | Report abuse

The woman's public statements thus far don't quite say conclusively that the White House directly ordered her firing.

~~~

The statement above may be inconclusive, but she believes that they are conclusive.

Now, the real question is, who contacted her and told her the WH wanted her to resign. Someone contacted Sherrod directly. Who was that person and what did they say to her directly?

I read in another post article that she said that she received several calls from from Cheryl Cook, USDA deputy undersecretary for rural development to resign. If it wasn't Cook who contacted her, then who was it?

Investigate.

Posted by: lcarter0311 | July 20, 2010 8:52 PM | Report abuse

Forget all the talk - Ms. Sherrod this is the same type of act that cause ACORN to close several of its offices. False allegations and lies from FOX NEWS and FOX CABLE NEWS. The owners and reporters are wreckless with their words and should pay for ruining people reputation and professional careers. Ms. Sherrod, sue the owners and the news reporters of FOXS NEWS AND FOX CABLE NEWS NETWORK. Oh, lets say for about $1.0 Trillion dollars.

Posted by: sun52shine | July 20, 2010 10:29 PM | Report abuse

Tell you what's bogus, it's this racist woman bragging about how she "helped" the white man by sending him to "one of his own."
She should have charges brought against her for discrimination, it doesn't matter to that poor farmer if she's changed her ways any more than it matters to some poor folks who probably got hurt back in the 1940's by Senator Byrd that he had eventually left the Ku Klux Klan. Racism is always wrong, don't you understand this?

Posted by: carla_rash | July 20, 2010 11:25 PM | Report abuse

Greg,
You did claim that the video was bogus. Look at the title of your blog posting. Also in conclusion of your posting, you write 'it is looking like a bogus'.

I thought you wanted to wait for the facts.

May be selective facts, eh?

Posted by: rbala_74 | July 20, 2010 11:55 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company