Does this sound plausible yet?

[Dawgs]

I posted this yesterday...

First of all, I have to put my hat on. -- :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat:

-The Bush Administration has someone show these images to the press; Time magazine in this case.
-Time magazine doesn't show the images because the asking price is too high (on purpose).
-Time runs a story to get Democrats excited.
-The seller of the pictures agrees to sell the images to Time a few days later at a lower price.
-Time runs the pictures, but the White House has already debunked them as just quick-shots with the President.
-The Bush Administration puts out a talking point that Time is partisan, the pictures show nothing, and it's the end of the story between Bush and Abramoff.
-The American people buy this story because the media spreads the message and nobody talks about the connection between Bush and Abramoff again; at least not anyone that matters to the Bush Administration (DUers).

[leveymg]

1. It's the old 'Bait n'Switch'. Ask Dan Rather about that con. eom

[Canuckistanian]

2. I think the pictures will still do damage

I know there are literally thousands of pictures taken every year. And make no mistake, it costs money to have your picture taken with *. Big money.

But Snotty did a stupid thing last week. He tried to paint Abramoff as just a minor player who's had no meaningful contact with the administration at all.

Now we know that Abramoff was part of *'s transition team, a 2-time "Pioneer", one of DeLay's cronies, etc, etc.

Embarrassing pictures always do damage. Remember John Wayne Gacy's picture with Rosalyn Carter?

It's a powerful connection when it's seen visually.