.jpeg)
My friend Mark Herbert files this report from London:
I've just read the material on Savage's website (links to news articles and BBC interview) and it appears slanted in his opinion. News coverage here has focused on Jacqui Smith's expenses problems, as well as where she fits into a cabinet re-shuffle as PM Gordon Brown tries to bolster his leadership ofthe Labour Party. (Smith is seen, with other MPs, as a "Blairite", representing a more centrist view than Brown). Her official reason for stepping down was to spend more time with her family. News reports here suggest her interest is in winning re-election. The following quote is from the Times Online:
"Ms Smith's decision to jump before she was pushed - she had been widely expected to be moved from her post - paves the way for an even broader Cabinet shake-up in a reshuffle now expected on Monday."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6415037.ece
(The cabinet reshuffle occurred yesterday (Friday), in fact.)
There are a lot of dailies here -- I don't read each one each day, but I do scan the headlines, and read at least one paper. It's possible I may miss an occasional story on Michael Savage. He's certainly not "major news". Looking online i found the following Guardian story:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/jun/02/shock-jock-michael-savage-jacqui-smith
One last thought on broadcast coverage: I watch the morning and evening television news daily (BBC, ITN, and Sky); I haved seen no linkage between Savage and Smith's resignation. The lawsuit didn't make it on the major news reports either, as far as I can tell.
Looks like Savage lies again.
Meanwhile Savage has taken an ad asking listeners to give him more money for his defense..he already raised 900 K for his Paul Revere Society that is unaccounted for, note to Jerry Brown