Washington » The White House had barely announced its appointment of Utahn Scott Matheson Jr. to a federal appeals court when a conservative blog intimated the nomination was a bribe to win a vote for health care reform from his brother, U.S. Rep. Jim Matheson.
And then the allegation spread.
Without regard for the veracity of the claim, the blogosphere erupted into a fiery clatter that President Barack Obama was buying votes with judgeships that found its way into mainstream news outlets and eventually prompted a Republican congresswoman to call for an investigation.
Rep. Jim Matheson called the claim simply absurd, as did the White House, Sen. Orrin Hatch and pretty much everyone who knows the Mathesons.
"One person makes a blog entry, and it somehow filters in to where people are reporting it, but it is just absurd on its face. Anyone who knows me, I think knows that's the case," Jim Matheson said.
"It is an illustration of how people with a political agenda can very easily manipulate the media," he added. "A completely baseless statement is now being reported everywhere and I think that is unfortunate."
The Weekly Standard , without citing any evidence, first posed the question of whether it was vote buying on its blog, which led to a link from the conservative news aggregator, the Drudge Report. Rep. Michelle Bachmann, R-Minn., chimed in by asking for an investigation. On Thursday afternoon, a Fox News reporter asked about it at the daily White House briefing.
Press Secretary Robert Gibbs dismissed it out of hand.
"I think based on Mr. Matheson's [American Bar Association] rating, based on Mr. Matheson's long legal resume, and based on the support he has from somebody important like Orrin Hatch, who has agreed to help shepherd his nomination through the Senate, I think it's a pretty silly argument," Gibbs said.
Rep. Matheson, who attended a White House reception with the president Wednesday night, noted that the president praised his brother when the two chatted but didn't once ask him to back health care. But that didn't stop the rumor mill from bouncing the allegation to sites like RedState, Politico and others, including The Wall Street Journal .
Never let the truth get in the way of a good blog post, quipped Rich Hanley, an assistant professor of journalism at Quinnipiac University in Connecticut.
"Blogs don't work with sober analysis and the give and take within the given subject that you would normally see, in the mainstream press," Hanley said. "An appointment like this will be interpreted as nefarious and evil because that's our discourse today."
Hatch said he knew Scott Matheson was going to be the nominee more than a month ago and disputes any idea that Obama was trying to get a vote for the nomination.
"I can assure you [of] that," Hatch said. "I don't think Jim would change because of it anyway."
Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, questioned the timing of the nomination, coming as the White House makes an earnest press for action on health care, but Chaffetz says he still finds it hard to believe Obama was trying to buy Matheson's vote.
"It should be crystal clear that Scott Matheson is eminently qualified, and I applaud the president for appointing him," Chaffetz said. "The timing, I can see why it raises eyebrows. [But] I find it hard to believe. I see no evidence" of vote buying.
Utah Republican Party Chairman Dave Hansen noted how "coincidental" the appointment was on his Facebook page but when questioned about it said he really just thinks the timing is odd.
"Yes, he is qualified, but there are a lot of qualified people in this town," Hansen said in an interview. "The timing, it looks a little funny."
Kirk Jowers, director of the University of Utah's Hinckley Institute of Politics, also says Obama should have named Scott Matheson to the judge seat months ago but doesn't buy an ounce of the conspiracy theory.
"I have no sympathy for any rumors of vote buying with Representative Matheson on his brother," said Jowers. "Scott Matheson was the consensus choice months ago."
