MSNBC Blowhard. Cable Catnip? WTF? These were the same yokels who couldn't wait to hear what Pres. Clinton was doing and with whom he was doing it, and back then all they wanted was investigations! So blow jobs are okay to investigate but there can be no investigations of actual lawbreaking and subverting the constitution. That would hurt the country and Pres. Obama's health care plan. WTF? Seriously Chuck the Pres. Can't get more than one thing done? Chuck Todd, I did like his reporting at one point in time, but now all I hear when I hear his voice is Charlie Browns teacher.

from the pentagon and announced by rummy on Sept.10th, 2001 late in that afternoon.

"Ultimately, a lawyer gets paid to not tell you what the law is -- but to interpret the law, to tell you how far you can push things until you cross a line that a judge will say is illegal. That's what lawyers get paid to do: they get paid to interpret the law, and interpret the law in a way that allows you to stretch things."

Okay, I instruct outside counsel about once a week on average, and I can tell you, I never, ever formulate requests in this way. (The advice never comes framed this way either.)

Are we all doing our job wrong?

One can assume that Obama administration believes explicit warnings from our old guard beltway establishment that his policy agenda will end when the investigations into the illegal behavior of the Shrubbites begins.

Hence looking forward rather than looking back.

This is going to be an all hands on deck political shitstorm for both parties. The Party of No versus the Herd of Cats.

Cable news talking heads prattling about distractions? As far as I can tell that's all the "reporting" on these networks is, distraction after distraction. Glenn, I don't think you even needed to get past Chuck Todd's first couple of sentences to prove what utter nonsense his statement is. I always cringe when I hear things like--there's a 24-hour news cycle these days that the networks need to fill, so that's why we see all this trivial "reporting". What crap. I actually watch MSNBC from 8-10pm and I still bitch about all the useless gossip and infotainment.

How can "it seems to me that's a legal and a political slippery slope" be interpreted as "explicitly arguing against investigations"?

It isn't even an explicit interpretation of his own thoughts! He's not sure. It "seems." And not sure about what? He's not saying they shouldn't investigate, but that it seems like a bad idea. 

Look up "explicit." Not even close in this case.   

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/news/stories/5681404

I posted this in the last thread before I noticed the newer post. Thought it would be worth reposting here.

-------------

If you want to see how bad it really is, just marvel at this piece published today in The State, which is a McClatchy newspaper. Kudos are indeed warranted to The State on this piece.

Media jostled for access to Sanford

E-mails illustrate frenzy to be the first on the air or in

print

By JOHN O’CONNOR

joconnor@thestate.com

National media blitzed Gov. Mark Sanford’s staff, offering big ratings and, possibly, a sympathetic venue in an effort to land the first interview with the governor after his six-day trip to Argentina.

In addition, a blogger and state leaders reached out to Sanford’s office to try to coordinate a way to “push back” on the growing mystery surrounding Sanford’s absence.

The behind-the-scenes maneuvering is detailed in e-mails released by the governor’s office this week in response to The State’s request under the freedom of information act.

The e-mails show some outlets promised Sanford “friendly ground,” while others objected to early reports that questioned his disappearance.

“If you all want to speak on this publicly, you’re welcome to Washington Times Radio,” wrote staffer Joseph Deoudes to Sanford spokesman Joel Sawyer on June 23. “You know that you will be on friendly ground here!”

. . .

Local media tried their best with Sanford as well.

“The Governor can have the floor for 10 minutes and reach over a million people on the show tomorrow!!” wrote WACH morning anchor Tim Miller on June 23. “I’ve already have calls from others who want to bash. ... I’m not doing that!”

Miller, a former chairman of the Lexington County Republican Party, said his channel’s three-hour morning show provided Sanford an open mike, of sorts, to explain himself.

“We’re not taking sides,” Miller said. “We’d ask some questions. There would be no hidden agenda.”

Another reporter, Griff Jenkins of Fox News, invited Sanford on to set the record straight.

“Having known the Governor for years and even worked with him when he would host radio shows for me,” Jenkins wrote to Sawyer on June 23, “I find the story and the media frenzy surrounding it to be absolutely ridiculous!”

. . .

“One of the most competitive things in the media is nailing down the interview that no one else has,” said Bierbauer, a former CNN reporter, calling it “Olympic sport.”

But, Bierbauer said some of the e-mails crossed ethical lines.

“No, you can’t promise friendly ground,” Bierbauer said. “It’s legitimate to ask for a focused interview, but you have to ask about current events.”

The e-mails also show some reached out to the governor on how best to come to his defense.

“If he wants something more personal for the blog to push back, I’m happy to help,” wrote Erick Erickson, a writer for

RedState.com. On June 23, Erickson ripped “media speculation” about Sanford’s whereabouts.

“I wasn’t trying to be a reporter. I wanted to curtail the story,” Erickson said by e-mail. “Well that didn’t work.”

After Sanford admitted an affair with an Argentine woman, Erickson struck and amended the original post, meditating that “we live in a fallen world.”

Sawyer, Sanford’s spokesman, offered only an oft-repeated statement to Erickson’s query. Sawyer said he did not coordinate coverage with any media outlets.

. . .

ABC News White House reporter Jake Tapper e-mailed Sawyer twice on June 23, both to note coverage of competitor NBC.

With a subject line of “NBC spot was slimy,” Tapper e-mailed Sawyer a “Today” show transcript of Sanford coverage, calling it “insulting.” Later, Tapper forwarded Sawyer a Twitter post by “Meet The Press” host David Gregory.

Jeff Schneider, a vice president at ABC News, said Tapper was “carrying some water for producers who knew he had a relationship with the governor’s office.”

The governor’s office also received unsolicited advice on how to respond to the story. . . .

http://www.thestate.com/local/story/864316.html