Bozell Column: Chuck Schumer's Media

Photo of Brent Bozell.

Senator Charles Schumer is a legendary pursuer of television cameras. But look at the way the national media are covering Schumer’s heavy-breathing pursuit to make Attorney General Alberto Gonzales cry uncle and resign. It makes you wonder just how hard Schumer has to work to get press attention. The media look Schumer-owned and operated.

One interview really captures how the press looks more like a Democratic goon squad than a nonpartisan observers of the national scene. On ABC’s “Good Morning America,” news anchor Christopher Cuomo, son of Mario Cuomo, asked this pushy question on July 27: “Is Alberto Gonzales out of a job at end of business today?” Cuomo wanted the Attorney General whacked, and he wanted it now.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

He was asking the question to George Stephanopoulos, the former Clinton lie-spinner. At least George bluntly explained the game: the Democrats’ price for confirming a new Attorney General would be “very, very high.”

The Democrats are trying to set up a game of damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don’t, and most of the liberal media are playing along with them, refusing to cover the naked politics of it. If our political press were truly nonpartisan, they might be pushing Schumer back about his record: a partisan double standard for truth-bending politicians and cabinet officers, and a sudden hunger for a special prosecutor after years of opposing the same under a Democratic regime.

Start at the top. How many Senate Democrats voted to remove Bill Clinton from office for lying under oath in a sexual-harassment investigation? Did they favor special prosecutors then, or treat them like unelected tyrants? Charles Schumer, for example, had the unique historical distinction of voting against Clinton’s impeachment in both houses of Congress: first as a lame-duck House member in December of 1998, and then later as a freshman Senator in 1999.

How many Democrats would suggest that Hillary Clinton should resign, or should have never run for office, for hiding Rose Law Firm documents from the special prosecutor in the Whitewater investigation for several years (until they were discovered near her private office in the White House quarters)? Special prosecutor Robert Ray found Hillary Clinton provided factually false statements to the special prosecutor in the Travel Office case. Neither Rep. Schumer nor Sen. Schumer cared.

And no one in the “news” media cares, either.

This controversy is supposedly about the dismissal of seven U.S. Attorneys. So where was Chuck Schumer when the Clinton administration dismissed all 93 U.S. Attorneys in 1993? Back then, it was perfectly fine. Now he’s outraged. No one in the “news” media cares about the hypocrisy.

How many Democrats suggested that Attorney General Janet Reno should resign after she took responsibility for the fiery deaths of cult members in the fiasco at Waco months later? They didn’t need to, as long as the national media was doing their bidding and hailing her as a hero. Time put her on the cover with the word “Reno: The Real Thing,” like she was as appealing as Coca-Cola, noting she was “cheered on both sides of the aisle in Congress.” They dismissed her Republican predecessors in the office as “25 watt” dim bulbs by comparison. CNN called her a “rock star celebrity.”

Journalists also cheered Reno when she lied to the family members of Elian Gonzales in order to conduct a surprise raid on their Florida home in the middle of the night to send the six-year-old boy back to Fidel Castro. Tom Friedman of the New York Times raved on PBS about how she would be the toast of lawless towns: “What people in Bogota, Colombia would give for five minutes of Janet Reno!”

Nine summers ago, Reno adamantly refused to name a special prosecutor in the Asian-foreign-contributions scandal, despite it being urged by her own appointed investigator, Charles LaBella, a recommendation endorsed by FBI Director Louis Freeh. Neither Schumer nor the Schumer-sympathetic media found any reason to ask her to resign.

Chuck Schumer and Co. aren’t really sticklers for honest testimony, but they are partisans seeking to win more Senate seats and the White House by any means necessary. They pose now as the avatars of accountability, after spending the Clinton years raging against prosecutors and congressional oversight probes. Sadly, you would never know that if you relied on TV news as the only source of your political information. They’re doing the very same poses.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Thank you is all I can say

Thank you is all I can say Mr. Bozell.

You said it all.

Schumer should of been forced to step down from the Judiciary committee long ago...

He is working to raise money for the dem's while on there, let alone intentionally hurting others like Domenici for political gain...look what he did to Steele, nada happened to him.

Schumer is the walking talking perfection of political sleaze.

He makes one want to shower...and I have never posted those words here before about any leftist POS.

Rush had a great name that fits him perfectly this week...

Sen. Schemer 

Media bias on investigations and scandals

It's so bad and you outlined it so well it's disgusting that they actually get away with it.

 I'm not sure how the USA works so well anymore.

Thanks to Mr. Bozell for

Thanks to Mr. Bozell for recounting the "glories" of the Reno years. To accomodate his ever-changing standards of accountability, Schumer's values have undergone more adjustments than Lance Armstrong's bike shorts.

i have noticed that chuckie

i have noticed that chuckie baby has had to get more wild eyed and just plain screaming to get the usual press coverage lately.

maybe he should take lessons from that guy in pakastan that screams at a camera for 87cents a scream.

C

loss cause

Bush gave up Rumsfeld but is sticking by Gonzales? For how long? The president  knows this is witch hunt and SHOULD hold firm but who knows. Reno was a piece of dupa but her boss was a bigger chunk.

mp... I feel the same way

mp...

I feel the same way you do when it comes to the difference with abandoning Rummie one day after the '06 elections, and staying by the side of an inept do nothing AG.

I have posted as such before, in fact one of the few times I was so angry after the Rummy then Gonzales comes out not long after and apologizes for NOTHING that he need apologize for at that time..I stayed up all night here, called and got in to the Wa. Journal...and posted some more here afterwards......

It all has been past maddening.

What does Chucky know about

What does Chucky know about the crime committed against Steele during the election???

The liberal MSM sure cover things up nicely for Schumer!

Exactly nick...I

Exactly nick...

I expressed same sentiments in the above post.

Zilch happened with that sleaze...as usual...and he still sits and basically rules the Judiciary Committee hand in hand with Leahy. 

I blame the conservatives for not fighting back in unison...

The Fearless Leader (Reid) is a perfect example that they could use in unison...

I am past tired with these gutless wonders at times...(I am excluding the real patriots in the Senate/House that are never heard from though they try to get heard, but are intentionally ignored)

Even more sinister was that

Even more sinister was that Chuckys name never appeared with the perps when punishment was doled out. That was obviuosly the left helping the left for the good of the left!!!

 

On the Other Foot....

I can guarantee you that if Schumer were a Republican Senator and Gonzales a Democrat AG, the MSM would be asking questions like these:

"Is racism a factor in the vicious attacks on Gonzales?"

"Does Chuck Schumer hate brown people?"

"Will Schumer's treatment of Gonzales turn Hispanic voters against Republicans?"

And on and on and on.............

 

In a Senate saddled with

In a Senate saddled with the likes of Durbin, Reid, Webb, Boxer, Feingold, Clinton, Obama, Cantwell, Kennedy, Kerry and Spector, Chucky Schumer is the most disgusting POS ever elected to this chamber.  A more partisan, dishonest, distasteful excuse for a living thing I have yet to discover.  I have had BMs with higher IQs than this fraud, yet he is afforded an unconscionable amount of say-so and power in this government.  He is such a hateful scumbag that I'm just hoping we see more and more of him in the next 15 months or so.  If this is what the Democrat party is seen to represent, there may be a shot for us in 2008. 

The poor table

I dislike the tactic of claiming moral outrage over every single issue. When conservatives push a nominee for the judiciary, Senator Schumer is “outraged” that the nominee threatens liberal gains. When the president pushes any program, Senator Schumer is “outraged” that the president is trying to ____ yada yada yada. Every proposal that doesn’t spring from his own mind is an “outrage.” That is, in essence, the politics of personal destruction. It works on the premise that anyone who doesn’t agree with Chuck Schumer must be either stupid or corrupt, and the senator sprints to the camera to say so.

If you have the facts, argue the facts. If not, pound the table. Chuck Schumer’s poor table has been pounded so often, it’s now a stoop.

Even worse, this creep has

Even worse, this creep has the nerve to suggest that he represents "the mainstream".  In truth, he really does represent the mainstream...of the former Soviet Union.  Douchebag.

I've made the following

I've made the following comparison on other posts, and I'll make it again, with additional elaboration:

The Democrats are known as "The Party of Peace and Tolerance" - Isn't Islam also known as such?

Whenever Chucky want's to make his point, he's "outraged" - Don't the radical Muslims act in the exact same way?

Is there any wonder that Islam is getting such blatant support from the Democart Leadership? And why terrorism isn't treated as the threat it is by said leadership?

The Dem leaders and radical Islam uses the same playbook! The act the same in response to any issue and apply the same hypocrisy to their opponents. They are both supported by the MSM.

They have far more in common than people want to admit. So, who's the real danger to us all? 

The Closed Mind Erects Strong Barriers

}}}----> We'll always have Reno

Janet reno is responsible for two of the most shameful scenes ever to take place on American soil.

She publicly stated Koresh was a madman and then proceeded to take actions contraindicated when mentally unstable individuals hold hostages.  There can be no argument that the children in the compound were hostages.

Reno also invaded a private residence for purposes of deporting a political refugee.  Too bad Elian wasn't an Illegal Alien, he could have stayed.

One student stands in front of a tank in Tiananmen Square and the world cheers.  Our Republican Legislators cower in fear from the likes of Chuck Schumer.

Reno was a puppet, Bill

Reno was a puppet, Bill pulled the strings.

}}}----> Puppet Reno

And we know how Bill felt about trailer trash, don't we?

Further, she was on the job

Further, she was on the job a VERY short time (remember all the illegal nannies of the various partisan-Democrat female lawyers Bill REALLY wanted before 3rd choice Janet? All that nannygate stuff took time!) before Waco happened. Bill knew from those who knew Janet that she could be manipulated via a perception of threats to the children, and it worked, ironically to the detriment of almost all the children, who died in the fire. At least one government employee was on scene both at Waco & Ruby Ridge, and despite all the scandals he was promoted. We get what we reward, but then some of us wonder why...
JMR

}}}----> But how

But how does her time on the job exonerate her?

Deadly force used to provoke a mentally unstable self proclaimed martyr?  Are you saying she believed she was approaching the situation correctly?

Taking a (by definition) political refugee from his home and forcing him to leave the country?  And this was done almost 7 years after Waco.  Can you still make the argument she was new on the job?

I don't buy it completely.