Matthew, on subpoenas, etc. - then and now. It's a bit difficult not to reflect back on how the MSM generally covered oversight of the Clinton administration back in the 90's. The issue for Blitzer, is not so much that the Republicans "also" conducted investigations, but rather how much interest (or lack of) the MSM had in the Clinton scandals and corrupt activities.  The media wanted them to go away, then. Now, the media pushes the investigation of each and every issue - often challenging the Democrats to push ahead.

When one listens to the shallowness of a typical MSM deflection, such as...

BLITZER: So, if it was OK for Republicans to do it [subpoenas] to a Democratic White House, then why isn't it OK for Democrats to do it to a Republican White House now?

 ... memories of the MSM's non-stop attacks and criticisms on the Republicans of the Republican's oversight, issuing of subpoenas over the so many scandals and illegal activities surrounding the Clinton White House (Lewinski matter being only one) come rushing into my mind. While there were occasions where the reporters and anchors did actually report the news, and seemed truly challenged at how Clinton had got himself in such trouble, the general trend of the media’s reporting, then, seemed to be one that was either challenging the Republicans to explain why they have to keep coming after Clinton, or in editorializing as to what all of their efforts hoped to accomplish. The later lending to the Clinton angle of, "oh, gosh... I've got important work to do here."

Not too long ago, Matthew, you linked this - MRC's Notable Quotables - where right up top we see Blitzer expressing the norm:

"John, what is the White House strategy right now in dealing with all of these late breaking developments involving this so-called scandal?"
--CNN Late Edition host Wolf Blitzer to John King, May 3 [1998]

A few other special entries, from the same coverage:

"Tonight, a CNN special report, 'Burton vs. Clinton.' Thank you for joining us. It is a remarkable political and personal battle, even for a President who has been under attack from Day One, even for a Congressman known for harsh words and partisan hardball. As we will explain in the next hour, 'Burton vs. Clinton' is about the Webster Hubbell tapes and so much more, including Dan Burton's power, his tactics, and even his personality."
--Judy Woodruff introducing CNN's May 5 prime time special "Burton vs. Clinton."

"Dan Burton pulled a stunt that was so outrageous it enabled Democrats today, this week to seize the initiative. They were able to distract attention from Starr's campaign to build a case for a cover-up and have enabled Democrats to try to discredit the whole investigation as partisan and unfair. Starr and Burton and Gingrich have been doing that all along. Their behavior has allowed the White House to depict them as zealots and partisans out to get the President, and Democrats hope that discredits anything they could turn up."
--CNN political analyst Bill Schneider, same program.

"In this tale of truth, lies and audiotapes, the media is smack in the middle of a confusing, complicated, and constantly changing story. Critics say journalists were too late to question being handed only a one-hour edited version out of 150 hours of recorded jail house conversations....News organizations argue that there is intrinsic news value when the chairman of a major congressional committee releases information, but there is no doubt that some are somewhat uncomfortable with the role they played in this episode. But are they uncomfortable enough to change the way the media is covering this continuing saga in the nation's capital?"
--CNN reporter Linda Pattillo on the media, same program

The Democrats aren't pulling any stunts, I suspect is the MSM's view. LOL. (;~> gary

Blitzer's advocacy for the Democrats is well taken.

I think Bush should appoint a special prosecutor. We need a special prosector with no accounatability to the Justice Department to investigate certain land deals in Nevada (are you listening Senator Reid).

We need a special prosecutor with no accounatability to the Justice Department  to investigate the cozy deals Senator  einstein's husband obtained from her committee's work.

We need a special prosector with with no accounatability to the Justice Department to investigate whether Speaker Pelosi's exclusion of American Samoa from the minimum wage legistation was the result of any illicit influences.

.. and I'm just getting started here.

It would be a great parting gift from Bush to the Democrats.  To make sure they do a complete job  Let's pay these prosecutors seven figures while they are conducting their investigations. That way they won't have to worry about their law practices.

I bet we'd see a lot of justice.

I was in Vegas a few months ago when Wolf Blitzer was interviewing Penn Jillette, noted magician and Libertarian.  Wolfie proceeded to ask Penn if he would consider voting for any of the Democrats for President in the 2008 election.  It didn't take long for Penn to reject that premise out of hand.  "Not even Barack Obama?" an incredulous Wolfie shot back.  Penn reiterated his original answer.  CNN's chief windbag remained stunned.  Wolf Blitzer is your typical socialist lightweight empty suit with a microphone.  His "Situation Room" is standard CNN fare, regurgitated DNC talking points.  This exchange with Tony Snow is par for the course.   

Did anyone at CNN or anywhere ask Chuckie Boy about this little tidbit he says!   http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0707/5146.html