Laura Ingraham Smacks Down CNN's Toobin on Thomas's 'Rage'

Photo of Tim Graham.

Update (NB Staff | Oct. 3, 14:55): Ingraham's producer was kind enough to send us an MP3 (14:03 long, 4.82 MB) of the exchange.

On Monday’s Anderson Cooper 360, CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin unspooled a wild, unsubstantiated theory that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is "furious all the time" and when Cooper asked if his "hatred of the media" started with the Anita Hill charges, Toobin said that event sent his rage into "the stratosphere." Toobin also criticized CBS for not cross-examining Thomas on sexual harassment on 60 Minutes, when "subsequent evidence" (books by liberal reporters) "generally favors Anita Hill, not him, in what really happened between them."

On Tuesday’s Laura Ingraham show, Toobin accepted an interview invitation, and Ingraham, who was a clerk for Justice Thomas, lit into him about his Cooper interview. She found it "incredibly condescending," and also "appalling and stupid." She asked Toobin if he knew Thomas, and he changed the subject, referring to the theme of anger in his writings and speeches. Later, when Ingraham asked Toobin if he had ever met or interviewed Thomas for his new Supreme Court book, "The Nine," he wouldn’t even say yes or no. (Ingraham took that as a no.)

How can someone who's supposedly a media professional claim without ever meeting someone that they’re "furious all the time" and even "furious his entire life"?

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

It would be one thing to say Thomas associates or even adversaries have seen an episode of fury, but "furious all the time"? (It's even weirder when, in other interviews -- but not this one -- Toobin reports Thomas is the most popular justice inside the Court. Popular, well-liked -- and "furious all the time"?)

The Cooper-Toobin exchange aired on CNN Monday night at around 10:50 Eastern time, and began with a big promotional "swoosh" of the words "The Nine" and the book cover, with Cooper gurgling about how remarkable Toobin's book was:

COOPER: CNN's Senior Legal Analyst Jeffrey Toobin writes about Justice Thomas in his new book, "The Nine." It's a remarkable book. I spoke to him earlier. [To tape]

COOPER: We just heard Clarence Thomas talking about race. He really has not responded to criticism of him over the years, and there seems to be a lot of anger built up.

TOOBIN: The thread that goes through Thomas's life is rage. He -- by his own admission, he's furious his entire life. At first, he was furious at the racial discrimination. And, you know, he was, he wore overalls, and he says, you know, I named my son Jamal. That tells you where my head was at in those days. Yet, now, the rage is at white liberals. He is furious all the time at the people he believes tormented him during the Anita Hill hearings and criticized him on the court. I have never seen, frankly, anyone, much less a Supreme Court Justice, whose life is defined by anger as much as Thomas's.

COOPER: And it's interesting, though, I mean, in his law school days, in his college days, it was -- I don't think he said he was liberal, he said he was much more militant than that.

TOOBIN: No, he was a black separatist. I mean, he was -- I don't know if he was formally a member of the Black Panther party, but it was in that general idea of black nationalism, where he found himself. So, you know, he's done a 180, ideologically, but not temperamentally.

COOPER: Let's hear a little bit of what he said about the Anita Hill hearings.

STEVE KROFT, CBS: Was the Anita Hill that testified on the Hill the Anita Hill that you knew at EEOC?

THOMAS: She was not the -- the demure, religious, conservative person that they portrayed. That's not the person I knew.

KROFT: Who is the person you knew?

THOMAS: She could defend herself. Let's just put it that way.

COOPER: He doesn't really address any of the details of the accusations that came up during those hearings.

TOOBIN: No. Nor was he asked by Steve Kroft. I mean, he wasn't asked about corroborating witnesses who said that Thomas had engaged in this behavior before. He wasn't asked about, well, what was the nature of his relationship with her? How often was he alone with her, were they ever together outside the office? You know, the things that 60 Minutes usually does to cross-examine people, Thomas was not asked those questions.

COOPER: Do we know if he wasn't asked or it just didn't make it into the...

TOOBIN: They didn't broadcast it. I don't know. But I mean, I think the point is, that -- I don't draw -- the subsequent evidence that has come out, you know, whether it's Jane Mayer and Jill Abramson's book called "Strange Justice" or elsewhere generally favors Anita Hill, not him, in what really happened between them.

COOPER: And the hatred of the media, of liberal Democrats, did that start with the Anita Hill hearings?

TOOBIN: Well, I think he felt like he was badly treated when he worked in the Reagan administration, and the Department of Education, at the EEOC. He felt like, you know, the liberals made him not feel like he was defending the interests of African-Americans. But certainly, it was the hearings that sent the conflict into the stratosphere and along with it, his rage.

COOPER: All right, Jeffrey Toobin, thanks.

Ingraham played the "furious his entire life" and "life defined by anger" snippets on her show, and walked Toobin through some of the outrages of Anita Hill's unproven charges. She asked Toobin if it was proper for Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee to leak raw allegations in Hill's FBI file to the media. He said no. She asked Toobin if he's "ever worked with a woman." He said of course. Has he ever been alone with a woman in the office? Yes. And if that woman came forward ten years later and accused him falsely of sexual harassment, wouldn't he be a little angry about that? Yes.

But overall, Toobin was incredibly slippery, trying to tell Ingraham that in his book, he tries to tell the "complete story" of Thomas. But that's not at all what he offered last night on CNN. He made wild allegations about Thomas that he cannot substantiate. CNN ought to be ashamed.

—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center


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.

Toobin is nothing but an

Toobin is nothing but an empty leftist suit for CNN...

Always has been always will be.

He has been wrong so many times with different predictions on different subjects that it is laughable...

Which is exactly what I am doing right now.

Anybody that makes the mistake to take this guy seriously has to be a leftist that follows lemmings everywhere....including off the cliff.

CNN ought to be

CNN ought to be ashamed.

Tim, this episode will just have to get in line behind all the other things CNN should be ashamed of. They're overbooked for apologies that they never can seem to get to, as it is...

Facts and Logic

When have facts or logic ever mattered to the Left? 

http://thelazytriathlete.blogspot.com/

Toobin alleges: "I mean, he

Toobin alleges: "I mean, he wasn't asked about corroborating witnesses who said that Thomas had engaged in this behavior before." 

"[C]orroborating witnesses"?  ROTFLMAO!  There were NO "corroborating witnesses".  Evidently, Toobin is one of the idiots who still "thinks" that the thoroughly discredited Susan Hershner was a "corroborating witness".

Tim, Laura Ingraham just mentioned & linked your Toobin story

Hmmm.  Joe Scarborough said this AM that he reads NB, now Laura Ingraham.  

Come on, Rush, make it a Trifecta....  ;^>

Everyone reads Newsbusters

Michelle Malkin even subscribes to Newsbusted. 

Ha, Dee, I didn't know that about Michelle Malkin

But I meant that 3 "mentions" on the same day would give us a Trifecta. 

As for Rush, he often talks about NB....especially, it seems, Noel.   :^>

Jeffrey "Two-bit Reporter" : Democrat Accusationist

"How can someone who's supposedly a media professional claim without ever meeting someone that they’re "furious all the time" and even "furious his entire life"?"

When they are a sociopathic liar.

Jeffrey Toobin is a jack_ss idiot, 3rd string antichrist, and a two-bit excuse for a journalist.

falsely depicted fury is a common tactic...

I know....And if he were acting all-mellow instead of angry about it, I'm sure that mental state would be used as proof he was guilty and got away with what was alleged. It's almost as if he can't win, but I'm sure an impartial journalist would never set that up for Justice Thomas. (NOT!)
JMR

Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.

Hypocrisy of MSM

If Toobin's rage at Justice Thomas took him to the stratosphere, I wonder where his rage took him when Bill Clinton's dalliances of rape, groping, threats against Paula Jones, Katthleen Willey, Jen Flowers etc were revealed??????

I speak for all

Have you ever noticed liberals in the way they speak:

I speak for all 9 Supreme Court Justices in my new book.

I speak for all blacks.

I speak for all mothers.

I speak for all working people.

I feel your pain.

Can't we all just get along.

Toobin can not help himself. He was hired because he has an attention fetish being the frumpy ugly kid in school and now wants to punish everyone for showing how bright he is.
In not being the greatest fan of Laura Ingraham, her latest throw downs have made me smile and give her full credit for knocking the stuffing out of these girly boys in the media.

On a personal rememberance, Justice Thomas' wife told Rush Limbaugh that his wonderful laugh stopped about 3 days after the lynching in his confirmation and then was back.

In psychological study of Justice Thomas, he is a hard sell to put it in old west terms, but there is no fury nor venom in the gentleman. He is a product of his tough Grandfather and he is the better man for it. Clarence Thomas is a man who would stand by you no matter the danger. He is the truest form of American.

Sometimes though I would like Clarence Thomas to not be so virtuous and show some of this phantom fury and have him go beat Toobin with a stick like the gopher he is as Toobin is in dire need of a Buffalo Bill education for lying about someone.

 

*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS

A case of racism?

Toobin, as far as I know, has never interviewed Thomas, but he assumes that Judge Thomas is an "angry black man." Isn't that "subtle racism?" CNN and Toobin should be ashamed.

BRAWLER...

Laura Ingraham can drop the gloves a brawl on-air with anybody. She usually tries to be a nice easy going person, but she will slug it out. Not quite as agressive as Mark Levin or Ann Coulter, but just as tough when need be.

"Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise"  Mark Levin

I think she was getting

I think she was getting somewhat ticked off at O'Reilly last night, when he kept on interrupting her to ask questions in a condescending tone (per usual). She's his equal and I don't think she appreciates it.

Mr. Toobin is doing what he

Mr. Toobin is doing what he always does.  A pig can put lipstick on but it really doesn't change anything.  Catalog all his wrong predictions....with that BA he'd be back in single A.

Miss Ingraham can handle a light weight such as Toobin any day of the week.

We are stuck with having CNN on at work..whenever Toobin comes on you know there is going to be either a whopper told,  or facts so screwed up it's ridiculous. It really is laughable anyone above a two digit IQ would take this man seriously..let's see how his book sells vs. Miss Ingraham's.  It would be a fair test, both came out about the same time.  Then they'll also see that conservatives have always read more than leftist..just more proof.

Actually, I erred when I

Actually, I erred when I called Ms. Ingraham an equal of O'Reilly. I think she's a lot smarter and sharper.

How to get on TV

How to get on TV? Answer: say whatever they want you to say, and let them use your credentials to support their view.

I always thought that Jonathan Turley was the worst legal expert, because he pimps for the media to get special constitutional protection. The media loves that, and Turley gives them exactly what they want. And he appears on Olbermann, which Olbermann never allows unless he already knows that the guest is going to agree with him.

Toobin, however, is closing in on that title. His argument is less a reasoned position than it is an attitude. He describes the resignation of Sandra Day O'Connor as a great loss, since her opinions didn't reflect any real philosophy, and instead reflected a practical attempt to split legal problems down the middle. (Once again, if liberals read the Bible, they would know that Solomon's splitting the baby was a bluff, not a plan.) Toobin's celebration of judges 'solving problems' rather than interpreting the law is exactly what conservatives oppose ... but Toobin presents it as if conservatives want to solve problems one way, and liberals the other, so they're just all the same. They aren't.

CNN Still in Business?

If CNN got a dollar for everytime I watched their propaganda channel within a year, they would have a hard time purchasing a decent cup of coffee.

Apparently you haven't

Apparently you haven't spent much time in airports.  What a joy it was to see Fox News on the monitors at Ft Walton Beach (VPS).

"Fighters are fun but bombers make policy"

Fox at the airports!

it would be nice to have Fox control all of the airports instead of CNN - that way all Americans could be served instead of just the bitching left wing moonbats:)

I'm quite proud of myself

I'm quite proud of myself for taking a stand on news channels.

I don't care if it's the airport, the bar at the airport, in a doctors waiting room, or the lobby of a hotel, if CNN, or MSNBC is on I go out of my way to get the channel changed to Fox. 

Get Email updates from Fred http://socialnet.imwithfred.com/email_alert_july_26.html

salute

salute

They build walled off

They build walled off smoking areas, they would probably put FoxNews in the same kind of isolation room.

bastards are censoring

bastards are censoring us

the dixie burka chicks understand

Has anyone ever investigated

Has anyone ever investigated why CNN practically has a lock on airports? In Atlanta (obviously), you can't escape them at Atlanta Hartsfield Jackson Young King Jr. McGinnis Malcolm X International Airport.

I hit a ton of airporst and

I hit a ton of airports and they own every one of em - Fox occasionally has one newstand store but that's about it...

I think a note to the congress people is in order...

what would our frackin moonbat reps do if fox had the airport monopoly instead - considering the BS they're trying to pull with Rush

If Fox had Airport Monopoly

Congresional hearings, new "fairness" laws, NY Slimes & Washington Compost would be running editorials day after day . . .

your wish is granted

I just added it to the NB forums - lets have some fun with congress too over the next few months, shall we:)?!?!

It reminds me of "1984" and

It reminds me of "1984" and the giant news screens all over the city. We are being force-fed liberal propaganda while trapped in a small area.

If I didn't think it might

If I didn't think it might cause a hassle getting through security, I'd consider buying a cheap remote and resolve the problem myself.

"Fighters are fun but bombers make policy"

I heard this exchange

I heard this exchange live...Laura was awesome!

Smackdown-not

I heard this exchange and it was no smackdown. Laura was pretty rude and was blindly defending Thomas, without providing a real alternative to Toobins points. She took big issue with the "angry" comments, saying Toobin was obviously wrong about that because he never talked with Thomas. Toobin was trying to explain how he was quoting things Thomas had said about himself, and she just ignored that. Her anger came across as very petty. Her whole position was to defend Thomas, with no ear for any of the explanations Toobin provided. He didn't do a good job of getting his point across though, but he was a lot more civil and polite than she was. It was a smackdown if you consider the way Chris Matthews cuts his guests off a smackdown.

If I recall, she wrote a book about Hillary Clinton that was critical of her, did Laura interview Hillary? Is this hypocrisy in action?