The Media Research Center’s Rich Noyes appeared on Fox and Friends Sunday, where he called out the liberal media for journalists “willing to step forward and carry some of that water” for the Hillary Clinton campaign’s push back of FBI Director James Comey. “Unless you think he's lying about the timeline he explained in his letter to congress, he was briefed about this and felt the need to proceed and he felt like he should inform the committees that he had talked to that he was updating the record,” Noyes explained.
Noyes continued by pointing out the media history of sticking up for the Clinton’s:
I think, you know, we've seen this in the past. You know, whenever the Clintons, we're going back to the 1990s got in trouble with one of their various scandals, they would turn their guns on the investigators and they turn their guns on anybody who was digging into them. Anybody who was a witness against them and just sort of unload the entire machinery. And there were all these journalists who were willing to step forward and carry some of that water for them and make it seem as if it was, you know, everybody's business. You know, we've seen this play before.
He also noted that the media frustration with Comey stems from their unwillingness to report on Clinton’s many scandals:
Yeah, they're sounding exactly like the democratic campaign. They don't like that this issue came so close to the election. They wish this was off the table. They want to discredit the message and sort of reassure Hillary voters there is nothing to look at here. But again, if this had been disclosed months and months ago it wouldn’t have been an issue right before the election either, so.
Transcript below:
FNC
Fox and Friends Sunday
October 30, 2016
6:46:16 AM EasternABBY HUNTSMAN: Joining us now is research director for the Media Research Center Rich Noyes. Rich, good morning. Thanks for being here.
CLAYTON MORRIS: Morning.
RICH NOYES: Thanks for having me.
HUNTSMAN: So, I just read a blurb from the editorial of The Washington Post and that’s just one of the media outlets that have come out criticizing James Comey for the timing of all this and not giving any specifics. What is your reaction to all that?
NOYES: Well, you sort of seen a lot of this over the last 48 hours and I guess the question is, what choice did Comey have? I mean, he—you know, unless you think he's lying about the timeline he explained in his letter to congress, he was briefed about this and felt the need to proceed and he felt like he should inform the committees that he had talked to that he was updating the record. I think, you know, we've seen this in the past. You know, whenever the Clintons, we're going back to the 1990s got in trouble with one of their various scandals, they would turn their guns on the investigators and they turn their guns on anybody who was digging into them. Anybody who was a witness against them and just sort of unload the entire machinery. And there were all these journalists who were willing to step forward and carry some of that water for them and make it seem as if it was, you know, everybody's business. You know, we've seen this play before.
MORRIS: Speaking of journalists carrying the water, Andrea Mitchell from NBC News tweeting this yesterday: “FBI looking at e-mail from unrelated case but Donald Trump says proves criminal case. Should Comey do this so close to election?” David Ignatius from The Washington Post: “Note to Comey: In news business, you wouldn't publish story so thin 10 days before election, without providing details.” Well, it turns out he wasn’t able to provide the details because Loretta lynch wouldn't give him access and allow a warrant so we could know what is in the e-mails. Rich?
NOYES: Right. And you know, this is probably the thing that’s going to be most frustrating; is the real conclusions from all these e-mails won't come until after the election, but at least voters are aware of it now. But I think the media reaction you're seeing as part of the trend we've seen all general election campaign. They don't want to cover Hillary Clinton’s scandals and they don't want to cover e-mail. We just did a study, we found over 100 minutes of coverage of Trump and women. That personal issue that’s two and half times more than coverage of this e-mail scandal—
HUNTSMAN: Right.
NOYES: --which goes to the heart of her ethics and competence when she was in public office. I think, clearly, they should be getting at least equal coverage.
HUNTSMAN: Rich, is this journalism though or is this activism? When you look at some of the tweets that were sent out by journalists, the opinion from the biggest papers in this country. I mean, you have to wonder.
NOYES: Yeah, they're sounding exactly like the democratic campaign. They don't like that this issue came so close to the election. They wish this was off the table. They want to discredit the message and sort of reassure Hillary voters there is nothing to look at here. But again, if this had been disclosed months and months ago it wouldn’t have been an issue right before the election either, so.
HUNTSMAN: We’ll have to leave it there.
MORRIS: Rich Noyes, from the Media Research Center. Thanks so much, Rich.
HUNTSMAN: Thank you.
NOYES: Thank you.
