Comedy gold: Breitbart and Shuster yell at each other over James O’Keefe; Update: Shuster lied to me to get to appear, says Breitbart

posted at 4:00 pm on January 28, 2010 by Allahpundit

In which Breitbart gets grilled about journalistic ethics by a guy who was reprimanded by his own network this very morning for “inappropriately” jumping to conclusions about O’Keefe and whose career highlights include telling the Olby faithful that he was “convinced” an indictment of Karl Rove in Plamegate was on the way. A question from AmSpec’s Philip Klein: If, as Shuster suggests, it’s not appropriate to accuse someone of criminal behavior until formal charges have been filed, how come the left feels so chill about calling Bush and Rumsfeld war criminals? Food for thought as you watch. In Shuster’s semi-defense, he does grudgingly retract his own hasty judgment about O’Keefe — which, as of this writing, is more than can be said for CBS and the LA Times.

Needless to say, this is the stuff cable news dreams are made of. Oh, almost forgot: Right after Breitbart was cut off and this segment ended, Shuster brought in Eric Boehlert of Media Matters to play a few minutes of softball about what a shady guy Breitbart is. If you follow AB’s Twitter feed, you know that he regularly taunts Media Matters — and Boehlert particularly — for propagandizing for the left. I’m sure having him on here and giving Breitbart no chance to respond to him was pure coincidence.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Update: You’ll be pleased to know that David Shuster has no horse in this race.

As I am signing off here, I have just been informed that MSNBC has admonished Shuster for “inappropriate” twitter comments. But what about Shuster’s obvious lie that he has no “horse in this race,” a lie he used to try to get me into the Obama-stimulus-infused, bias-laden MSNBC eco-system? Could there be a greater admission of a journalist’s political investment in a storyline than divining (”the truth is, you intended to tap her phones”) a subject guilty of a crime he has not even been accused of? Remember, Shuster has sold out Olbermann and Maddow as the ideologues in the newsroom. If Shuster is their idea of journalistic neutrality, I can continue to sleep well acting as a journalist who openly admits that he comes to the table with a unique political perspective.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

But Shuster doesn’t have a horse in the race. It’s a donkey.

and also:

who controls the media?

True_King on January 28, 2010 at 4:44 PM

The mediots?

Merovign on January 29, 2010 at 1:49 AM

who controls the media?

True_King on January 28, 2010 at 4:44 PM

The mediots?

Merovign on January 29, 2010 at 1:49 AM

The mediocres?

Shy Guy on January 29, 2010 at 2:24 AM

Good job, Andrew Breitbart.

I was hoping someone would … knock him out. That guy is the biggest POS on the planet.

Narutoboy on January 28, 2010 at 5:20 PM

You mean rhetorically speaking? Andrew pretty much did that, don’t you agree?

RD on January 29, 2010 at 4:06 AM

Ticking time bomb

If the New York Times wants to adulterate its news reportage with the narrative of liberal politics, that is bad. However, someone once built the NYT without the grant of an air license and the various advantages given to the electronic media.

Because of the ‘King’s Grant’ given to them, the fact that we had a center left ideological monopoly in the electronic media with their own agenda for years was unfair and a real disservice to the nation. Their victims did not just include conservative politicians and the nations on the wrong side of their foreign policy goals. Just ask anyone from evangelicals to Vietnam veterans to Hillary.

However, MSNBC and their nonexistant journalistic standards are even more pernicious. The treatment of “W” was a crime. They are now polarizing their audience with endless reports of racism and imagined examples of the abuse of the President by political opponents and any part of the media that has any crtitque of the mighty 2008 junta.

The administration has so far shown themselves to be too ethical and possibly too inept (or just too busy) to engage in a Reichstag fire with these thugs. However, watch for the results of the festering anger they are fueling as time passes, the “transformation” fails and they create new villains. Or just wait for the right opportunity to present itself.

IlikedAUH2O on January 29, 2010 at 4:26 AM

Andrew is so much more of an honorable man than this other horses patoot.
Someone has got to stand for us in the fight against the blatant criminal activity by organizations like ACORN and SEIU and seemingly condoned by our government.

I say keep up the good fight until all the progressives are rooted out and we can get back to a congress that works together on policies instead of fighting between two parties trying to decide what form of government to institute.

mrcarter123 on January 29, 2010 at 6:25 AM

Shuster is douchetastic to the max.

keepinitreal on January 29, 2010 at 9:42 AM

If, as Shuster suggests, it’s not appropriate to accuse someone of criminal behavior until formal charges have been filed, how come the left feels so chill about calling Bush and Rumsfeld war criminals?

Rumsfeld has been charged.

orange on January 29, 2010 at 3:43 PM

Comment pages: 1 2