Tapper: Christie getting a lot more attention on Bridgegate than Hillary did on Benghazi

posted at 8:41 am on January 23, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

Not coverage, CNN’s Jake Tapper distinguishes for Hugh Hewitt, because Benghazi got a lot of coverage … as a White House story rather than a State Department story. That may be the difference in comparing media coverage, Tapper suggests, but agrees with Hewitt that the media has pressed Chris Christie much harder as the man at the top than they have Hillary Clinton as the woman at the top of the State Department when the attack on Benghazi succeeded. Tapper has another question, though — why isn’t Hillary getting on top of this story?

Hugh Hewitt: Second big story, you were covering Chris Christie yesterday. E.J. Dionne was on with me to talk about the same thing. But he asked the question why didn’t Chris Christie investigate more what happened on the bridge, and so I asked him well, what about Hillary? Why didn’t she investigate more about Benghazi? And he said yeah, okay, game, set, match, he walked into it. What do you think? Chris Christie and Hillary Clinton, both frontrunners, both dogged by what they did know and when did they know it stories. Are they getting the same level of MSM scrutiny on their major scandal stories?

Jake Tapper: When…MSM or MSN?

HH: MSM, mainstream media, Manhattan-Beltway media elites, yeah.

JT: I thought you were referring to a specific channel.

HH: No, no.

JT: Are they getting the same degree of scrutiny? No, of course not, but I think Benghazi was…

HH: Explain what you mean. Who’s getting more?

JT: Well obviously, Christie is getting a lot more attention when it comes to Bridgegate than Hillary got when it came to Benghazi. I think that there are complicated reasons for it. I don’t know that Benghazi, pardon me, I don’t know that Benghazi got less coverage in aggregate than Bridgegate got. You know, I think Benghazi was in a lot of ways, that was covered, well, I just know like when I was covering Benghazi right after it happened, it was almost more like a White House story than it was a State Department story, because the White House took control of it, Hillary Clinton didn’t go out on the Sunday shows, Susan Rice did, obviously. And then the story turned to, and I did a lot of my coverage in 2012, September and October about the State Department not meeting security requests, and that was, it was not focused, per se, on Hillary Clinton as much as it was to the State Department not fulfilling those requests.

HH: But we don’t know what she did that night, do we, Jake Tapper? And no one bothers her about it. She’s been allowed to walk away whereas Christie’s dump trucked a bunch of subpoenas two weeks later.

JT: Hillary Clinton, I do not know what she did that night. I do think that, you know, she was, look, I don’t, I’m not trying to make excuses for anybody. I’m just trying to look at the perspective of Christie is an incumbent governor. He has an adversarial Democratic legislature. They are launching subpoenas. Christie, it’s also the nature of Christie to go out there and give a two-hour plus press conference and answer all those questions, although he has laid low since then. But still, that was one of the longest press conferences in modern American politics. Hillary Clinton was on her way out, and you know, I can’t tackle her. I haven’t had a chance to interview her since Benghazi happened. I don’t even know, has she done interviews? I think she did some interviews on her way out.

HH: It’s a pretty stark contrast, isn’t it, between Christie’s two hour longest day press conference and Hillary hiding?

JT: So a big contrast between Christie’s press conference and most politicians in scandals, but certainly, of course what you’ve said is right. I mean, most politicians don’t then go out there and give two hour press conferences. John McCain did like a 90 minute one after Keating Five.

HH: Yeah.

JT: And Gerry Ferraro did a 90 minute one when her finances were under question when she was the VP nominee in ’84. But generally speaking, you don’t get that. No, I mean, I would, you know, I would like to, there are lots of questions that I would like to ask both Christie and Hillary, but especially Hillary. You’re right. I mean, the things is, that I think is a mistake for the Hillary people, and to a lesser extent, the Christie people, because I’m sure he will soon do an interview, but for the Hillary people is, the issue isn’t going away. I’m sure she has explanations. I’m sure she has answers to questions. Why not give them if you intend on possibly seeking office someday? That’s…

HH: Well, and Jake, just to plant a question, why didn’t you call back Gregory Hicks after you talked to him at2am later when the Ambassador’s dead and the Embassy’s overrun, or the annex is overrun.

JT: Hugh, if you have an interview, if you have to set up an interview between me and Secretary Clinton, that is very exciting news for me.

Tapper says he’s sure that Hillary has some sort of answers to these questions, presumably not just “What difference at this point does it make?” — from one year ago today, by the way. That answer won’t work on the campaign trail when Benghazi and the entire arc of Libya policy during her tenure comes under scrutiny. Why wait for that when she can address the issue now? If she has answers that will defuse it, providing them sooner rather than later works better, as Tapper points out with his examples of Geraldine Ferraro, John McCain, and Christie himself.

So far, it looks like “What difference” is the only answer, and the Clintons are hoping that people will just forget about Benghazi. The media might not be as interested, but the story isn’t going away.


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

at this point, what diff does it make?

SwabJockey on January 23, 2014 at 8:44 AM

Tapper: Christie getting a lot more attention on Bridgegate than Hillary did on Benghazi
========================

Jake Tapper is an honest reporter,..and thats why Hopey had
him removed from the WH Press Pool!!

Jake is truly speaking,..Truth to Power!!!!

canopfor on January 23, 2014 at 8:46 AM

Yeah. And a lot of that coverage was networks running defense for the White House and State.

BKeyser on January 23, 2014 at 8:47 AM

False equivalency.

verbaluce on January 23, 2014 at 8:47 AM

I won’t forget that not only Killary but Dog Eater turned their backs on Americans fighting for their lives and did nothing. Well ok Bark did something, he packed for his Vegas trip and made sure his Speedo and swim goggles were in his carry-on.

Bishop on January 23, 2014 at 8:49 AM

Gawd…she is ugl……..

She could stop traffic on a bridge with that face…

Electrongod on January 23, 2014 at 8:50 AM

False equivalency.

verbaluce on January 23, 2014 at 8:47 AM

Of course you’d get that wrong.

Thanks for playing.

Bitter Clinger on January 23, 2014 at 8:52 AM

Hugh Hewitt’s interviews are excellent. He’s very civilized but I’m still surprised that people like Eugene Dionne walk into his parlor.

I wonder if Tapper will return after this – he’s made himself sound downright foolish in my opinion.

Drained Brain on January 23, 2014 at 8:52 AM

Tapper says he’s sure that Hillary has some sort of answers to these questions, presumably not just “What difference at this point does it make?” — from one year ago today, by the way. That answer won’t work on the campaign trail when Benghazi and the entire arc of Libya policy during her tenure comes under scrutiny. Why wait for that when she can address the issue now?

What makes you think it’ll come under scrutiny in 2016, Ed? After 7 years of the Obama buttsniffing media, is it really that hard to figure out their schtick? Benghazi will be mentioned in passing by some media types just to pay lip service, but otherwise it’ll be virtually ignored. Here are the various excuses they’ll use:

Benghazi is an old story.

The NY Times did an extensive report on it and found Hillary did nothing wrong(and it was due to a YouTube video).

There was an investigation which absolved Hillary of any responsibility.

The Republicans are overreaching with this.

There are more important issues in this campaign.

Americans don’t care about Benghazi.

It’s sexist to press Hillary on anything.

Take your pick.

Doughboy on January 23, 2014 at 8:53 AM

verbaluce on January 23, 2014 at 8:47 AM

You are right. 4 Ameicns were not massacred by Muslim Terroists in New Jersey.

kingsjester on January 23, 2014 at 8:53 AM

That answer won’t work on the campaign trail when Benghazi and the entire arc of Libya policy during her tenure comes under scrutiny.

I doubt that Libya gets more than a passing mention on the campaign trail. Remember Reverend Wright? Bill Ayers? How much of a mention did they get in 2008? A couple days on Fox, and Hannity harping on it forever, but that’s it.

The media might not be as interested, but the story isn’t going away.

I think the story has gone away. You might care, Ed. I might care, but the average Joe doesn’t. And he’s going to care a whole lot less in 2016 than he does now.

And that’s the answer to this question:

Why wait for that when she can address the issue now?

Chris of Rights on January 23, 2014 at 8:53 AM

“Americans”

kingsjester on January 23, 2014 at 8:54 AM

And they’ll largely ignore what Greg Hicks just wrote in the WSJ:

Gregory Hicks: Benghazi and the Smearing of Chris Stevens

Drained Brain on January 23, 2014 at 8:54 AM

Its fun listening and visualizing Jake tie himself in knots trying to answer questions about the MSM totally giving Billary a pass, where people actually died-in contrast to people getting stuck in traffic. Amazing…

Static21 on January 23, 2014 at 8:55 AM

That answer won’t work on the campaign trail when Benghazi and the entire arc of Libya policy during her tenure comes under scrutiny.

I doubt that Libya gets more than a passing mention on the campaign trail. Remember Reverend Wright? Bill Ayers? How much of a mention did they get in 2008? A couple days on Fox, and Hannity harping on it forever, but that’s it.

The media might not be as interested, but the story isn’t going away.

I think the story has gone away. You might care, Ed. I might care, but the average Joe doesn’t. And he’s going to care a whole lot less in 2016 than he does now.

And that’s the answer to this question:

Why wait for that when she can address the issue now?

Why address the issue now when you believe you can address it…never?

Chris of Rights on January 23, 2014 at 8:55 AM

Just goes to show, Jake may be one of MSM’s best, but still he sees everything from inside the bubble.

petefrt on January 23, 2014 at 8:56 AM

Apologies for the double post. I selected text to quote it, and somehow the window scrolled or something and I ended up apparently hitting “Submit Comment” before I was ready to do so.

Chris of Rights on January 23, 2014 at 8:56 AM

I have maintained that Hillary will never be President. Reason 1 is that she has absolutely zero charisma. Reason 2 is that she is aging gracelessly (yeah, I know, sexism; however, it’s true of most people’s perception of her). And Reason 3 is that she has always dodged scrutiny. The MSM will try to cover for her, but Reasons 1 & 2 will negate much of that.

Bitter Clinger on January 23, 2014 at 8:56 AM

So far, it looks like “What difference” is the only answer, and the Clintons are hoping that people will just forget about Benghazi. The media might not be as interested, but the story isn’t going away.

The State Department is clearly abetting Hillary. They’ve taken the position that any concerns about Benghazi were asked in answered in that sham ARB that clearly went out its way to keep the pig out of the line of fire. It’s to the point where Jay Carney refers all answers to State who declares that they’ve said all they intend to say on the subject. And there seems no intention of actually tracking down the individuals identified as the leaders of the attack- even though their whereabouts are known.

If the pig wants to be President, she will have to come up with a far better answer than a screeching “what difference does it make” especially since the administration has done nothing other than to protect senior administration officials.

Happy Nomad on January 23, 2014 at 8:57 AM

Jake Tapper is an honest reporter,..and thats why Hopey had
him removed from the WH Press Pool!!

Jake is truly speaking,..Truth to Power!!!!

canopfor on January 23, 2014 at 8:46 AM

…which is why Jake Tapper getting a one-on-one interview with Hillary Clinton before 2017 is about as likely as that sun rising in the west tomorrow morning is. (CNN may get one or more one-on-ones with Hillary between now and then. But Wolf will do the interview. Or Candy. Or Piers. Not Tapper — way too risky for Team Clinton that Jake might actually try to commit journalism).

jon1979 on January 23, 2014 at 9:00 AM

I have maintained that Hillary will never be President. Reason 1 is that she has absolutely zero charisma. Reason 2 is that she is aging gracelessly (yeah, I know, sexism; however, it’s true of most people’s perception of her). And Reason 3 is that she has always dodged scrutiny. The MSM will try to cover for her, but Reasons 1 & 2 will negate much of that.

Bitter Clinger on January 23, 2014 at 8:56 AM

Reason 1: People forget that she ran a really lousy campaign in 2008, in large part because all she does is sreech at people.

Reason 2: You say aging gracelessly. I say more along the lines of melting in front of our eyes. She’s essentially turning into a giant angry blob.

Reson 3: The media will try and cover for her but at some point she will have to come up with substantive points. This isn’t 2008 where she can run against the outgoing GOP administration. She’ll have to defend the current administration and her role in killing Ambassador Stevens and the others at Benghazi.

Happy Nomad on January 23, 2014 at 9:01 AM

False equivalency.

verbaluce on January 23, 2014 at 8:47 AM

verbaluce:Yup,..a stupid racist video!!

canopfor on January 23, 2014 at 9:05 AM

If the pig wants to be President, she will have to come up with a far better answer than a screeching “what difference does it make” especially since the administration has done nothing other than to protect senior administration officials.

Happy Nomad on January 23, 2014 at 8:57 AM

If the GOP really wants to go for the jugular, give a primetime speaking slot at the 2016 convention to one of more family members of the Benghazi victims. If it has to be just one of them, make it that mom who’s appeared on FoxNews a few times and was lied to her face by Hillary and Obama about the YouTube video. The media will go apesh-t over it, but it will be a dagger through the heart of the Clinton campaign.

Doughboy on January 23, 2014 at 9:06 AM

canopfor on January 23, 2014 at 8:46 AM

…which is why Jake Tapper getting a one-on-one interview with Hillary Clinton before 2017 is about as likely as that sun rising in the west tomorrow morning is. (CNN may get one or more one-on-ones with Hillary between now and then. But Wolf will do the interview. Or Candy. Or Piers. Not Tapper — way too risky for Team Clinton that Jake might actually try to commit journalism).

jon1979 on January 23, 2014 at 9:00 AM

jon1979:Agreed :)

canopfor on January 23, 2014 at 9:07 AM

‘Christie getting a lot more attention on Bridgegate than Hillary did on Benghazi’ …

… from the exact same state-run media that Christie has been kissing up to, and being built up by, for years.

It should come as no surprise to anyone that the state-run media is very liberal and extremely biased – Christie chose to play their games, and know he’s paying the price. If Christie wants to be protected and praised by the liberal media (as he used to be), pushing the full liberal agenda isn’t enough – he’s going to have to officially switch parties.

Pork-Chop on January 23, 2014 at 9:05 AM

Pork-Chop on January 23, 2014 at 9:07 AM

If the GOP really wants to go for the jugular, give a primetime speaking slot at the 2016 convention to one of more family members of the Benghazi victims. If it has to be just one of them, make it that mom who’s appeared on FoxNews a few times and was lied to her face by Hillary and Obama about the YouTube video. The media will go apesh-t over it, but it will be a dagger through the heart of the Clinton campaign.

Doughboy on January 23, 2014 at 9:06 AM

Yeah, that would leave a mark. Sadly, I suspect the RNC will be more interested in booking speakers lauding amnesty for the illegals, legitimacy for sodomites, and attacks on the Tea Party.

Happy Nomad on January 23, 2014 at 9:09 AM

Must be because an ambassador didn’t die in Bridgegate.
Or something.

TimBuk3 on January 23, 2014 at 9:10 AM

Doughboy on January 23, 2014 at 9:06 AM

Boy howdy would that be an Alpha Strike, people with relatives in the military who might lean demorat could be brought over.

But yeah, as Nomad said the GOP will instead have Karl Rove and Charlie Crist as their top speakers.

Bishop on January 23, 2014 at 9:11 AM

Hillary Clinton is unfit for office. She lacks the skill, the decency, the intelligence, the fortitude and the integrity to occupy the seat of POTUS. Just like Obama. Hillary is Obama’s lickalottapussmotpotus. Unfortunately, she’s licking the wrong dog this time.

Because, Obama.

Key West Reader on January 23, 2014 at 9:21 AM

False equivalency. verbaluce on January 23, 2014 at 8:47 AM

What a brilliant argument.

Akzed on January 23, 2014 at 9:28 AM

Not to worry, Congressman Issa is going to bring out a big, block buster, critical report on Hillary and Benghazi any day now……not.

albill on January 23, 2014 at 9:29 AM

If the GOP really wants to go for the jugular, give a primetime speaking slot at the 2016 convention to one of more family members of the Benghazi victims. If it has to be just one of them, make it that mom who’s appeared on FoxNews a few times and was lied to her face by Hillary and Obama about the YouTube video. The media will go apesh-t over it, but it will be a dagger through the heart of the Clinton campaign.

Doughboy on January 23, 2014 at 9:06 AM

Yeah, that would leave a mark. Sadly, I suspect the RNC will be more interested in booking speakers lauding amnesty for the illegals, legitimacy for sodomites, and attacks on the Tea Party.

Happy Nomad on January 23, 2014 at 9:09 AM

The RNC still hasn’t figured out that all’s fair in love, war, and politics. They want to be liked more than they want to win.

If the DNC can claim Mitt Romney gave a woman cancer and Harry Reid can claim, without any evidence whatsoever, that Romney didn’t pay taxes, then Doughboy’s suggestion is the least the RNC should do in taking out Hillary.

Bitter Clinger on January 23, 2014 at 9:31 AM

It ain’t over til the Fat lady man sings.

ToddPA on January 23, 2014 at 9:37 AM

False equivalency.

verbaluce on January 23, 2014 at 8:47

yeah, one’s to be held accountalbe, and the other is not.

Good point Verb.

ToddPA on January 23, 2014 at 9:39 AM

verbaluce on January 23, 2014 at 8:47 AM

You are right. 4 Americans were not massacred by Muslim terrorists in New Jersey.

kingsjester on January 23, 2014 at 8:53 AM

I’m surprised that even Verbie can see that the cover given to Hillary by the MSM was different. Perverse and lacking curiosity.

According to the media, if Crispy Creme had been the Secretary of State, he would have had to know about Benghazi but not Hillary because “sexist”*?

(*Hipsters, is that how you use the “because” meme?)

Fallon on January 23, 2014 at 9:39 AM

False equivalency.

verbaluce on January 23, 2014 at 8:47 AM

I presume you mean, “no one died during Bridgegate.”

There Goes the Neighborhood on January 23, 2014 at 9:40 AM

Is it just me or does Hillary look like Robert Gibbs in a Garth wig from Wayne’s World?

Chuck Schick on January 23, 2014 at 9:52 AM

Benghazi is a sad replay of the OJ trial.

The verdict was rendered, and a Murderer walked out of
the Courtroom….saying he would “spend the rest of his days”
looking for the killers of Nicole and Ron…..

..in 2012, this Nation re-elected a man who vowed he would
“bring those who did this to Justice”…

Justice in both these cases has been spat upon….

in the case of Benghazi, to save the Alcohol besotted Azz
of a certain woman..

ToddPA on January 23, 2014 at 9:55 AM

Conservatives may extol Jake Tapper as an example of a fair and balanced reporter, but he still has a lot of room fr improvement himself. I distinctly remember Tapper saying, at the conclusion of the 2012 election, that the media couldn’t fully investigate Benghazi because Republicans made the issue too political.

I never realized that incompetence, failure and apathy on the part of the Executive branch toward the safety of our diplomats was political. I always thought our media was supposed to expose these things regardless of the political ramifications of doing so.

That is my $.02

h a p f a t on January 23, 2014 at 9:59 AM

I am sure she is polling the public for an acceptable answer to all those questions and will be ready by 2016. She’ll be smooth as silk by then.

Cindy Munford on January 23, 2014 at 10:00 AM

h a p f a t on January 23, 2014 at 9:59 AM

The press doesn’t want to get any of icky Republican “mud” on them. They are above it. Too political, what a hoot.

Cindy Munford on January 23, 2014 at 10:01 AM

I reject the entire argumentative premise.

How could one conflate creating a traffic jam with the murder of four Americans, including an ambassador? Are those two…equal in someone’s mind?

Hillary deliberately and with malice ignored advice and requests to better protect our embassy. She participated in a scheme to cover up the use of US facilities in Benghazi to funnel arms. She actively participated in the scheme to cover up the perpetrators of the attack (have you ever asked yourself- why?)

Even when the embassy was under attack, she was involved in the decision to refuse those men help.

Hillary put politics above the lives of our citizens.

Her actions wholly and fully display she can not be trusted to make decisions which are in the best interest of our country.

Haven’t we had enough of self-absorbed, politically manipulating, divisive, untalented people pushing themselves as “leaders” when their own actions aptly display they are nothing of the sort?

Marcus Traianus on January 23, 2014 at 10:14 AM

I’m sure hearing it live the stutters and bird-walking wouldn’t be as overt (talking suffers when placed verbatim on the page), but Tapper really comes across as stammering, dodging, and apologizing for Hillary. It probably is, as a commenter above suggested, just a reflection of him living inside the beltway bubble, but it still is troubling that the only halfway honest reporter this side of Fox sounds so weak in this topic.

MaxMBJ on January 23, 2014 at 10:17 AM

False equivalency.

verbaluce on January 23, 2014 at 8:47 AM

Yeah.

Christie is implicated in a scandal and conservatives actually want him investigated. Christie fires people.

Obama and Hillary are implicated in scandals. They express outrage. No one is held accountable or takes responsibility and liberals don’t think there’s anything to see.

Liberals like you demonstrate every day why government cannot be trusted. The least you could do as part of the “bigger government is better for everyone” crowd is show at least a smidgen of integrity and demand that government be transparent and politicians be held accountable for things they are responsible for.

gwelf on January 23, 2014 at 10:24 AM

Too political, what a hoot.

Cindy Munford on January 23, 2014 at 10:01 AM

Yup, nothing should be examined or questioned too closely during a presidential election*.
.
.
.
.

*When a Democrat holds the Office of the Presidency.

Fallon on January 23, 2014 at 10:30 AM

*When a Democrat holds the Office of the Presidency.

Fallon on January 23, 2014 at 10:30 AM

Or is running. No fair asking them hard questions.

Cindy Munford on January 23, 2014 at 10:32 AM

Hugh Hewitt’s interviews are excellent. He’s very civilized but I’m still surprised that people like Eugene Dionne walk into his parlor.

Drained Brain on January 23, 2014 at 8:52 AM

Hewitt gets decent ratings, but I’m surprised he doesn’t get better ratings. He, Prager, and Medved are three guys who’ve mastered the art of debate.. Rush is an excellent debater, but his show is more entertainment than debate. Hannity is good guy and does great work, but I’m surprised he gets the ratings he does. He’s not a good debater, and he’s not very entertaining. Levin is brilliant, but not a good debater. He yells at and shuts down/hangs up on just about anyone with whom he disagrees. And Savage? Well, I’m surprised anyone still carries him.

GOPRanknFile on January 23, 2014 at 10:32 AM

GOPRanknFile on January 23, 2014 at 10:32 AM

I agree on most of your assessments. Though, Medved is overrated as a debater. He responds to debate with te same canned arguments that he has been using for years. He self promotes more than any other host (except Savage), and in a more nauseating manner.

h a p f a t on January 23, 2014 at 10:42 AM

h a p f a t on January 23, 2014 at 10:42 AM

Fair enough. I can see why you think he’s overrated as a debater. However, I don’t know if I understand the “self promotes” part. I never got that from him. What does he do?

GOPRanknFile on January 23, 2014 at 10:49 AM

The media might not be as interested, but the story isn’t going away.

*cough*

F&F went away. Far, far away. See that little microdot on the horizon?

The world is changed.

And not for the better.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on January 23, 2014 at 10:50 AM

He has an adversarial Democratic legislature. They are launching subpoenas.

Don’t we control a legislative branch? Where are our subpoenas? The GOP are for the most part cowards.

Rancher on January 23, 2014 at 11:01 AM

Hillary deliberately and with malice ignored advice and requests to better protect our embassy. She participated in a scheme to cover up the use of US facilities in Benghazi to funnel arms. She actively participated in the scheme to cover up the perpetrators of the attack (have you ever asked yourself- why?)

Even when the embassy was under attack, she was involved in the decision to refuse those men help.

Hillary put politics above the lives of our citizens.

Her actions wholly and fully display she can not be trusted to make decisions which are in the best interest of our country.

Haven’t we had enough of self-absorbed, politically manipulating, divisive, untalented people pushing themselves as “leaders” when their own actions aptly display they are nothing of the sort?

Marcus Traianus on January 23, 2014 at 10:14 AM

Damn, that would make a great ad

Kat_man on January 23, 2014 at 11:01 AM

So far, it looks like “What difference” is the only answer, and the Clintons are hoping that people will just forget about Benghazi. The media might not be as interested, but the story isn’t going away.

I wouldn’t be so quick to assume the story isn’t going away. If the media wants Hillary to win… believe me, they’ll try their dandest to make it go away. How many gamebreaking stories on Obama went away? Yeah…

Ukiah on January 23, 2014 at 11:19 AM

I wouldn’t be so quick to assume the story isn’t going away.

They haven’t been able to make it go away yet and that may be why subpoenas and a special prosecutor haven’t happened yet, it may be a strategic decision to wait till we are closer to the election. Still Filegate, Cattlegate, Whitewater, (I’m sure I’m forgetting some), all went away.

Rancher on January 23, 2014 at 11:59 AM

GOPRanknFile on January 23, 2014 at 10:49 AM

I only mean that his constant references to the Medved Insider or medved head subscription in addition to relentlessly plugging the Medved history store become incredibly annoying. Also, he traverses the country ceaselessly (which is less annoying, but still seems to be over and above most host’s self promotion.

h a p f a t on January 23, 2014 at 12:00 PM

h a p f a t on January 23, 2014 at 12:00 PM

Ah okay. Fair enough.

GOPRanknFile on January 23, 2014 at 12:29 PM

h a p f a t on January 23, 2014 at 12:00 PM

Ah okay. Fair enough.

GOPRanknFile on January 23, 2014 at 12:29 PM

Pretty decent synopsis – though I would call Rush more of a media analyst than a debater. He pegs what they do pretty much dead on all the time.

He rarely has guests and his questions are pretty straight up – he is a fair interview. He will play with callers, but typically only to reinforce a point he wants to make. He will give opponents oodles of time to talk in the hopes they will demonstrate why their point of view is wrong. But he is always pretty polite with them. As to Medved, these guys all promote, it is how they make a living. I don’t think it is fair to call him out on that.

Zomcon JEM on January 23, 2014 at 12:59 PM

It probably is, as a commenter above suggested, just a reflection of him living inside the beltway bubble, but it still is troubling that the only halfway honest reporter this side of Fox sounds so weak in this topic.

MaxMBJ on January 23, 2014 at 10:17 AM

Case in point:

HH:…Are they getting the same level of MSM scrutiny on their major scandal stories?

Jake Tapper: When…MSM or MSN?

HH: MSM, mainstream media, Manhattan-Beltway media elites, yeah.

JT: I thought you were referring to a specific channel.

Is it really possible Tapper didn’t recognize the Right’s favorite derogatory acronym? How big is this bubble, anyway?

AesopFan on January 23, 2014 at 2:11 PM

Well, more people died at Bridgegate….oh, wait….

Another Drew on January 23, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Well obviously, Christie is getting a lot more attention when it comes to Bridgegate than Hillary got when it came to Benghazi. I think that there are complicated reasons for it.

SIGH.

Yet more weasel words to downplay the malpractice of the LSM.

No. It’s not complicated. It is no more complicated that protecting the Obama Regime and Obama.

Always ask yourself “what if it was a republican” in any media situation and you will see how truly uncomplicated it is.

But thanks for playing, Mr. Tapper.

kim roy on January 23, 2014 at 9:22 PM

One year ago today … Hillary made this shocking statement about Benghazi …

https://vine.co/v/MBHHgWrrQJD

Just let this VINE play a few times … THIS little clip really is enough to destroy Hillary’s presidential aspirations … listen, and watch her body language … send it to everyone you know.

Pork-Chop on January 23, 2014 at 10:32 PM