Global War on Terror Watch: Hugh Hewitt Vs. Eric Lichtblau on CNN Reliable Sources
Expose The Left: Hewitt Takes On Lichtblau, NY Times: ‘Story Helped Terrorists Elude Capture’ (VIDEO)
Conservative Hugh Hewitt appeared on CNN’s Reliable Sources, opposite of a liberally stacked panel, which included Eric Lichtblau of the New York Times, Eugene Robinson of The Washington Post, and Geneva Overholser from the U. of Missouri School of Journalism.
Even though he was outnumbered, Hewitt did manage to fight it out with Lichtblau, who refuses to appear on his nationally syndicated radio talk show. Hugh expressed the sentiment most Americans seem to feel; that what was done helped the terrorists. Moderator Howard Kurtz calls this thinking a “political attack†on the New York Times, however doesn’t think to mention that this was a “political attack†on the administration.
Watch the VIDEO – .WMV
Ian has a full transcript here.
Since this program was taped a few days ago it appears the MSM has coalesced around a “company line.” This line of defense is: All of the terrorists knew about this program anyway.
But, then the reader has to ask: Why publish a story everyone knew about on the front page of the New York and Los Angeles Times?
Does the MSM seem a little disingenious when called on the carpet for a bad call?
You betcha…..
Hugh Hewitt last week calls Eric Lichtblau out:
He declines interviews with me, but agrees to CNN and NPR.
He’s making money off of his “scoops.”
His reporting while in California was critized as deeply dishonest and partisan, especially with regards to Congressman Darrell Issa’s campaign for the U.S. Senate in 1998.
And Lichtblau’s been waging a “war against the war” since 2002. (More here and here.)
And why won’t Lichtblau or Bill Keller be interviewed by non-MSM press? Doyle McManus, Washington Bureau Chief of the Los Angeles times had the guts to go on Hewitt’s radio program last week (listen to the interview here). And he revealed some interesting facts of how and why the Los Angeles Times reached their decision to publish this story. Why not Keller and Lichtblau? Is it beneath you?
The MSM wagons are certainly circling around to defend the New York and Los Angeles Times on First Amendment grounds. It is obvious by polling data and blog traffic that they are smarting (circulation,advertising,public opinion) from their bad decision to reveal classified secrets for a program according to Lichtblau and Keller about which every terrorist knew or should have known.
The New York Times cannot have a “scoop” and then next week when it is no longer in vogue or they face intense criticism say no it wasn’t. And why not?
How do you spell HYPOCRISY?
Previous:
Global War on Terror Watch: New York and Los Angeles Times – “When Do We Publish a Secret?â€
Michael Ramirez on the New York Times Publishing U.S. Anti-Terror Secrets
Global War on Terror Watch: House Resolution 895 Passes 227-183
Global War on Terror Watch: House Resolution 895 – The House Debates
Global War on Terror Watch: House Resolution 895 – Redux
Global War on Terror Watch: House Resolution 895
Global War on Terror Watch: Michael Gerson Shames Media for Revealing SWIFT Anti-Terror Program
Global War on Terror Watch: Piling on the New York Times?
Global War on Terror Watch: Eric Lichtblau of the New York Times Explains SWIFT Scoop
Los Angeles Times Watch: Patterico and Danziger Dump the Los Angeles Dog Trainer
Global War on Terror Watch: Dear Mr. Keller – Why?
Technorati Tags:LosAngelesTimes, NewYorkTimes, GlobalWaronTerror, SWIFT, BillKeller, DeanBaquet, JamesRisen, EricLichtblau, DoyleMcManus, HughHewitt