Ah, impeachment and sexual misconduct by a public official, apparently these warrant little or no coverage by the MSM unless there’s a Clinton involved. How else can you explain what we’re NOT hearing and what’s NOT being reported?
Would someone answer this question, how is it possible the MSM has been virtually silent about former Senator John Edwards 2:30 am meeting with his paramour and love child? Granted, this has been reported by the National Enquirer, but absent a complete and outright denial from Edwards, why no follow-up? BTW, its not as if the Enquirer hasn’t been right in the past, right Rush?
I’m asking this question as a former Edwards supporter who greatly admires his wife’s courage and character. I’m asking this question as someone who always thought the Bill/Monica story was none of our business . . . that this should have always remained a private matter between Bill and Hillary . . . that it was never a story to have trotted out for the world to gawk at.
It has been suggested that one reason for the MSM not covering this story is because Obama is still considering Edwards as his VP. AND, if the MSM looks the other way, this pick could still be possible! Say what? It’s as good a guess as anything. This is a legitimate story. It does not have to be covered with the same heavy-handed partisan way the Clinton/Monica story was, but this needs follow-up, particularly if Edwards is (was?) being considered for the #2 spot on the ticket.
Now, on to impeachment, other than Jonathan Turley’s post here, last week, and an email from a friend, the MSM never brought my attention to this story. Friday afternoon I went to C-Span to see, indeed, hearings were taking place; a surprise given the fact Pelosi had taken the issue off the table 2 years ago. I had to Google this story this morning to get a concise article about what is taking place. Here is part of Friday’s Voice of America article:
US Congressional Panel Hears Testimony on Case for Bush Impeachment
25 July 2008
A congressional committee has heard testimony about the case for impeachment of President Bush. VOA’s Dan Robinson reports, while majority Democrats have ruled out formal impeachment efforts, they approved the public hearing to examine limitations on presidential powers and arguments about what constitute impeachable offenses.
Critics say President Bush and Vice President Cheney should be impeached because of a range of alleged legal and constitutional abuses.
The list includes administration justifications to Congress and Americans for the war in Iraq, authorization of secret electronic surveillance, approval of harsh interrogation techniques, and defiance of congressional subpoenas.
Granted these impeachment efforts are driven, primarily by Congressman Dennis Kucinich, and in some quarters just a mention of his name is “enough said” but is that a reason for the virtual silence. Yes, yes, some outlets have done reporting, but nothing major from the cable outlets.
Surely, what was happening on Friday was more important than the “newsless news” recently reported like, Obama’s plane lands in Germany.