On March 10, eight days after The New York Times began the
scandal over her private email server, Hillary Clinton assembled the
press at the United Nations in New York to offer a typically legalistic
and crabby press conference lasting only 21 minutes. The first-blush
reaction from the pundits? That wasn't good enough. She can't expect the
story to go away just from that mess.
But within 48 hours,
that's exactly what began to hapen, with the networks suddenly finding
other shiny news objects to explore. So here's the question that needs
to be asked: With the networks dumping investigators Lisa Myers, Michael
Isikoff and Sharyl Attkisson, is there anyone on broadcast television
interested in an investigation of Hillary's decidedly opaque email
practices?
In her press conference, Clinton made her usual categorical declarations like: "I fully complied by every rule that I was governed by." Will this be tested, or will Hillary's emails become like the digital equivalent of Bill Clinton's female accusers, buried and forgotten?
Let's recall what then-Los Angeles Times columnist Tim Rutten wrote about John Edwards after the entire fatherhood fiasco in 2008, and the entire national media elite tried not to confirm a National Enquirer story they didn't like about a viable Democratic candidate.
Rutten wrote there were two kinds of confirmation. One occurs when an editor mutters, "Find somebody and have them make a few calls." Or "there's the sort that comes when that editor summons an investigative reporter with a heart like ice and a mind like Torquemada's and says, 'Follow this wherever it goes and peel this guy like an onion.'"
This ice-veined Torquemada approach was applied to every 2012 Republican presidential contender. It's already on display in this cycle against GOP front-runners Jeb Bush and Scott Walker. Is Hillary Clinton's status as the one and only Democratic hope in the field going to cause the liberal media to fold and avoid damaging the Democrats?
In her press conference, Clinton made her usual categorical declarations like: "I fully complied by every rule that I was governed by." Will this be tested, or will Hillary's emails become like the digital equivalent of Bill Clinton's female accusers, buried and forgotten?
Let's recall what then-Los Angeles Times columnist Tim Rutten wrote about John Edwards after the entire fatherhood fiasco in 2008, and the entire national media elite tried not to confirm a National Enquirer story they didn't like about a viable Democratic candidate.
Rutten wrote there were two kinds of confirmation. One occurs when an editor mutters, "Find somebody and have them make a few calls." Or "there's the sort that comes when that editor summons an investigative reporter with a heart like ice and a mind like Torquemada's and says, 'Follow this wherever it goes and peel this guy like an onion.'"
This ice-veined Torquemada approach was applied to every 2012 Republican presidential contender. It's already on display in this cycle against GOP front-runners Jeb Bush and Scott Walker. Is Hillary Clinton's status as the one and only Democratic hope in the field going to cause the liberal media to fold and avoid damaging the Democrats?
