MediaWatch: February 1998
Table of Contents:
- MediaWatch: February 1998
- Enlisting in White House War on Starr
- NewsBites: Who Set the Sex Precedent?
- The Monica Story's First Casualty
- Editors Realize Liberal Slant
Enlisting in White House War on Starr
After years of calling him a "Republican prosecutor," Dan Rather announced the newest network poll: "By more than two to one, the public says special prosecutor Ken Starr is politically motivated to damage the Clintons." NBC News touted a poll showing 64 percent said the Starr probe is "partisan and political" while only 22 percent found it "fair and impartial."
The unasked question in the pack of stories and polls suggesting the partisanship of independent counsel Kenneth Starr is this: has Starr done anything as politically damaging as Iran-Contra counsel Lawrence Walsh’s reindictment of ex-Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger four days before the 1992 election? Walsh’s team leaked a note suggesting George Bush lied when he said he was "out of the loop" on Iran-Contra. The networks have aired stories underlining Starr’s partisanship without any reference to Walsh, displaying a double standard.
ABC’s Michel McQueen noted on February 7 that Lewinsky lawyer William Ginsburg "is not the only one to complain that Starr’s tactics border on abuse. Whitewater figure Susan McDougal has long maintained that she’s in jail on contempt charges only because she won’t invent facts to fill Starr’s story. The question now is whether Starr’s tactics will prove more offensive to the courts and the public than any alleged wrongdoing that the President is investigating."
CBS anchor Dan Rather aided the war on Starr by emphasizing his party in this February 6 intro: "New and heavy return fire late today from the White House under fire. Clearly and dramatically, the President’s side confirmed a key part of their strategy is to counterattack the man they see as a politically biased special prosecutor, Republican Kenneth Starr."
Three days later, Rather carried this salvo: "In Washington late today, lawyers for President Clinton asked a federal court to find special prosecutor Kenneth Starr in contempt of court. Mr. Clinton’s lawyers cite what they say are illegal, false, and self-serving leaks from Starr’s grand jury investigation, especially aspects involving Monica Lewinsky."
On February 8, NBC Nightly News began with the tease by anchor Len Cannon: "The President’s popularity continues to climb while new leaks raise more questions about this crisis and the special counsel who is running the investigation." NBC then highlighted a clip of Clinton defender Paul Begala from Meet the Press: "Ken Starr has become corrupt in the sense Lord Acton meant when he said absolute power corrupts absolutely."
Leading into the first ad break on the February 16 NBC Nightly News viewers were treated to this plug from Tom Brokaw: "Still ahead tonight. Investigating the President. A growing backlash against independent counsel Kenneth Starr. Is he out of bounds or just tone deaf?" Reporter Lisa Myers elaborated: "Even some former prosecutors now say Starr’s tactics are overkill, tactics usually used against Mobsters and drug lords." Myers referred to Stanley Brand, without identifying him as a former lawyer for the House Democratic majority under Jim Wright.
Though Myers aired Starr’s side, "But other former prosecutors insist Starr’s tactics are both reasonable and justified," she countered: "Even those who approve of Starr’s tactics say he has hurt himself by not realizing how the public would react. Polls show that almost two-thirds of Americans now believe Starr is on a partisan crusade."
On February 5, CNN aired a 60-minute special on "Investigating the Investigator." Reporter Kathy Slobogin announced Starr’s "conservative connections, his links with the President’s political opponents, have made him suspect." Host Roger Cossack added: "Even if Starr’s critics overlooked his connections to the right, they’d probably still find ammunition by focusing in on his tactics."
Walsh Was No Media Starr. On October 30, 1992, with George Bush arriving at a statistical dead heat with Bill Clinton in some network polls, Lawrence Walsh dropped an Iran-Contra bomb on the Bush campaign. Did the networks react harshly, scorning prosecutorial abuse on the eve of a national election? There were no heavy-breathing attacks on grand jury leaks, no 60-minute investigations of the investigator. In fact, even as they presented the story as another damaging blow to the Bush campaign, the Big Three networks didn’t even mention Lawrence Walsh by name.
That night, ABC’s Peter Jennings began: "The question of truth and character came up again today for President Bush." After reading the leaked Weinberger note, Jennings was the only anchor to mention the note was "released by the special prosecutor, who is seeking a new indictment of Mr. Weinberger for lying to Congress about the Iran-Contra affair. Governor Clinton’s campaign said today this was the smoking gun that shows the President has been lying." Walsh’s name went unspoken.
CBS anchor Dan Rather cited new "grand jury evidence" without any mention of Walsh. Reporter Rita Braver ran two soundbites of unlabeled liberal columnist Anthony Lewis, who told viewers: "It’s the President of the United States deliberately, knowingly, forcefully telling you an untruth year after year, month after month. That’s going to destroy our faith in our political system."
After nearly two minutes of Bush-busting, Braver concluded without a drop of skepticism: "The independent counsel insists the release of the note was timed to meet the schedule for Caspar Weinberger’s trial, not to embarrass the President in the final days of the campaign."
NBC anchor Tom Brokaw cited "new material that directly contradicts President Bush’s claim he was out of the loop in the Iran-Contra affair." John Cochran noted: "the last thing George Bush needs is a reminder of the arms-for-hostages deal with Iran." Andrea Mitchell added: "The Iran-Contra developments were a gift to Bill Clinton, who’s been struggling to counteract Bush’s attack on his credibility." No one mentioned Walsh.
Over on CNN’s World News, reporter Anthony Collings noted that "pre-trial court papers in the indictment of...Caspar Weinberger quote from Weinberger’s notes seeming to contradict Mr. Bush." But unlike the others, Collings found someone who accused Walsh of "playing politics," then-Weinberger lawyer Bob Bennett: "They’ve had this information for years. There can be no doubt any more that this is not about justice. This is an outrageous political prosecution."
None of the networks followed up on the Washington Times story of November 6, 1992 which raised the question of why did the Clinton campaign issue a detailed press release dated the day before Walsh’s re-indictment? Did the Walsh team leak to the Clintonites? It may seem late to seek answers now, but it should chasten media attacks on Starr, who worked quietly through the 1996 campaign as each new inquiry added to his plate (Travelgate, the FBI files) disappeared from the news media.
