MediaWatch: January 1993
Table of Contents:
- MediaWatch: January 1993
- No Liberal Labels for Redistributionists
- NewsBites: Holiday Homeless Hype
- Revolving Door: Schram's Spin
- Networks Predictably Erupt Over Iran-Contra Pardons
- 20/20 Host Slashes at GOP
- Cummins on Crime
- Not Enough Details on Iran-Contra, But "Bastards" Kept Honest on Ads
- Janet Cooke Award: Time's Lance Morrow, Margaret Carlson Promote the Clintons
Networks Predictably Erupt Over Iran-Contra Pardons
The Unpardonable President
President Bush's pardon of six figures in the Iran-Contra affair generated outrage over Bush's decision, but no concern for misbehavior by Special Prosecutor Lawrence Walsh.
Making no attempt at balance, Boston Globe reporter Lynda Gorov began a December 25 story: "No legal scholars dispute a President's constitutional right to grant pardons, but many worry that President Bush may have misused that authority yesterday to disguise his own role in the Iran-Contra affair. Those scholars also said the sweeping pardon of the six Reagan-era officials has denied the American people a full airing of the arms-for-hostages scandal in court."
That night, CBS Evening News reporter Bruce Morton wasn't in a holiday mood: "[Lawrence] Walsh's investigation of the President will continue. The men Mr. Bush pardoned were all accused or convicted of lying to Congress, and so the question remains: How can the executive and the legislative agree on a foreign policy when one branch of government lies to the other?"
The next day, weekend Today co-host Scott Simon sermonized: "Until the truth about the Iran-Contra scandal is truly uncovered, and all responsible are made to answer for it, it may be difficult for any of us to trust that the policies made by the Congress we elect aren't being overturned by our own spies, suave diplomats, and good soldiers. President Bush called the men he pardoned patriots, and no doubt they are. So is Mr. Bush. But patriotism isn't simply loving your country. It's not looking for pardons from the law."
On Sunday, ABC reporter Jim Wooten joined in: "It seems to me that the President with these pardons has attempted to apply a statute of limitations to the American people's right to know what went on."
In the January 4 Newsweek, Evan Thomas wrote: "Bush's pardon also risked tarnishing the President's legacy. The humanitarian who saved Somalia suddenly looked like the arrogant elitist who forgave his friends -- and thumbed his nose at the rule of law."
Bryant Gumbel's December 28 questions on Today assumed the pardoned men were guilty: "But if, Senator, as it seems clear, that crimes were committed, that illegalities may have been done, why not let the process go forward? Why not let justice be done?"
Evans and Novak reported that former Pentagon spokesman Henry Catto said James Brosnahan, the attorney prosecuting Weinberger for Walsh, asked him whether Weinberger had an extramarital affair. Catto believed Walsh wished to "denigrate Weinberger's character" before a jury, but the networks ignored this story of improper conduct.
