About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Matthews continues to obsess over Democratic memo; still hasn't corrected false claims

November 04, 2005 3:04 pm ET

Trouble viewing clip? Download: QT | WMV

6 Comments

MSNBC host Chris Matthews misrepresented a Democratic memorandum on Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr. for the third day in a row November 2, falsely claiming that the "hit sheet" accused Alito of being "soft on the mob" by failing to win a conviction in an "easy case."

Media Matters for America previously flagged Matthews's false claims about the memo -- that Democrats were "going after ethnicity for an Italian-American" -- and corrected him again along with nationally syndicated radio host Rush Limbaugh and MSNBC contributor and former Republican presidential candidate Pat Buchanan, who both echoed and expanded upon Matthews's claims. Matthews has yet to correct any of the false claims identified by Media Matters.

A Democratic memorandum began circulating shortly after President Bush announced Alito's nomination for the Court and was soon posted to conservative website Townhall.com. The memo includes a bullet point regarding a 1988 criminal trial in New Jersey that Alito prosecuted as a U.S. attorney. The defense called no witnesses; the case ended with the 20 defendants -- all members of the Lucchese crime family -- acquitted of 77 criminal charges.

On November 2, during interviews with senior White House official Dan Bartlett, former Bush legislative assistant Nick Calio, and former Clinton press secretary Dee Dee Myers, Matthews made two false claims: that the memo "suggested it was an easy case, he blew it," and that "the Democrats put out a hit sheet saying he was soft on the mob."

The memo makes no such suggestion about the case being easy, or that Altio "blew it"; it only notes a 1988 Associated Press story printed in the Chicago Tribune that called the loss a "stunning defeat" for the government. The memo also makes no claim that Alito was soft on the mob; Media Matters previously debunked a similar assertion by Matthews.

Matthews did not repeat the baseless claim that the memo attacked Alito's ethnicity during the November 2 show, as he did on October 31, when he asserted that Democrats are "going after ethnicity for an Italian-American with an incredible record like this as a prosecutor, as a judge, as a Yale Law grad," and on November 1, when he claimed, "They're out there saying this -- the Italian-American guy is too weak on the mob." Matthews has yet to correct those statements.

From the November 2 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews:

MATTHEWS: The Democrats have been circulating a little fact sheet -- it might be a hit sheet, you might call it -- on Alito's nomination saying -- first thing they mention in this little document is that he lost a big mob case in New Jersey back in '88. It suggested that -- in fact, it said he embarrassed the U.S. government, it suggested it was an easy case, he blew it.

[...]

MATTHEWS: Nick, I've got to ask you about the Republican party and the Democratic party. The minute Judge Alito -- Samuel Alito from Philadelphia from the Third Circuit -- the minute his name was announced, within 17 minutes, the Democrats put out a hit sheet saying he was soft on the mob, the first thing that he did. What do you make of that?

[...]

MATTHEWS: You know, he made a big hit against a mob. New Jersey's got problems obviously there, Dee Dee. But he made a big kill the next year. He got three big indictments, including the chief hoodlum in one of the big families up there. Do you think the Democrats are a little bit stupid to be making that an issue, when there's so many things to go after? To lead with that, this was the number-one item on their hit sheet.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by Sagra (November 04, 2005 4:00 pm ET)
         

      While serving as a U.S. Attorney, Alito failed to obtain a key conviction, releasing nearly two dozen mobsters back into society.

      [...]

      Alito Embarrassed Government by Failing to Obtain Crucial Mafia Conviction

      U.S. Attorney Alito Failed to Obtain Conviction of 20 Mobsters, Saying "You Can’t Win Them All." Federal law enforcement agencies sustained a major rebuff in their anti-mafia campaign with the August 1988 acquittal of all 20 defendants accused of making up the entire membership of the Lucchese family in the New Jersey suburbs of New York. The verdict ended what was believed to be the nation’s longest federal criminal trial and according to the Chicago Tribune, dealt the government a "stunning defeat." Samuel Alito, the US Attorney on the case, said, "Obviously we are disappointed but you realize you can’t win them all." Alito also said he had no regrets about the prosecution but in the future would try to keep cases "as short and simple as possible." Alito continued, "I certainly don’t feel embarrassed and I don’t think we should feel embarrassed." [Guardian, 8/29/88; Chicago Tribune, 8/27/88; UPI, 8/26/88]

      Have you guys seen anybody on the Left even pushing this talking point? Or is it all Matthews?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by leatherhelmet (November 04, 2005 5:43 pm ET)
         

      Maybe he's the only one on the left with the guts to say it.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by kenkong77 (November 04, 2005 6:06 pm ET)
         

      "Alito failed to obtain a key conviction, releasing nearly two dozen mobsters back into society. Based on his Third Circuit opinions, Alito has established himself as a potential foe to immigrants, reproductive rights, and civil liberties."

      I disagree with Matthews (although he's hardly the conservative some try to make him out to be), but I do see where he's coming from (a little). "Releasing nearly two dozen mobsters back into society" and calling Alito an "established...potentional foe to immigrants, reproductive rights, and civil liberties" isn't exactly nice.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Brabantio (November 04, 2005 7:34 pm ET)
           

        ""Releasing nearly two dozen mobsters back into society" and calling Alito an "established...potentional foe to immigrants, reproductive rights, and civil liberties" isn't exactly nice."

        Nice? How about true?

        Report Abuse
    • Author by skiploader1111 (November 04, 2005 9:56 pm ET)
         

      OOOKAAYY. Matthews claimed in earlier segments that the document was "going after Alito's Italian ethnicity." It had no such language that could be interpreted like that. Yet Matthews uses terms like "hit list" and "big kill" while describing it.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by wasademocrat (November 07, 2005 11:57 am ET)
         

      The Dems got stung on this one, it back-fired on them. That's what happens when all you do is attack.

      What is funny is the Dems/Libs always use the "race card" on Repubs and try to make the Repubs/Conserv's look like racists. It's good to see the Dems/Libs get a taste of their own medicine.

      Speaking of racists ... What about Al Franken?

      Franken just got exposed in the book "Do As I Say, Not As I Do" by Peter Schweizer. Seems like Al Franken has hired 112 people of the years, and ONLY 1 was African American. Only 1 Black employee out of 112 ... what's up with that?

      And get this, now (The Grand Wizard) Franken is threatening to sue. Sue for what? Because he just got exposed as a "racist"?

      [link to www.newsmax.com]

      Report Abuse

Most Popular Tags

Feed IconRSS Feeds

Get personalized rss or email alerts

Connect & Share

Facebook Twitter Digg YouTube MySpace