About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

In "Clinton Chapters" segment, Hannity omitted key points from journalist on whose reporting he based the segment

December 04, 2007 4:57 pm ET

Trouble viewing clip? Download: QT | WMV

SUMMARY: During a Hannity's America "Clinton Chapters" segment highlighting Hillary Clinton's alleged "connections with a communist law firm," host Sean Hannity omitted key points from reporting by The New York Sun's Josh Gerstein despite Hannity claiming his report was "based on reporting from ... Gerstein." Specifically, Hannity asserted that Jessica Mitford, the wife of one of the partners at the firm where Clinton held a summer internship, "decided to use her connection to the Clintons to get the state of Arkansas to drop the extradition or to completely pardon" an escaped fugitive after Bill Clinton had become Arkansas governor. But Hannity didn't note Gerstein's reporting that the Clintons rebuffed the request. Hannity also questioned whether Hillary Clinton had "sympathy with the Communist Party" in deciding to clerk at the firm but failed to note Gerstein's reporting quoting a partner in the law firm calling Clinton "much more of a classic liberal than the rest of us."

43 Comments

On the December 2 edition of Fox News' Hannity's America, host Sean Hannity asserted: "[T]onight, we travel back in time to the early 70's, and based on reporting from New York Sun reporter Josh Gerstein, we take a rare look at [Sen.] Hillary Clinton's [D-NY] affiliation with a group of radicals more than three decades ago." Hannity was referring to Clinton's time as a law clerk for the then-California law firm Treuhaft, Walker, and Burnstein in the early 1970s. However, during the following segment, which was supposedly "based on reporting from" Gerstein, Hannity omitted key points from Gerstein's own reporting. Specifically, Hannity reported that Jessica Mitford, who was married to Robert Treuhaft, one of the partners at the firm, tried to get the state of Arkansas to pardon Arkansas prison escapee James Dean Walker after Bill Clinton became governor of the state. But Hannity did not report that, according to Gerstein, the Clintons rebuffed the request. Further, Hannity questioned whether Clinton had "sympathy with the communist Party" in deciding to clerk at the firm but did not note Gerstein's report quoting one of the firm's partners, who said Clinton was "much more of a classic liberal than the rest of us."

Hannity's report was the latest edition in a series on Hannity's America titled "The Clinton Chapters," whose assertions Media Matters for America has repeatedly debunked.

During the segment, Hannity asserted: "Ironically, after Hillary left the law firm and turned into the first lady of Arkansas, the firm's wild antics continued to follow her." Hannity then asserted that Mitford "decided to use her connection to the Clintons to get the state of Arkansas to drop the extradition or completely pardon" Walker, who had been convicted of murdering a Little Rock police officer, after Hillary Clinton became the first lady of Arkansas.

HANNITY: Ironically, after Hillary left the law firm and turned into the first lady of Arkansas, the firm's wild antics continued to follow her. There was the case of the Arkansas prison system that came to light soon after Bill became governor in 1979. There were allegations the inmates in Arkansas jails were living in inhumane conditions. A key player in the publicity in that case was Jessica Mitford, the wife of firm partner Bob Treuhaft.

Mitford's involvement in the case had to do with an Arkansas prison escapee, James Dean Walker. He had been convicted of murder of a Little Rock police officer. While in jail, he had won furloughs for religious work and failed to return to the prison from one of those jobs. He fled to California and was later arrested on drug charges. Arkansas officials tried for his extradition back to Arkansas, but his lawyers fought it. Since Mitford was involved in the case, she decided to use her connection to the Clintons to get the state of Arkansas to drop the extradition or to completely pardon Walker.

However, even though Gerstein appears on camera several times during the "Clinton Chapters" segment, Hannity did not note Gerstein's reporting in his November 27 New York Sun article -- the subhead of which is, "Jessica Mitford Is Rebuffed by a Friend" -- that "[d]espite an aggressive campaign, including a personal visit Mitford paid to Little Rock, the Clintons did not budge [by dropping extradition or pardoning Walker]. Mitford, who clearly expected a different response, later described the episode as a 'furious falling-out.' " From Gerstein's article:

Mitford, best known for her 1963 exposé of the funeral industry, "American Way of Death," was also a civil rights activist who had long decried American prisons and the justice system in the South. In 1980, she seized on the case of an Arkansas prison escapee, James Dean Walker, who had been convicted at two separate trials of the murder of a Little Rock police officer during a traffic stop in 1963. Walker, who became a born-again Christian in prison and won furloughs for religious work, failed to return from one of those sojourns in 1975.

Walker fled to California, where he took up residence near Lake Tahoe. In 1979, he was arrested on drug charges. Arkansas officials soon moved for Walker's extradition back to Arkansas.

Walker's California lawyers tried to block his return, arguing that Arkansas prison conditions were unconstitutionally cruel and that he faced particular danger because a warden had threatened to kill him. Walker also argued that he had been wrongly convicted.

For left-wing activists, Walker's challenge to his extradition represented a chance to call attention to prison conditions across the South. Mitford decided to try to leverage her husband's ties to Mrs. Clinton to get Arkansas to drop the extradition or to pardon Walker outright. Despite an aggressive campaign, including a personal visit Mitford paid to Little Rock, the Clintons did not budge. Mitford, who clearly expected a different response, later described the episode as a "furious falling-out."

Also during the segment, Hannity purported to address Clinton's motives for "travel[ling] thousands of miles across the country" to work for Treuhaft, Walker, and Burnstein. Hannity quoted author Carl Bernstein's assertion in A Woman in Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton (Random House, June 2007) that Clinton's "attraction to the firm wasn't ideology but rather its defense of constitutional causes." Hannity then cited a comment by Treuhaft, who was quoted by Bernstein in A Woman in Charge asserting that "[t]here was no reason except politics" for Clinton to work for the firm, and that she "was certainly in sympathy with all of the left causes." Hannity added: " 'Sympathy with all the left causes,' or sympathy with the Communist Party?":

HANNITY: What was it that attracted young Miss Rodham to this firm? Was there a deciding factor? After all, she was focusing on child custody cases, so why travel thousands of miles across the country to work at this particular law firm? Some people say she was referred to this law firm by a professor. Another story says that she was referred to them by a friend. But in the book A Woman in Charge, author Carl Bernstein tells us what he thinks, saying, quote, "Hillary's attraction to the firm was not ideology but rather its defense of constitutional causes," end quote. But in the same book, Robert Treuhaft, one of the firm's communist partners, is quoted as saying, "The only reason I could think of, because none of us knew her, was because we were a so-called movement law firm at the time. There was no reason except politics for a girl from Yale, she ... was in sympathy with all of the left causes," end quote.

"Sympathy with all the left causes" or sympathy with the Communist Party? But as research shows us, Hillary's involvement in the firm's cases wasn't that intense. Since she was just one of the summer's law clerks, her duties were limited to drafting motions and reading through transcripts. She did mostly grunt work and recalls that experience in her memoir.

Hannity did not note, however, that in a November 26 article Gerstein quoted another of the firm's partners, Malcolm Burnstein, on the topic of why Clinton worked for the firm. Gerstein wrote that "Mr. Burnstein said Mrs. Clinton was probably drawn to the firm by its civil rights work and not by the left-wing politics of its partners, though she expressed no disquiet about that. 'There was nothing revolutionary about Hillary, and I do not say that pejoratively,' he said. 'She was much more of a classic liberal than the rest of us.' "

From Gerstein's November 26 article:

When the connection did emerge, halfway through a Herb Caen column in the [San Francisco] Chronicle on Nov. 12, 1992, eight days after the election, some conservatives likely viewed it as confirmation of Mrs. Clinton's radical views. However, some on the left side of the political spectrum who knew the Treuhaft firm were taken aback.

"I was quite shocked when I found out that Hillary had been there the summer after I was," Ms. Nichols, a Democrat who holds a top environmental post under [California] Governor [Arnold] Schwarzenegger, said. "She certainly downplayed anything that would make you think that'd be the kind of place she'd summer....Once the political career was actually launched, Hillary's whole life has been about being moderate and fending off criticism from friends on the left."

"I was kind of surprised when I heard she had worked there," Mr. Siegel recalled. "Anything I've ever heard about her or known about wouldn't have led me to think she was interested in Marxism, for example, or any other kind of left politics."

Mr. Burnstein said Mrs. Clinton was probably drawn to the firm by its civil rights work and not by the left-wing politics of its partners, though she expressed no disquiet about that. "There was nothing revolutionary about Hillary, and I do not say that pejoratively," he said. "She was much more of a classic liberal than the rest of us."

Mr. Burnstein said he also detected a clear change in Mrs. Clinton's political outlook after she faced real-world campaigning with her husband. "The Hillary that clerked for us that summer is not the Hillary that ran for the Senate and is not the Hillary that was in the White House for eight years. The politics were noticeably different," Mr. Burnstein said. "The Hillary of 1971 was much more idealistic and progressive in the sense we would use the term today than the Hillary we saw after her exposure to politics in Arkansas."

From the December 2 edition of Fox News' Hannity's America:

HANNITY: And good evening, and welcome to this brand-new edition of Hannity's America. I'm Sean Hannity. We have a great show for you this week, and we start with another installment in our ongoing series called "The Clinton Chapters." Now tonight, we travel back in time to the early '70s, and based on reporting from New York Sun reporter Josh Gerstein, we take a rare look at Hillary Clinton's affiliation with a group of radicals more than three decades ago.

[begin video clip]

HANNITY: Chapter 12: Hillary's lost summer. It was the spring of 1971. Hillary Rodham was a second-year law student at Yale who had recently started dating fellow student Bill Clinton. Within weeks of their relationship, Hillary had to decide how she was going to spend her summer and told Bill she was going to Oakland, California, to intern at the law firm of Treuhaft, Walker and Burnstein.

[...]

HANNITY: What was it that attracted young Miss Rodham to this firm? Was there a deciding factor? After all, she was focusing on child custody cases, so why travel thousands of miles across the country to work at this particular law firm? Some people say she was referred to this law firm by a professor. Another story says that she was referred to them by a friend. But in the book A Woman in Charge, author Carl Bernstein tells us what he thinks, saying, quote, "Hillary's attraction to the firm was not ideology but rather its defense of constitutional causes," end quote. But in the same book, Robert Treuhaft, one of the firm's communist partners, is quoted as saying, "The only reason I could think of, because none of us knew her, was because we were a so-called movement law firm at the time. There was no reason except politics for a girl from Yale, she ... was in sympathy with all of the left causes," end quote.

"Sympathy with all the left causes," or sympathy with the Communist Party? But as research shows us, Hillary's involvement in the firm's cases wasn't that intense. Since she was just one of the summer's law clerks, her duties were limited to drafting motions and reading through transcripts. She did mostly grunt work and recalls that experience in her memoir.

HANNITY [audio clip, reading from Clinton's book Living History]: I spent most of my time working For Mal Burnstein researching, writing legal motions and briefs for a child custody case.

HANNITY: But her interest in the firm's cases is that drew her to the radical practice and perhaps the events leading up to her clerkship trained her for this. If we go back to New Haven in 1970 in the criminal trial of Black Panthers leader Bobby Seale, well, that was under way. He was on trial for kidnapping and murdering another member of the Panthers. As interest in the trial grew at Yale, many of the radicals on campus started believing that Seale would not be able to receive a fair trial. As students prepared for a mass rally in support of the Black Panthers on trial, it is said that Hillary Clinton too was involved. According to the book Murder in the Model City by Paul Bass and Douglas Ray, Hillary led a student committee that monitored the trial and offered legal advice to demonstrators who got arrested.

Now, the timing of the next part is unclear, but at some point during the trial, Bob Treuhaft and his wife, Jessica, stopped in New Haven and threw a party to raise money for the Panthers' defense, and according to reports, Hillary attended the rally. Now the situation brings us up to her clerkship.

GERSTEIN: One thing I discovered during my research is that during the summer of 1971, while Mrs. Clinton was there, Bob Treuhaft, one of the partners of this firm, was representing a Black Panther member. He was a friend of the famous Black Panther Huey Newton in what was basically a cop-killing trial in Oakland, California.

HANNITY: But on top of the Black Panther case, there were many others that a future president would not want to associate themselves with. Some stem from working on cases involving draft dissents and others issues dealing with Vietnam. Then there was the case of Angela Davis, the communist and black revolutionary who was charged with murder, kidnapping, and conspiracy charges from a shooting that left a judge dead.

Ironically, after Hillary left the law firm and turned into the first lady of Arkansas, the firm's wild antics continued to follow her. There was the case of the Arkansas prison system that came to light soon after Bill became governor in 1979. There were allegations the inmates in Arkansas jails were living in inhumane conditions. A key player in the publicity in that case was Jessica Mitford, the wife of firm partner Bob Treuhaft.

Mitford's involvement in the case had to do with an Arkansas prison escapee, James Dean Walker. He had been convicted of murder of a Little Rock police officer. While in jail, he had won furloughs for religious work and failed to return to the prison from one of those jobs. He fled to California and was later arrested on drug charges. Arkansas officials tried for his extradition back to Arkansas, but his lawyers fought it. Since Mitford was involved in the case, she decided to use her connection to the Clintons to get the state of Arkansas to drop the extradition or to completely pardon Walker.

So while Hillary herself was never an acting lawyer on any of these cases, her interest in working with the firm still raises many questions and opens just another part of her questionable past. And if she had nothing to hide from, why did she bury it so deep in her past?

GERSTEIN [video clip]: She doesn't square herself with what went on back then. Does she regret having worked for this firm, or does she embrace it? And she's sort of driven it down the middle. It's kind of interesting that in 25 years in public life, nobody has really squarely put the question to her about why she ended up there.

HANNITY: The summer of 1971 remains a mystery to all of us. Why is Hillary so secretive about this part of her life as well? And will anyone ever step forward to confront her about her connections with a communist law firm. Or is this another chapter in the Clinton past that will never be closed?

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by tommy (December 04, 2007 5:02 pm ET)
         

      Let's see, judging a Fox News' Sean Hannity hosted program about Hillary Clinton and expecting no misinformation to be furthered is like nominating Britney Spears for Mother of the Year, and being disappointed when she doesn't win.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by friedbergboy1422 (December 04, 2007 5:05 pm ET)
           

        Tommy,

        Are you saying this shouldn't be here because its like a tap-in putt?  I think its good to put up because, unfortunately, there are a good amount of people who still believe this clown to be a truth teller.  This article gives the easy return fire to those who live with/argue with Hannity's followers. 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by JLyons (December 04, 2007 5:07 pm ET)
             

          Well this does belong her, Hannity is a prime misinformer. It has no bearings on his followers but will prevent it from reaching msm.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by tommy (December 04, 2007 5:09 pm ET)
             

          It's placement here is what it is.  I am only saying the bar is awfully low when it comes to fairness from Hannity regarding anything Clinton.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by friedbergboy1422 (December 04, 2007 5:23 pm ET)
               

            Tommy,

            I can't disagree with the low bar comment, but just because a layup is easy, it still counts as two points :).  I am glad MMFA is staying on top of this guy's lies.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by historygeek001 (December 06, 2007 4:37 pm ET)
                 

              I agree--I'm glad they're reporting it, but I barely glance at anything Hannity says about Clinton now.  He is so dishonest that even the entertainment factor for creative lies has worn thin.

              Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (December 04, 2007 5:24 pm ET)
           

        And yet it IS misinformation. This site is dedicated to exposing information. So much like a compass pointing north Hannity shows he has the ethics of a weasel on speed and MMFA points it out. Life is as it should be.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by tommy (December 04, 2007 5:30 pm ET)
             

          "ethics of a weasel on speed".......sometimes you crack me up.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by solon (December 04, 2007 5:56 pm ET)
               

            From the late great Hunter S Thompson talking about Agnew

            Report Abuse
            • Author by historygeek001 (December 06, 2007 4:39 pm ET)
                 

              "Ethics of a weasel on speed" -- PERFECT!  And he is as subtle as a tuba in mating season in his hatred of Clinton.  He USED to be amusing, now he's just pathetic.

              Report Abuse
      • Author by dangrady (December 04, 2007 7:20 pm ET)
           

        SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!

        That was one hell of a long segment to get around to calling Hilary a Commie!

        Which is see, a closet Republican, or a closet Commie, somebody straighten this out for me? Not really, rhetorical.

        If Hannity tried to be more irrelevant he would have a hard time. If this was a high school journalism project, he would get a "D" only for effort.

        Happy Thoughts;

        Dan Grady

        Report Abuse
      • Author by justicetruthus8276 (December 04, 2007 9:34 pm ET)
           

        You said it - I mean, it would be amazing if MMFA could find ANYTHING in "Hannity's America" that they didn't choke on.

         

        It's would be more likely that K. O. (on "Meltdown") would interview someone who is NOT a lefty hack!.

         

         

        Report Abuse
        • Author by solon (December 04, 2007 9:38 pm ET)
             

          You are such a liar. Olbermann interviews many people who arent lefty hacks. Cons are just afraid to come on his show. Hannity on the other hand besides being a complete and utter moron is without journalistic ethics and lies like a persian rug. In both senses he reminds me of you.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by friedbergboy1422 (December 04, 2007 11:40 pm ET)
             

          Care to address the points on the show JT?  I never knew John Dean was a left-wing hack.

          Report Abuse
      • Author by Les is more (December 05, 2007 7:39 am ET)
           

        So what?

        This site omits key points in its hit pieces all the time.  What goes around, comes around.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (December 05, 2007 10:29 am ET)
             

          This site omits key points in its hit pieces all the time.  - Les is more

          For example?

          Report Abuse
        • Author by solon (December 07, 2007 6:49 am ET)
             

          So you say but since I never read any post you make that isnt either stupid or an outright lie I cant take your baseless assertion seriously.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by RABBITLUVR (December 04, 2007 5:08 pm ET)
         

      Why doesn't Hannity do an in-depth 'expose' of someone... like... oh... Nixon?

      I know, I know... dumb question but I thought I'd throw that one out anyway...

      Still... Sean's obsession with the Clintons is fascinating indeed. I wonder what a professional shrink would have to say about it. Could be a decent book from it too - 'Sean on the Couch: Inside the Mind of a Fanatical Pundit'.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (December 04, 2007 5:14 pm ET)
           

        To steal a line from one of our favorite trolls, it would give him more credibility if he were to report on what his party is doing, wouldn't it?

        Report Abuse
    • Author by captfoster2 (December 04, 2007 5:09 pm ET)
         

      "Hannity asserted that Jessica Mitford, the wife of one of the partners at the firm where Clinton held a summer internship, "decided to use her connection to the Clintons to get the state of Arkansas to drop the extradition or to completely pardon" an escaped fugitive after Bill Clinton had become Arkansas governor."

      So, according to InSannity, if anyone comes forward or found to have asked either Clinton if they would do them a favor, it is only to be reported that they were asked to do said favor but not reported that they said 'no'.......

      So this is what FOX calls news........ (I'm harnessing Dana Carvey here) "Isn't that special!"

      Report Abuse
      • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (December 04, 2007 5:36 pm ET)
           

        HANNITY: Ironically, after Hillary left the law firm and turned into the first lady of Arkansas, the firm's wild antics continued to follow her.

        A person contacted a former co-worker who had gone on to a more influential position. Now that's Ironic ! 

        Wait, not ironic, what's the word I'm looking for? Mundane? Predictable? Completely unremarkable? The exact opposite of ironic?

        (I really just wanted to stir up another proper-use-of-irony donnybrooks)

        Report Abuse
        • Author by captfoster2 (December 04, 2007 5:53 pm ET)
             

          Hannity's logic is something to behold......

          This whole presumption about Hill and Bill would be the equivilent of a person I once worked with 25 years ago, is say today, a mass murderer and the cops arresting me as an accessory because we happened to have worked together 25 years ago.....

          It makes no sense what so ever!

          Report Abuse
        • Author by eweston8542983 (December 04, 2007 10:02 pm ET)
             

          Pedantic, orthodox, expected, probably not the fur tounged emema of surprise.

          Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (December 04, 2007 5:36 pm ET)
           

        You would think a flag waving troop lover like Hannity could spend his time reporting on more useful issues, like say medical treatment for veterans. But seems the only soldiers Hannity and Fox loves are the ones who aren't wounded.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by fawltylogic (December 04, 2007 5:34 pm ET)
         

      Thank G-d (hey, fundies, that's the correct way to write God these days, right?) we have a scholar like Hannity around to disseminate the "Clinton Chapters". How else would these half-lies, implications and irrelevant facts be mixed into one lovely stew of right-wing hate?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by bittermarv (December 04, 2007 5:38 pm ET)
         

      I think it's kind of cool that the background of a Presidential candidate can be looked into like that.  Were we only able to do so with President Bush...

      Report Abuse
    • Author by snoopy (December 04, 2007 5:44 pm ET)
         

      Ironically, not a word in the mainstream media about Julie Anny's law firm lobbying...

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Marker (December 04, 2007 5:53 pm ET)
         

      Hannity hating and the repugs join in to fight anything decent in America is why they need to be made extinct in "08.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Billy Hill (December 04, 2007 6:17 pm ET)
         

      I have it on good athourity that SH is making 2 programs on this matter in which he will address the concerns of those so inclined to be interested in.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by foghornleghorn (December 04, 2007 6:27 pm ET)
         

      I missed this show.  Do angels really walk among us, Mr. Hannity?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Limit Corp. Ownership (December 04, 2007 6:35 pm ET)
         

      Ohio, 2004... 

      "In heavily Democratic precinct 4N, the Libertarian candidate received 32% of the vote.  Voters in another heavily Democratic precinct gave the Constitution party candidate 40% of the vote." 

       

      This is just a morsel from "Was the 2004 presidential election stolen?  exit polls, election fraud, and the official count, " by Steven F. Freeman, Phd, MIT.

      The Election Integrity forces have made significant strides, but there is still a long way to go.  

      If elections are not fair and transparent, then it's fascism.  We're almost there.

      Exit poll Ohio, 2004, there was an 8.8% difference between the exit poll and the official count.  And it wasn't just Ohio where they stole it, not by a long shot.

      Help out the election integrity community in your state.  

      Report Abuse
      • Author by tommy (December 04, 2007 6:38 pm ET)
           

        Where is your data on the stolen elections from 2006?  Or the presidential elections of 1992 and 1996?  Or do the Democrats only cry stolen elections when they lose?  Yeah, that's it.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by Limit Corp. Ownership (December 04, 2007 6:52 pm ET)
             

          It's possible that the Election Integrity community

           

          May have been effective enough to partially stop them in 2006.  2008 should be a whole new ballgame for Diebold, Sequoia and ES & S.  

          In all 11 battleground states in 2004, in the days leading up to election day, Bush's disapproval rating was at least 6% (except for Nevada where it was 2%).  This means that his disapproval rating in every battleground state was at least 53% to 47%.

          This is consistent with a strong possibility of fraud. 

          Report Abuse
        • Author by Mark from Chicago (December 05, 2007 10:49 am ET)
             

          Tommy:  Please do not suggest that indignation over stolen elections should be a liberal vs. conservative issue. Every American, regardless of political affiliation, should want all election fraud stopped--PERIOD. If it is not, then our whole system of governament is a charade. If you have proof that the Clintons somehow stole the elections of 1992 and 1996, please provide it and I will support any indictments that are warranted. I hope that you feel exactly the same way about any provable election fraud that occurred in 2000 and 2004. Not one of us should shrug and call it "whining" if there is any evidence of election chicanary, no matter which party is guilty of it.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by Pithaughn (December 04, 2007 6:54 pm ET)
         

      Oh, look, Sean has that Bill0 two pointer fingers in tandem affection down pat. Reminds me of the on air talent in 3rd tier market newscasts and commercials. "Get down to Hank's Used Autos today for the sale of a lifetime!!"

      Report Abuse
      • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (December 04, 2007 7:46 pm ET)
           

        Pit,either that or he's exaggerating about himself.

        Or describing what he considers a "Great American".

        Report Abuse
    • Author by TadekKorn (December 04, 2007 11:17 pm ET)
         

      I pity the poor soul at MMFA assigned to following Hannity (or, for that matter, anyone on FOX news).  What's it like to be in an intellectual cesspool day after day?  How do you eat?  What do you use to wash off stench at the end of a session with such turd (blossoms)?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Limit Corp. Ownership (December 04, 2007 11:33 pm ET)
         

      Indeed Tadekkorn...

       

      It must be excruciating for Media Matters to have to listen to this sewage.  But they're doing an important public service.  You have to get in the gutter with these Cons--that's the only way you can play it.

      Media Matters is the crown jewel in our new infrastructure. 

        

      Report Abuse
    • Author by newzhound (December 05, 2007 11:56 am ET)
         

      “Hannity’s America.”  Is there a more fatuous title possible?

       

      Hannity’s America – I guess we’re just lucky he lets the rest of us live here.

       

      And when he has a moment, he should look up the definition of “irony.”  He’s one of a great many people who doesn’t understand what that word means.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by NiceguyEddie (December 05, 2007 2:07 pm ET)
         

      I'm beginning to get an almost coinessuers taste for the differennt typres of mis-info these guys spread, and the strategies they use.

      Rush - he's just ad hominem attacks and childish put-downs.

      Savage - Rash squared.  SAVAGE ad hominem attacks, and VISCIOUS put-downs.

      O'Rielly - Loves to misinterpret, misrepresent or outright invent stats & polls.

      Hannity - His thing seems to be all about cropped and out-of-context quotes.

      Can someone please sum up Beck for me in one line?  (Other that "idiot with no talent"?  What's his misinformation strategem?  I'd love to have "the complete set" so to speak.) :)

      Report Abuse
      • Author by RABBITLUVR (December 05, 2007 2:48 pm ET)
           

        I'll give you the summary for The Detestable One, aka Mark Levin. Sorry, I do not follow Beck. Levin is my nemesis.

        Levin's 'shtick': Mockery and name-calling. That's it.

        I'm sure the faculty at Temple must be really proud of this jackass who used his 'education' to be a hatemonger and D-grade writer.

        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.