Russert continues pattern of misrepresenting facts in debate questions for Clinton
SUMMARY: During the February 26 Democratic presidential debate, Tim Russert continued a pattern of asking Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton questions that include false assertions of fact while suggesting that she is being inconsistent or not being forthcoming.
Media Matters for America has documented a pattern in which NBC News Washington bureau chief Tim Russert asks Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton questions during Democratic presidential debates that include false assertions of fact, while suggesting in the questions that she is being inconsistent or not being forthcoming. In the October 30 debate, Russert misrepresented a letter written by former President Bill Clinton in 2002 to the National Archives to assert falsely that Bill Clinton was banning the release of certain documents related to the first lady and to suggest that Hillary Clinton was complicit in that "ban." During the same debate, Russert misrepresented exchanges Clinton had in prior debates with moderator Judy Woodruff and Russert himself to accuse Clinton of having "one public position and one private position" on the issue of raising the cap on income on which Social Security taxes must be paid. During the February 26 debate, Russert again misrepresented basic, verifiable facts, this time to suggest again that Hillary Clinton was not being forthcoming with documents from her time as first lady. Russert challenged Clinton's response to a question about the release of "10,000 pages of your public schedule as first lady" by falsely asserting "you had it for more than a month," adding "would you get it to the White House immediately?" -- again suggesting that she was not being forthcoming. In fact, a January 30 Associated Press article reported that "Hillary Rodham Clinton's daily schedules as first lady will be forwarded to former President Clinton by Friday [February 1] for review." February 26 is not, in fact, "more than a month" after January 30. During the exchange, Clinton stated, "I've urged that the process be as quick as possible. It's a cumbersome process, set up by law. It doesn't just apply to us; it applies to everyone in our position."
Notwithstanding these questions based on falsehoods, Russert said during an appearance on the February 27 edition of NBC's Today, "It's never the question that's the problem ... it's the answer."
From the February 26 MSNBC Democratic presidential debate:
RUSSERT: One other issue: You talk about releasing documents. On January 30th, the National Archives released 10,000 pages of your public schedule as first lady. It's now in the custody of former President Clinton. Will you release that -- again, during this primary season, that you claim that eight years as experience, let the public know what you did, who you met with those eight years?
CLINTON: Absolutely. I've urged that the process be as quick as possible. It's a cumbersome process, set up by law. It doesn't just apply to us; it applies to everyone in our position. And I have urged that our end of it move as expeditiously as we can. Now, also, President Bush claims the right to look at anything that is released, and I would urge the Bush White House to move as quickly as possible.
RUSSERT: But you had it for more than a month. Will you get to him -- would you get it to the White House immediately?
CLINTON: As soon as we can, Tim. I've urged that, and I hope it will happen.
From the February 27 edition of NBC's Today:
MATT LAUER (co-host): Let's talk honestly about this idea that Senator Clinton put forward about always getting the first question of the debate. In other words, she's got to think quickly on her feet. Senator Obama has a chance to listen to her answer and react and kind of counterpunch. Is there truth to it, and how does the defense work for Senator Clinton?
RUSSERT: Well, there certainly wasn't last night. I heard her -- it was, you know, a scripted spin line that she'd used the very day before at a fundraiser with Ellen DeGeneres. The fact is, last night, whether it was Iraq, Louis Farrakhan, or public financing, the first question was to Senator Obama.
It's never the question that's the problem, Matt, it's the answer. And if candidates for president can't answer tough questions, they can't make tough decisions.
LAUER: Well, what --
RUSSERT: And so I think it's better to keep the issue -- focus on the issues and really not complain about whether or not a question's coming your way. I'll give you a perfect example. Another question I asked last night about the next president of Russia, I didn't direct it at either candidate. Senator Clinton jumped at the chance to answer it. So, too, with health care at the start of the debate. She likes to answer questions.
The fear of a consolidation of the media has been growing throughout the years, but I am afraid it is more consolidated than we ever thought possible.
I think its strange that all of the networks have such a similar lapse of judgment when it pertains to particular political coverage.
"And if the candidates for president can't answer tough questions, they can't make tough decisions".
Well said Tim Russert. All this whining about unfair questions, or being the first one questioned, or questions that misrepresent facts is just a diversion from answering honestly and forthrightly, from any candidate.
And besides, when the "bomb Pakistan" charge was falsely leveled against Obama by Mrs. Clinton at this very debate, where is the charge against HER for misrepresenting facts? The defense was well Obama was right there to refute it. Well, isn't Hillary right there to refute these questions if they are unfair, or mispresented?
Complain, complain. Get over it.
Pete,
You and I have been through this before, and if you think I am the biggest MMFA whiner and complainer, then so be it - I have no problem wearing that label.
Frankly, I would rather have that as my moniker than posting continually on a blog where I rubberstamp every single item, without fail, every single day, surrounded by others who high five the topic and all the agreeable posters, and who is so utterly defensive when an opposing opinion is introduced through that "whining and complaining"
If you don't like your opinions, or those of MMFA's, challenged then I have told you before, contact the moderators and narrow the comments to those that only wallow in the liberal lovefest that you find so comfortable.
"...if candidates for president can't answer tough questions, they can't make tough decisions"
Being subjected to carefully-crafted questions by "media" hacks such as russert, and then, on what is essentially no notice whatsoever as to what's coming, to both sift the question for whatever trap or controversy it may cleverly contain (these hacks have assistants, and they stay up all night crafting these clever questions)... to do all this on the fly, on live television, and make a controversy-free intelligent response...
It's no qualification to the Office of President of the United States, and is no indication of the ability to make "tough decisions".
Instead, it fits more the qualifications of a game show host, or contestant... or a talk show host, or guest...
It's what leads to the inane empty insubstantial talk that television specializes in, whether it be game shows or talk shows or tim russert shows, or the current debates, because of their "tim russert format".
But leave it to him, to justify the "surprise booby-trap no-notice immaterial question on live television" as some qualification to the Presidency, or as an indication of a moral human intelligent compass, and the ability to make "tough decisions".
That being said, the candidates should just call the moderator a liar when the misrepresent facts.
Dem,
If asking Hillary about releasing those records is a booby-trapped question, then I'm Indiana Jones.
Hillary is so politically tone deaf not know she sounds just like John Francois Kerry did when he said he would release his military records. Acknowledging they are being held by her husband but she cannot get to them borders on the ridiculous. She would have gone a long way if she would have explained in any detail the process. To me she sounded like she was 'covering up'.
Exactly. Please, please - can we get a candidate who essentially says "Ok, give me what you've got, if it's unfair, I will let you know and demand it be asked fairly and tell you why, if you're lying, I will tell you why and expect an apology and a truthful question asked....I am not scared of any question, go for it"
God, that would be refreshing instead of whining complainers.
Obama has been completely given a free ride by the press, so he would have no reason to complain (and this is not a plug for David's book....)! That is by design; as soon as Hillary is out of the way, this inexperienced empty suit will be DECIMATED by the right wing media. When Hillary wins by double-digits, it's 'disappointing'. When Barack wins Missouri by less than 1% (after trailing for 97% of the evening), to win by 10,000 votes...in a state where the sitting governor endorses him...), it's a DECISIVE WIN.
Look at Howard Fineman's current article on Hillary ('Hillary's Last Stand'). At the time that the article was written, Clinton was ahead in OH, PA, RI, and either ahead or behind by 1% in TX, yet she's described as UNPOPULAR. Fineman's argument is that Hillary's 'attack' on Obama (denied by both Clinton & Obama campaigns), showing an ACCURATE photo of Obama in Somali dress, 'will not work, because last-minute attacks on popular candidates are ineffective'. Tell that to Tom Daschle, John Kerry and Al Gore. The GOP has turned last-minute attacks on popular candidates into an art-form.
This evening, virtually every media outlet is discussing this same topic. Why has the media been so tough on this woman?
AA,
Nice cheap shot on Kerry! Still regretting not serving ;)? I still find it truly amazing that those disparaging Kerry's service the most are those who never went overseas.
By the way, where was GWB when he didn't show for his physical? Why didn't the media pursue that one til completion?
" I'll give you a perfect example. Another question I asked last night about the next president of Russia, I didn't direct it at either candidate. Senator Clinton jumped at the chance to answer it. So, too, with health care at the start of the debate. She likes to answer questions."
Russert is completely lying. He directed both the health care and Russia questions at Clinton.
Anyone who doesn't believe Russert's treatment of Clinton was unfair and business as usual for both him and the media in general and that Obama has been handled with kid gloves is just not paying attention. For example, she was interrupted and cut off for 'gotta go to break' then when break is over she is not allowed to complete her truncated sentence and instead Obama is addressed to speak, again, ad infinitum.
On MSNBC the other night it was admitted that the media hates the Clintons (then blamed it on them) and further that the reason they are being especially vicious now is because she is perceived as the loser (not a flattering assessment of media policy). At least someone admits it.
And if you need a little more cannon fodder for the Hate Hillary Brigade you only need read Dowd's NYT piece for Feb. 27 called Begrudging the Bedazzled. She trashes with vitriol and venom her every move, dress, hair, mental wellness, etc. and engages in the ubiquitous Obama lovefest some of us find tedious - and peculiar as well. Russert must be wishing he dared to be that cruel, and that he had to restrain himself ever so slightly.
We aren't supposed to mention by the way that misogyny is far more deeply ingrained and insidious than racism in this country (and a few others).
Dowd's hate piece ends with a paraphrased Obama quote she found exhilerating: "whoever drives the bus into the ditch can't drive it out", which suggests he won't be able to rectify any mistakes he might make. Meanwhile, I have no doubt Clinton's energy, determination, diligence, and brilliant mind can drive the bus out of the ditch no matter how it got there.
That is, if she still has a chance after the media decided for us that she had to lose.