BROCK: Well look, conservatives have had their complaints for years about The New York Times, and we have one as far as their Clinton coverage goes. And I think if you look at the evidence, the conclusion is inescapable. Three times in the last six months, The Times essentially carried on the front page allegations of criminal misconduct by Hillary Clinton, saying that she was the subject of a criminal referral when she wasn't, she wasn't the subject of that investigation, charging that she auctioned off U.S. foreign policy for a Clinton Foundation donor, ended up groundless. And then the original story, which may be the worst, the original email story where they said she may have broken federal law, their own source contradicted them later. They didn't use a statement that Secretary Clinton's spokesman had given them before the story ran, that would have set the story straight. So I think, you know, once might be a mistake, twice a coincidence, three times a pattern.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Do you think there's a conspiracy at The New York Times to take down Hillary Clinton?
BROCK: I wouldn't call it a conspiracy, but behind the pattern is working with Republican investigators on Capitol Hill in the Benghazi investigation. And go back six months, this investigation was running out of steam, and then it kind of morphed into an investigation on the e-mails and clearly, what they're doing is running a partisan operation with taxpayer money and they've used The New York Times, and unfortunately I think The Times has let itself be used to smear Hillary Clinton.
[...]
SCARBOROUGH: Why is Hillary always a target?
BROCK: Look, I think you go back to when they first came on the national scene in 1991, 1992, and I think they were uniquely threatening to a lot of people, not just conservatives, because of the change they represented. And I think specifically at The Times, I talk in the book, I trace this history, they got sold a bad story called Whitewater in 1992, and they stuck with it for years. And I think institutionally they're still trying to prove out this notion that the Clintons are somehow corrupt. And I think they're operating under Clinton rules of journalism, which is basically what's normal behavior by any other politician is somehow painted as wrong and corrupt when it's the Clintons. And so look, she's a huge target, there's no question about that. And she's the front runner, I understand there's going to be the scrutiny, but look I think there's just a history there unfortunately, of some anti-Clinton animus at The Times.
