CNN's Dobbs, Henry attempted to discredit DeLay prosecutor

[donsu]

http://mediamatters.org/items/200410080006

Following the House Ethics Committee's October 6 admonishment of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX), CNN host Lou Dobbs and CNN congressional correspondent Ed Henry promoted the spin -- advanced by DeLay -- that Texas District Attorney Ronnie Earle's September 21 indictments of three top DeLay aides may be politically motivated. But as Media Matters for America has documented, Earle's record contradicts charges of partisan motivations.

On the October 7 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, host Dobbs said to Henry: "I think it's incumbent upon us as well, Ed, to point out that the prosecutor in Houston is a Democrat." Henry agreed with Dobbs, adding: "e went after Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) several years ago, and that case fell apart."

The professed need of Dobbs and Henry to point that out about Earle did not extend to a sense of obligation to note, as a June 17 editorial in the Houston Chronicle did: "During his long tenure, Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle has prosecuted many more Democratic officials than Republicans. The record does not support allegations that Earle is prone to partisan witch hunts." This assertion supports Earle's own claim about his record. From a March 6 article in the El Paso Times: "Earle says local prosecution is fundamental and points out that 11 of the 15 politicians he has prosecuted over the years were Democrats."

Henry's statement that Earle "went after Hutchison" but that the case "fell apart" echoed the charges of a September 24 Wall Street Journal editorial attack on Earle. The Journal's case against Earle's integrity and motives relied entirely on his unsuccessful prosecution of Hutchison in 1993. But MMFA cited several examples, which the Journal ignored, of Earle prosecuting Democratic officials; these include his 1983 indictment of then-Texas Attorney General Jim Mattox, who later opposed Hutchison in her 1994 Senate reelection campaign.
-snip-
-------------------------------------

Dobbs is a strange dude. a good part of the time he isn't so bloody bushgang and then wham he hits everybody with his bloody side.

It's sad that Henry has gone over to the darkside. wonder if that big CNN paycheck and perks pushed his conscience out the door and made him bloody.

[acmavm]

1. Lou Dobbs just pretends to be 'impartial'. CNN has no intention to

accurately report the news, they have the express intent to promote the bush* administration line of crap, nothing else.

A crime is a crime. Fraud is fraud. It doesn't matter who prosecutes the events, it is what it is.

[napi21]

2. Send an email to Lou.

He's one of the only hosts that even reads some emails from disagreeing fans, on air.

http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?9

Most of the time, at least in the last year or so, Lou has voiced our opinions on almost every show. Look at how he has interrogated guests on outsourcing, drug costs, and a lot of other common sense issues.

Just because he didn't include the other cases this Tx. Dem as argued isn't a reason to totaly slam him.

[Robert Oak]

3. agreed Dobbs is a hero and he is fair too

I'm reading his "Exporting America" book and you guys ...I mean
short of threatening to kill him, the attack on Lou Dobbs for reporting
on outsourcing from the Bush administration has been relentless.

Just threats to unbelievable character assassination to pressuring the network and of course refusing to do interviews, a constant barrage on Lou Dobbs to stop the reporting of the story on how the Bush administration is selling America off piece by piece in favor of multinational corporations.

He has been one of the few journalists who stood up and said "no"
to the bush administration's pressures and reported on outsourcing,
trade, budget deficits anyway.

[MADem]

5. What do we know about Lou?

Conservative, Catholic, Opus Dei. Left CNN over someone making fun of his deep religiosity. Came back after apologies and all forgiven. Wife was bagged carrying a large handgun through airport security. Fined, all forgiven.

Lou HATES the current trend to ignore the fact that our southern borders are open wide and illegal immigration is totally out of control, with a nod and a wink from shrubbie. He hates job exportation. He thinks the USA is on its way to being a third world country. He thinks our current education system sucks dead dog's asses. He does not believe the administration's "economy getting stronger" bullshit. He despises corruption, especially pork barrel nonsense. He thinks that soldiers are being screwed--pay, body armor, family support, you name it.

I'd be shocked, SHOCKED if Lou did not have friends in this administration, but if he had to choose upon pain of death between taking orders from JP2 or the weecowboy, he would pick the former. He is a product of his beliefs, his environment, and his well rounded education. I could not in good conscience call him a lockstep shill. Now, DELAY is a lockstep shill who is a capo of his regime. But not Lou. He is one of those genuine, as opposed to neocon/fascist, conservatives that you can disagree with, but without being disagreeable. His beliefs are his beliefs--I don't have much in common with him, except that I admire his civility--he doesn't like shoutfests, he likes discussion, and every so often, he's quite right in his outrage.

And he has a VERY BIG HEAD, like a baby head. Makes for good television.

[TankLV]

4. I am so glad they were equally fair during Clinton's witch hunts.

They pointed out, after all, how rabid repukes Starr and all his predecessors were, right?

One after the other that were paraded in front of us, after each one FAILED to find any wrong doing, they'd then go out and hire another one, each one worse and more rabid repuke than the last, to see if they could change the verdict.

They did do that, right? right?

Why can't we find any evidence of them doing that?