Tim Russert - Democrat Shill

Russert passes for a “tough” interviewer by adopting a confrontational pose rather than asking genuinely challenging questions. As much as any politician, Russert has constructed a persona for the benefit of the public, an identity meant to give him the authority that his actual work might not. Like most well-designed personas, it has a basis in truth but has been polished and honed to a fine sheen.

Tim Russert - Democrat Shill
| November 14, 2004 |

Posted on Monday, November 14, 2005 7:29:25 AM by Peach

Tim Russert, Democrat Shill

We realize Tim Russert only got his job at NBC because of Russert’s then boss Senator Patrick Moynihan’s friendship with the then head of NBC News. But Russert regularly goes beyond the call of duty to his DNC overlords.

Behold this lead into a question for GOP head, Ken Mehlman on today’s (November 13th) installment of Meet The Press:

MR. RUSSERT: "On solid intelligence." And then 15 months later, the secretary of state came on this program and said this.


SEC’Y POWELL: But it turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong, and in some cases, deliberately misleading. And for that, I am disappointed, and I regret it.


MR. RUSSERT: "Deliberately misleading." That’s the secretary of state. So why can’t Democrats now say that the administration deliberately misled the American people?

Because, Mr. Russert, you are a liar.

The actual context of Powell’s remarks from the cited May 16, 2004 Meet The Press broadcast gives his words an entirely different meaning:

RUSSERT: Thank you very much, sir. In February of 2003, you put your enormous personal reputation on the line before the United Nations and said that you had solid sources for the case against Saddam Hussein. It now appears that an agent called Curveball had misled the CIA by suggesting that Saddam had trucks and trains that were delivering biological and chemical weapons. How concerned are you that some of the information you shared with the world is now inaccurate and discredited?

POWELL: I’m very concerned. When I made that presentation in February 2003, it was based on the best information that the Central Intelligence Agency made available to me. We studied it carefully; we looked at the sourcing in the case of the mobile trucks and trains. There was multiple sourcing for that. Unfortunately, that multiple sourcing over time has turned out to be not accurate. And so I’m deeply disappointed. But I’m also comfortable that at the time that I made the presentation, it reflected the collective judgment, the sound judgment of the intelligence community. But it turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and in some cases, deliberately misleading. And for that, I am disappointed and I regret it.

It is clear that in his May 16th remarks Powell was referring to the CIA asset called "Curveball," who had been deliberately misleading. — Not the administration.

In fact in his original answer Powell insisted the administration honestly believed the information the CIA had made available to them and had acted in good faith. But Russert edited Powell’s response to make it sound exactly the opposite.

Doing so, Tim Russert has once again exposed himself to the world as the Democrat hack that he is. Of course this is not news to anyone who has ever watched him.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Pardon of Scooter Libby
Lets not forget the Scooter Libby case and what MR Russert told the FBI.

This is crucial. For the record, I note two items. First, I note the FBI report of its original interview with Mr. Russert. To quote from that report, Mr. Russert told the FBI that "he could not completely rule out the possibility that he had such an exchange [as described by Mr. Libby]. Russert acknowledged that he speaks to many people on a daily basis and it is difficult to reconstruct some specific conversations, particularly ones which occurred several months ago."

Note that on the stand in the Scooter Libby trial, Mr Russert was able to reconstruct specific conversations he had with Scooter Libby after initially telling the FBI the opposite. [It seems he Mr Russert lied about Scooter Libby] The facts are obvious.

In the "Today" interview, Russert reiterated what he had said on the stand: he did not discuss the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson with Libby in a conversation they had in July 2003 and he said he did not at that time know about Valerie Plame, Wilson's wife, who was outed subsequently as a CIA operative.

"I did not know she worked at the CIA. I did not know any of that until the following Monday when I saw all in (newspaper columnist) Robert Novak's column. ... We simply did not know it. I wish we had."

Russert did say he was "stunned" when he heard that Libby said he had learned Plame's identity from him, saying, "I said that just can't be. It's impossible." Russert held to that line during cross-examination. He also disclosed -- in a well-publicized statement -- that he considered his chats with sources all off-the-record unless put on the record, the opposite of the usual journalistic approach.


I then quote from the instructions provided by the judge to the jury: "A person who makes a statement based on a belief or opinion which he honestly held when the statement was made has not violated the statutes the defendant is charged with violating in this case merely because the statement turns out to be inaccurate, incorrect, or wrong. Making an honest statement that turns out to be inaccurate, incorrect or wrong because of mistake, confusion, or faulty memory, or even carelessness in one's recollection, does not rise to the level of criminal conduct."


I will only remember Mr Russert as a person who twisted the truth and one who interviwed by adopting a confrontational pose rather than asking genuinely challenging questions. Just another barking dog for the liberals promoting himself and them.

My condolesas to the family.