Matthews to NewsBusters: Plame Story Too Complicated to Cover Now

[RamboLiberal]

http://newsbusters.org/stories/matthews_says_plame_story_too_complicated.html

Last night, I went to a party held by MSNBC and National Journal celebrating a new venture the two media outlets are launching together. Quite a few NBCers were there, including Chris Matthews. I struck up a conversation with the host about the topic of Plame and why he hadn't talked about the story at all. Here's a rough transcript of our discussion which I wrote down shortly thereafter:

Q: So I've noticed you haven't done anything on the whole Valerie Plame story since the Armitage story broke. Why not invite Joe Wilson on the show to defend himself?

A: Because he'd say basically the same thing he always says. 'My wife had no involvement in getting me the mission.' He'd just repeat it over and over.

Q: Maybe, but isn't it at least worth showing your viewers that this guy has no credibility considering how much you talked about the story before? Shouldn't he be held accountable for wasting all our time? Why not invite one of his representatives or defenders on the show?

A: Well, the story's just gotten so complicated. I mean, it's just such a mess. Because what if it's true that Armitage was the source, but those other guys , also were leakers, what then?

Q: Isn't that a question worth exploring on your show?

A: It could be but the problem is that Dick Cheney has so many apologists it's ridiculous. So many journalists like Bob Woodward will say or do anything just to get access to him. And then all the people in the administration too.

[Catherine Vincent]

1. I take it this is a right wing blog.

"...but isn't it at least worth showing your viewers that this guy has no credibility considering how much you talked about the story before? Shouldn't he be held accountable for wasting all our time?"

To ask those idiotic questions he's got to be a Bush lapdog.

[Peace Patriot]

5. Don't know anything about this source, Catgirl, but I took it as ironic--

a joke.

It's pretty funny, if it is. (I wonder if Matthews "got" it.) But, now that you question it, I'm wondering if MY sense of humor got in the way--and I didn't see it for what it was--either a sincere or a butt-kissing suggestion that Matthews could use the opportunity for more "swiftboating" of Wilson.

The rest of the transcript is sure interesting. Too complicated. Hm-m.

[rfranklin]

2. But Matthews is saying something about Cheney and....

all his apologists which implies that Cheney is the source of it all. (of course, we know that.)

[RedStateShame]

3. OK, Chris, throw a blow job into the story somehow...

NOW is it worth reporting?!

[madrchsod]

4. "Plame Story Too Complicated to Cover Now"

no it`s not, it is that they can not admit that someone has committed treason. they are afraid of what they may find