Did anyone see Wolf Blitzer respond to Krugman's article?

[shoopnyc123]

He was hellafied denfensive! Krugman's the man!

<snip>

"But other journalists apparently remain ready to be used. On CNN, Wolf Blitzer told his viewers that unnamed officials were saying that Mr. Clarke "wants to make a few bucks, and that his own personal life, they're also suggesting that there are some weird aspects in his life as well."

<unsnip>

Full story here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/30/opinion/30KRUG.html

[rumguy]

1. Blitzer actually mentioned this?

what did he say?

[eleny]

4. He said that he was repeating what his guest said

The guest was that WH guy who was speaking a mile a minute against Clartke right after the book came out. He was interviewed by many on tv outside of the WH. I wish I could recall his name. But he was such a shit spreader.

[eleny]

2. I'm so glad I caught that!

He was on the ropes for sure. It's about time these whores are brought up short and nmde to answer for their part in the loud whisper, meme campaigns. Let this put them on notice!

[RoundRockD]

3. What did that bozo say? n/t

[shoopnyc123]

5. He referred to a claim that Clarke was "unstable" in his personal life...

And went on to rebut the charge leveled at him by Krugman...it was funny, one mention in a major daily, and you get an IMMEDIATE response!

[MajorFlaw]

6. I don't think that was a rebuttal.

It was closer to a quasi-apology. My take on it was that Blitzer wanted to make it clear that his previous comment was limited to the "stability" issue raised by shrub's minions and had nothing to do with Clarke's personal life. Damage control, if you ask me.

[buycitgo]

7. I saw what you're talking about, and I saw, and READ, the smear

to which he referred

somebody here had a whole thread with the transcript, and it was MUCH worse than he let on.

John King was JUST as bad as Wolf during the initial exchange. you could tell they were enjoying hashing over this juicy dish, as if it were the hardest of hard news

so despicable, as was his disingenuous response today

does anyone have that transcript?

it'll be great fun to compare that one with today's, before they scrub it, as ABC did with that General's interview from the Rumsfeld thing last week

did you see that thread today?

they NEVER stop lying

[DeepModem Mom]

10. Here is the transcript, contained in a recent DU post --

gbwarming (1000+ posts) Thu Mar-25-04 07:20 AM
Response to Reply #1

3. SOP. Anybody else hear Blitzer smear: "weird aspects in his life"


http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0403/24/wbr.00.html

BLITZER: Well, John, I get the sense not only what Dr. Rice just said to you and other reporters at the White House, but what administration officials have been saying since the weekend, basically that Richard Clarke from their vantage point was a disgruntled former government official, angry because he didn't get a certain promotion. He's got a hot new book out now that he wants to promote. He wants to make a few bucks, and that his own personal life, they're also suggesting that there are some weird aspects in his life as well, that they don't know what made this guy come forward and make these accusations against the president.

Is that the sense that you're getting, speaking to a wide range of officials?

KING: None of the senior officials I have spoken to here talked about Mr. Clarke's personal life in any way. But they offer a very mixed picture. They say that he was a very dedicated, a very smart member of the senior White House staff, that he was held over because of his expertise in the Clinton administration on terrorism issues and the Bush administration, these officials say, wanted a smooth transition.

[RainDog]

8. I saw Blitzer RIGHT AFTER Clarke testified

I saw the Clarke testimony on CNN.

Immediately afterward Blitzer's show started, and he and John King basically ignored the substance of Clarke's testimony and instead focused ENTIRELY on the spin coming from the White House about Clarke, including negative personal rumors which have nothing to substantiate them.

Krugman was right to slam Blitzer because the man is supposed to be a journalist, not a gop operative.

If he were interested in journalism, he would have told his viewing public what was said, why it was important, what the public should ask the White House about these statements, look at the previous statements made by the White House...

King should, instead of repeating the mud slinging from the White House, ask that "unnamed source" for proof, or maybe King should tell that unnamed source to go jump until he or she is ready to talk about the actual issues and not about character assassination.

Blitzer's performance after the Clarke testimony stands as a low in CNN's credibility...of course, since Bush took office, there have been many lows, but I really want to be able to look to a media source in the U.S. as still possessing some degree of credibility.

I am grateful to Krugman for consistently cutting through the bullshit that passes for reportage these days on issues across the spectrum.

[buycitgo]

9. zackly! that's the one!

it was truly appalling, made worse, I thought, by his display today.

don't they think anybody pays attention to their transcripts?

and did you happen to see Nightline, or ABC news that night?

both did despicable hatchet jobs on him, using very selective editing to put him in the worst possible light: the Thompson questions, without response, basically

the Lehman "credibility question," without his "thank you, John" response, to laughter, btw......clearly the audience was on his side

also, no mention of the applause, the silence after he nailed Lehman, the widows walking out, the general positive tenor of the response to Clarke

the abysmal performance of Rumdum on fighter scrambling, Armitage's inability to deal with Condi questions, then contradicting her.....


on and on and on, like that, with NO mention of any of it

SO disgusting

[DeepModem Mom]

11. kick

[DaveSZ]

12. .

Didn't Ted Turner originally hire Wolf?

He originally fashioned that channel as a left-leaning news station, but it seems to have drifted rightward with the buyout.

[DeepModem Mom]

13. Don't know -- remember him first reporting from the Pentagon...

during Gulf War I. I actually like Wolf's CNN reporting when he's in the field in Israel -- and that area is his journalistic background, I think -- but behind the desk, he's a priggish administration shill.

[UTUSN]

14. His Spin Was - Not Personal Life, the PsyOps Angle

That CLARKE's job was to be imaginative about potential threats, to dream up bizarre scenarios, and that this was "weird aspects" to his job description. Not to defend the Wolfster.

[DeepModem Mom]

16. Well, if that was his spin, seems Wolf was REALLY reaching --

[John_H]

15. EVERY Dem surrogate call the whores on their whoring real time on air

Evert single time I've seen a dem do that--Wes Clark on Russert, Trippi to Zahn come immediately to mind--the whoring stopped immediately, at least for the remainder of the segment. Team Kerry and the kids at the DNC need to learn this immediately.