For Immediate Release: Keith Appell (703) 683-5004 - Thursday, January 28, 1999
Vol. Three, No. 4
Why Do Reporters Lionize Clinton Aides Who Advocate Lying or Giving Nothing to Reporters?
Cheryl Mills: Liar, Obstructor...Heroine?
After Deputy White House Counsel Cheryl Mills defended the President before the Senate
on January 20, the media touted a new star. But almost none of them mentioned that she's
facing her own investigation for perjury and obstruction of justice.
On November 6, 1997,
Mills admitted to the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee that she and White
House Counsel Jack Quinn withheld documents for 15 months, including a memo suggesting
Clinton wanted the $1.7 million White House Office Data Base shared with the DNC. Last
fall, Rep. David McIntosh asked the Justice Department to investigate Mills. Neither of
these stories made the networks then -- or now:
On the January 20 ABC World News Tonight, Jackie Judd noted Mills "ended
on a personal note, challenging Republicans who have equated Paula Jones' lawsuit against
Mr. Clinton with the civil rights struggle."
On that night's NBC Nightly News, Tom Brokaw waxed: "When Cheryl Mills,
an African American lawyer, speaking to a mostly male, mostly white audience, concluded
her arguments with a forceful defense of the President's record on civil rights, the note
taking stopped and she had their complete attention, many of the Senators rushing up
afterwards to congratulate her."
Later, on MSNBC's The News with Brian Williams, reporter Chip Reid gave this
rave review: "Then it was time for Cheryl Mills, a young White House lawyer. She's
been working in the trenches at the White House on the scandal beat ever since the
beginning of the Clinton presidency. This was her moment to shine and shine she did. She
went through a calm, methodical performance."
On Today the next day, Pete Williams claimed: "A former colleague says
there's only one reason that she would give up her anonymity by appearing in the
Senate." Lanny Davis said: "I know the reason she ended up saying yes is because
of her devotion to and belief in President Clinton." Williams added: "A devotion
that led her to conclude her defense with an emotional tribute to the President as a
champion of civil rights."
Newsweek's "Conventional Wisdom Watch" crowed: "A star is born.
CW predicts big-bucks law job, MSNBC analyst by end of year." Time's
"Winners and Losers" boasted: "Not much riding on her first big courtroom
appearance -- just the President -- and she aces it."
Time's Jack E. White noted the charges, but added the GOP "owes its
post-Barry Goldwater resurgence to opposition to civil rights....They're too genteel for a
sheet-wearing bigot like David Duke, but all too willing to embrace bigotry if it's
dressed in a suit and tie. Mills, 33, is just the sort of hard-nosed advocate to drag such
hypocrisy to the surface."
last March 9 on Mike McCurry: "Former White House aides fault Mills in particular for
inaccurate statements McCurry has made in the past, leaving him fumbling for an
explanation when the truth later emerged." Why do reporters lionize aides who
advocate lying or giving nothing to reporters? -- Tim Graham
L. Brent Bozell III, Publisher; Brent Baker, Tim Graham, Editors;
Jessica Anderson, Brian Boyd, Geoffrey
Dickens, Mark Drake, Paul Smith, Media Analysts; Kristina Sewell, Research
Associate. For the latest liberal media bias, read the
Home | News Division
| Bozell Columns | CyberAlerts
Media Reality Check | Notable Quotables | Contact
the MRC | Subscribe