What He (Henry Hyde) Said, And What They Wish He'd Said

I'm yielding the floor to Dafydd ab Hugh for his dissection of a story by WLS in Chicago about their interview with retiring Congressman Henry Hyde:

A transcript of a video report that appeared on an ABC affilliate makes a rather startling claim Upon careful parsing, however, there appears to be an awful lot of gravy for so little pot roast. Here is the screaming headline:

Clinton impeachment was retaliation for Nixon, says retiring congressman by Andy Shaw.

By the time we get all the way to the lede, an element of doubt has begun to creep in:

Republican Congressman Henry Hyde made some surprising comments Thursday on the impeachment hearings of President Bill Clinton. He now says Republicans may have gone after Clinton to retaliate for the impeachment of Richard Nixon.

Note how "was retaliation" has transsubstantiated into "may have" been retaliation. Doubt and certainty are locked in an epic battle for all time (like the two guys in the Star Trek episode). But reading a bit further, doubt starts to get the upper hand:

The veteran DuPage County congressman acknowledged that Republicans went after Clinton in part to enact revenge against the Democrats for impeaching President Richard Nixon 25 years earlier.

In part? How much part? One part principle to three parts revenge? Or one part revenge to four parts sloe gin? And at last, if we persevere long enough, we finally come to the actual words that Hammerin' Hank Hyde actually used to Mr. Shaw:

Andy Shaw asked Hyde if the Clinton proceedings were payback for Nixon's impeachment.

"I can't say it wasn't, but I also thought that the Republican party should stand for something, and if we walked away from this, no matter how difficult, we could be accused of shirking our duty, our responsibility," said Hyde.

Well! It's certainly hard to imagine a stronger indictment of Republican perfidy than that! The sudden upthrust of principle after all renders utterly absurd the next paragraph... which makes it quite plain that Mr. Shaw began with his conclusion and worked backwards to his evidence, then forgot to work forward again and bring his snarky commentary into line with the best quote he could get out of old Henry:

Hyde's comments reflect what Democrats have been saying for years about the Clinton impeachment. It will be interesting to see what happens when Hyde's comments hit the national media.

Yes siree... for years and years, Democrats have insisted against an army of naysayers that the Republican Party should stand for something and shouldn't walk away from its responsibility to impeach Bill Clinton. By golly, I think the Dems deserve a round of applause and perhaps a lump of sugar for finally proving their case!

No sermon would be complete without its homily; no symphony would seem finished without a grace note. Shaw understands the requirements of his chosen profession, so he finishes out with the following:

Hyde's style will be missed in Washington, as well as his sense of civility, even though a lot of people will not miss his rigid ideology.

Somehow I have a feeling the "rigid ideology" at work here is Andy Shaw's. Turns out he was the one that introduced the concept of "payback" for Nixon's impeachment--a mere 25 years earlier--and Hyde responded politely, while making the point that the impeachment issue was one of principle. What a scoop!

I'm afraid that what happened when this story went national might not be what Shaw had in mind. The WLS story was unavailable online for a while, and now, if you follow the above link, you will see that it has been rewritten. The headline and some of Shaw's inflammatory commentary are gone, and key paragraphs are rewritten, but the impeachment quote remains.

Andy Shaw asked Hyde if the Clinton proceedings were payback for Nixon's impeachment.

"I can't say it wasn't,

Any one who has been around the media for more than an hour and a half, knows what they will do with such statements... You just can't make them. But in a life interview it is very hard not to say something the media can twist.

Republicans who come to goverment from Business often say things like this.. but not republican professionals. People often trash Repubicans for not trying to get the media to report their side of a conflict. What the people who trash Republicans for not using the media don't understand is only the media has control of what they print and what they broadcast. A Conservative can say any thing he wants to say and the media will report what it wants to report.

One case in point was an Eisenhower cabinet member who before joining the administration had been president of GM. His name was Charlie Wilson.Charlie was asked if it was not a conflict to have once worked for GM.

He tried logic .. Charlie said:

What's good for the United States is also good for GM.

the reporter waited until the end of the press conference repeated the question and charlies answer and askedm "And vice Versa?"

Charlie said, "Yes."

It was a no win question. If Charlie had said no.. Then the quote would have been "GM wants things that are bad for America and put a man in the administration to get them"

Since Charlie said yes..the headlines all over the USA quoted Charles Wilson as saying, "What is good for GM is good for the USA".

The method taught is to challenge the primise of the question. What Hyde should have said was, "I have never heard any responsible peopl claime that Nixon was railroaded. Who have you talked to who said he was?"

They can now debate who is or is not responsible and who heard who say what. The reporter goes away with out a way to shaft the person inteviewed.

There were calls from Democrats and the media to fire Charlie.

The reason the media does it is becuase it has always gotten away with trashing conservatives. The fake quote of Charlie Wilson only got corrected for the few people who read books wrtten by members of the Eisenhower Administration after they left office.

To day the truth is on the web with in hours of publication. Now a few poeple know the truth. But we are just short years away from a majority of poeple knowing the truth with in hours of the media distortion.

I noticed that Sam Donaldson told people at the NAB convention last week that network news was dead. Sam has been doing talk radio.. not to much of an audience .. but still doing a talk show on radio. He has no doubt heard from those that get news from talk radio and the Internet.

Sam has no doubt learned that as more and more people go to alternative news sources, the main stream media gets proven to be a propaganda arm of the political left.

The main stream media is working on getting the same sort of ratings Air America is getting.

What has changed in the last few years is the peoples ability to find out the truth. Today only a handful konw the truth.. but in a few short years a majority will know the truth. That will change many election results.

PLEASE REMEMBER ONLY DEAD REPUBLICANS GET TREATED FAIRLY BY THE PRESS.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.