ProPublica Forgets to Mention Federal Judge Being Impeached was Clinton Appointee

http://conservablogs.com/publiusforum/2008/09/19/propublica-forgets-to-mention-federal-judge-being-impeached-was-clinton-appointee/ ^ | 09/19/08 | Warner Todd Huston

[Mobile Vulgus]

A Federal judge from Louisiana is under a cloud of impeachment and if he's convicted it'll be the first Federal judge impeached in almost 20 years. The story was covered by the new wire service named ProPublica, a service that claims to be non-partisan. Yet in two stories on this judge there is not one mention of the fact that he was appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton, nor that his corruption was known by the Department of Justice when Clinton made the appointment. I wonder why ProPublica didn't find that relevant, don't you?

A while back, I wrote of a new wire service that was starting up to be called ProPublica. This new service claimed that it was going to be a non-partisan service but the fact that it was being funded by left-wing billionaires made me wonder about the veracity of that claim. I have to admit that I haven't paid much attention to ProPublica since my first look into it, but this judge story piqued my interest. So, I gave ProPublica a look see.

I found at least two stories about this corrupt judge on ProPublica, both written by Christina Jewett. One from September 16 and one from the next day.

Both of Jewett's stories have all the requisite facts about Judge Thomas Porteous' questionable actions. Both stories tell of the envelopes of cash the judge took from attorneys and representatives involved in cases before him, the free rooms in Vegas he accepted, the wild gambling there, the fact that he filed his own bankruptcy papers under an assumed name, that he didn't report these gifts on his taxes, etc., etc. We even get a paragraph informing us that authorities suspected this misconduct before he was named to the Federal bench.

Read the rest at Publiusforum.com...

[Mobile Vulgus]

Will ProPublica be just another lefty "news" service? This first example is not promising.

[Ouderkirk]

You only checked half way.

1) I’m OK with the idea that they didn’t mention this guy’s history with Bubba and the democRATS,

2) Need to see if the same non identification of party affiliation is applied to a Republican involved in an improper/illegal act.

As long as they are consistent....then there is no hypocrisy.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Need to see if the same non identification of party affiliation is applied to a Republican involved in an improper/illegal act.

As long as they are consistent....then there is no hypocrisy.

Typed by someone who apparently has never noticed that if an article about a miscreant politician doesn't mention party affiliation in the first 3 paragraphs, that miscreant is a Democrat . . .

[Ouderkirk]

We all know how the typical Drive-by media account involving a republican goes.

Headline: Republican implicated in Scandal

Republican [insert office name here]......

Democrat: [ insert office name here] accused of [minimizing action]

last line in story if mentioned at all. is that they’re a democRAT.