The biggest smoking gun I've ever seen... and the fact that no prosecutor took it upon himself to delve further is mind-boggling.
The refusal of any organ of Big Journalism to point out these facts and conclude that the "Killian memos" were fraudulent partisan hit by CBS News is a mark not of the "objectivity" but of the solidarity of Big Journalism.The biggest smoking gun I've ever seen... and the fact that no prosecutor took it upon himself to delve further is mind-boggling.
There is no occasion for a prosecutor to involve himself. After all, the First Amendment does not say that the press has to be objective or fair - it says that the government cannot impose its version of "fairness" on the press.That doesn't apply to the licensees of the FCC - but then, the FCC is (theoretically) in charge of requiring its licensees to be objective. Which is why it is my opinion that the FCC and its licensees should have their socks sued off in civil court. IMHO that is the only conceivable remedy - and given that all but one justice of SCOTUS listens to broadcast journalism, it is a slender reed to have to rely on.
In suing broadcast journalism, you would have to request as part of the remedy specific protections against broadcast criticism of SCOTUS in order to give the members of the court the freedom to judge without fear or favor. That is not dangerous because it would not reach the press - printed journalism and printed books and, I would certainly argue, the Internet and FreeRepublic.
The Internet differs fundamentally from broadcasting in that the requirements for entry into blogging, FReeping, or podcasting are entirely negligible in comparison to the barriers to entry into broadcasting.