Kurtz on Russert: One Plus For The Media

The Libby trial exposed the dark underside of Washington’s press corps and their incestuous relationships with the subjects of their coverage. But Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post has managed to find a sliver of hope for the restoration of the media’s honor:

The one plus for the media in Libby’s conviction involved Tim Russert, NBC’s Washington bureau chief…The jury believed Russert.

I think this requires a conclusionary leap the width of the Grand Canyon. There is no evidence that the jury’s belief in Russert rested on his veracity. It is far more likely that Russert just looked good in comparison to Libby and the weasels that came to his defense. And that’s no small feat considering what we learned about Russert during this trial.

Kathie Martin, Vice-President Dick Cheney’s director of communications, revealed her notes that listed “message control” as a positive reason for having the VP appear on Russert’s Sunday program. She expanded on that in her testimony:

“I suggested we put the vice president on ‘Meet the Press,’ which was a tactic we often used. It’s our best format.”

Russert can hardly be considered a “plus” for the media if the White House considers him a pawn for controlling their message. And since Kurtz characterized him as the “one” plus, by my count the media is back to zero.

Standards for Considering Pardon Petitions

This is just for reference and not a concession that the current residents of the White House have any standards:

“In general, a pardon is granted on the basis of the petitioner’s demonstrated good conduct for a substantial period of time after conviction and service of sentence. The Department’s regulations require a petitioner to wait a period of at least five years after conviction or release from confinement (whichever is later) before filing a pardon application (28 C.F.R. § 1.2). In determining whether a particular petitioner should be recommended for a pardon, the following are the principal factors taken into account.”

  1. Post-conviction conduct, character, and reputation.
  2. Seriousness and relative recentness of the offense.
  3. Acceptance of responsibility, remorse, and atonement.
  4. Need for relief.
  5. Official recommendations and reports.

Of course, the President can decline to take these factors into account and grant a pardon for any reason he chooses. Including to insure the loyalty and continued silence of a former staffer who knows where the bodies are buried.