CNN likes to tell viewers, ad nauseum, that it offers “the best political team on television.” Of course, that’s just a silly slogan, and I long ago gave up on taking the claim seriously — when it hired best-selling conservative compiler Bob Bennett and plucked J.C. Watts from the world of infomercials to offer political analysis, I knew I wasn’t missing much by turning off the TV.
But CNN hasn’t quite reached rock-bottom when it comes to lowering the network’s standards. Consider who CNN brought on this week.
Eighteen months ago, the political career of Christian right golden boy Ralph Reed came crashing down, a casualty of his role in the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal. This week, Reed has found a new calling. He appeared on CNN during its New Hampshire primary coverage and again last night, labeled as a “GOP political analyst.”
Reed sounded none too bullish about John McCain’s prospects going forward despite his big New Hampshire win. That’s perhaps not surprising, given the long history between the two.
McCain, as chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, launched an investigation of Abramoff’s tribal lobbying that turned up a mountain of e-mails, including some between Reed and Abramoff.
Now, for CNN, this is actually a humiliating breakdown in journalistic standards for two reasons. First, of course, is the obvious conflict of interest — McCain helped ruin Reed’s career. Bringing Reed on to talk about McCain’s career, without noting the history for viewers, is absurd.
Second, and just as important, is the notion of CNN treating Ralph Reed as some kind of respectable figure. Since when is Reed a reputable Republican voice? Did I miss the memo?
I know it’s been about a year and a half — and that may be a long time for CNN to remember back — but the Abramoff scandal left Reed a humiliated disgrace. It wasn’t just some embarrassing misunderstanding; the scandal ruined him. Permanently.
Remember this one, from June 2006?
Yet another delightful characterization of Ralph Reed, courtesy of today’s McCain report on the Abramoff scandal. This one comes courtesy of Jack Abramoff himself, via his discussion with Marc Schwartz, a public relations representative for the Tigua tribe in Texas.
Let’s pick up the report on page 148. Schwartz was evaluating whether the tribe should hire Abramoff as its lobbyist: To Schwartz, Abramoff appeared to have the right credentials. Abramoff claimed to be a close friend of Congressman Tom DeLay. He also discussed his friendship with Reed, recounting some of their history together at College Republicans. When Schwartz observed that Reed was an ideologue, Schwartz recalled that Abramoff laughingly replied “as far as the cash goes.”
Or, how about this one?
Ralph Reed, email to lobbyist Jack Abramoff, 1998: “Hey, now that I’m done with the electoral politics, I need to start humping in corporate accounts! I’m counting on you to help me with some contacts.”
E-mails and testimony before McCain’s panel showed that Reed, who once branded gambling a “cancer” on society, reaped millions of dollars in tribal casino proceeds that Abramoff secretly routed to him through various non-profit front groups. Abramoff, a lobbyist for the tribes, paid Reed to whip up “grassroots” Christian opposition to prevent rival tribes from opening casinos.
Abramoff sometimes routed his money to Reed through a group called Americans for Tax Reform, run by conservative anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist.
CNN’s defense is that Reed is qualified to talk about McCain and other candidates because he’s a “well-known expert on the evangelical vote.” He’s also a well-known disgrace, with an obvious conflict-of-interest problem.
What was CNN thinking?