Tough guy Sean Hannity couldn’t take having anyone defend Hillary Clinton so he stacked his panel with phony Fox Democrats Doug Schoen and Pat Caddell and Washington Examiner’s Rebecca Berg.
Let me say that I am not especially sympathetic to Hillary Clinton. As a former government worker myself, it was a no-brainer to keep work emails on my work email account and private emails on my private account. However, it’s hard for me to get too worked up over this. It would have been easy for her (or probably any other government worker) to hold private conversations for anything she wanted to keep out of the public eye anyway.
Plus, I wonder how much she would divulge in an email. Do Republicans really think, as Kate McKinnon suggested on Saturday Night Live, Clinton would put something like, “How can I cover up Benghazi?” in an email?
Still, after Hannity spent more than 12 minutes attacking Clinton with conservative guest Mark Steyn, you’d think he could have stood to have at least one Clinton defender on the show.
Hannity announced the guests were there “to help me dig deeper into the unprecedented controversy.” As if anything other than more attacks on Clinton were going to be "unearthed."
Although Schoen and Caddell were introduced merely as “Fox News contributors,” each identifies as a Democrat.
Schoen said, “Her candidacy, I think, is in tact but there remain many unanswered questions about the donations and the emails.”
Over the weekend, Caddell described the Obama administration as “Nixon on steroids.” But that was over the pending corruption charges against Senator Robert Menendez, which Caddell suggested is retribution for Menendez opposing Obama on Iran.
Last night, “Democrat” Caddell thought of Nixon again, this time over Hillary Clinton. Ironically, he said about Clinton, “This was déjà vu all over again.”
CADDELL: It’s unbelievable. You remember when Richard Nixon …during Watergate, President Nixon did transcripts of his quote, tapes because he didn’t want to turn them over and he produced those and let those out. It did not suffice. Because they chose the tapes and guess what we found out? They missed some, so to speak, including the smoking gun.
But there’s a big difference. Clinton’s decision to use private emails may not pass the smell test but there’s no actual evidence or even a real suspicion of any wrongdoing. As Huffington Post noted, “Numerous investigations have failed to yield a smoking gun connecting Clinton to security failures during the Benghazi attack.” Nixon, on the other hand, was already under investigation for serious wrongdoings over Watergate.
And one other thing? Even a good chunk of those Nixon tapes Caddell mentioned have remained private. About 700 of the 3,700 hours of Nixon tapes have been kept secret to protect national security or family privacy.
Nobody on the panel mentioned that, of course.
Watch it below, from last night’s Hannity.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2011/09/28/follow-the-sex-the-strange-history-of-fox-host/182573
As for Democrat Pat Caddell, he likes to attend CPAC. He swings both ways, you know.
Hillary’s emails are nothing compared to the dirty laundry of this hideous network, and its parent company.
These cafeteria Catholics are paranoid about their own emails becoming public knowledge. What they write would make Hillary’s look tame.
Look at News Corporation’s worthless defunct News International’s phone hacking scandals. That company was full of corruptions. Pot calling the kettle black.
Third rate tennis player Hannocchio is in no position to talk about Hillary’s issues. This self-serving New York street hustler has a laundry list of things he’s done, which he fears may become public knowledge. He would lose his elderly audience in a heartbeat if they learned about his personal ‘deeds.’
Questions of the Month
1. Is it legal to hire workers who don’t have work permits? Would that be considered tax evasion?
2. Sending money to a friend’s company, and he forwards the money back to that person under his company’s name. Is that called money laundering?
3. Does the IRS have the right to investigate an individual who uses a nonprofit organization to funnel money into his pockets?
4. Would a real ‘patriot’ fire his American maintenance worker and hire someone for less money?
5. Is it ethical to use public individuals for political and career gains?
6. Is it ethical to pimp your company as a trade-off to get free stuff and services for your family and friends?
7. Would it be considered theft if an individual took content from another network, via satellite, and not credit the source?
8. Can you gain weight from eating banana’s and peanut butter together?
http://www.newshounds.us/fox_democrat_pat_caddell_likens_obama_to_nixon_01162013
Hey, Pat — gimme a call when either President Obama or Secretary Clinton orders the break-in of RNC headquarters, attempts to cover up their involvement using both the FBI and the CIA, then fires most of their cabinet/staff in response . . .
.
