Why doesn't the liberal media cover the Feinstein Corruption?

Question

Sending millitary contracts to her husbands companies. Had to resign from the commitee. Whay don't you hear all the scream for her resignation from the Senate, and have her frog marched to jail?

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200704/POL20070404a.html

Here are some details. It's obvious you didn't hear about it huh.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200704/POL20070404a.html

Answer 1

The liberals won't even address the culture of corruption of the Democrat party, let alone the obvious collusion of the media to protect corrupt Democrats.

The fact is that Feinstein sat for years on a panel that awarded contracts; and her husband was one of those who were awarded contracts. Anybody of integrity would have not put themselves into that position in the first place.

It is reprehensible that the media and the liberals choose to "see no evil" when Democrats act unethically, immorally or criminally. Just like their lack of outrage over Harry Reid's shady real estate shenanigans. They will tolerate any activity, except support of the War on Terrorism.

Answer 2

i'm no longer a geologist, yet, the term of your test (ten seconds) is a lot too short. attempt leaving the ice out for a pair hours and notice if any of it melts. additionally, it truly is a fact that Artic and Antartica ice is melting, that is shown and has been measured. it truly is not the place the debate over worldwide warming is. there's no question approximately no count if the ice is melting. The questions/controversy pertains to no count if the craze will opposite itself and no count if people are the reason. ultimately, Al Gore got here out with an Inconvenient fact (approximately worldwide Warming) in 2006 and it based on the artwork of scientists that took notice of this long in the previous that. Benghazi befell in 2012, so as a manner to make your subject real, Al Gore might have had to predict the destiny 6 years in develop. If he ought to truly assume the destiny 6 years in develop, we'd desire to continuously have elected him President, and afterwords, made him an important adviser in our government (and an adviser to something of the international) for something of his existence.

Answer 3

Same thing for anything else, the media has an agenda and will only cover stories that are dramatic or somehow anti public. Being conservative doesn't help Bush in this sense, I just wonder how much the people will remember Hilary's husband sucking, but not inhaling when ballot time comes up. They seem all over Bush for his.......being a president during a tough time with terrorists, but seem to forget the Clinton scandal alltogether..........

Answer 4

First of all - I love the expression "Frog Marched". The liberal media is not going to participate in demeaning a member of their clan. Aside from the fact, they would not want to be accused of being fair and balanced like Fox News. Have you noticed that the ratings for CNN and the like have been decreasing as liberals are awaking from their long slumber and heading towards the light?

Answer 5

This is probably why the Democrats are beating up on Gonzales. Keep him busy and quiet.
Prinzess Di will have to meet her maker someday and that money will mean diddly then.

Answer 6

Hear anyone on CBS screaming about Rosie O'Donnell either?

Answer 7

Feinstein and Pelosi watch each others' backs.

Answer 8

Why isn't it all over Fox News and Drudge???

Answer 9

You answered your question with your question. "Liberal" media is biased. We all know that. If this would have been a Republican, God help us. Special prosecutors, hearings, public execution of character. Well, you get my drift!

Answer 10

and they preach their "honest ways' to us!!!! People should really remember this negative about news reporting when they vote in '08!