[Howard Kurtz, Host:] Nuclear war averted. The press hails a Senate deal on judges that preserves the filibuster. Are journalists puffing up mavericks like John McCain who broke party ranks? And does television favor partisans on both sides who would rather go nuclear than compromise? Were "Newsweek" and Mike Isikoff right? New FBI documents show detainees have charged that American guards put the Koran in the toilet. Plus, Alexandra Pelosi on life with a campaign press pack. And an editor defends an online sex sting.
[Kurtz:] Welcome to RELIABLE SOURCES, where today we turn our critical lens on the filibuster fallout and new documents in the case that put "Newsweek's" reputation in the toilet. I'm Howard Kurtz. From the moment that 14 moderate senators of both parties cut a deal that derailed the Republican plan to abolish filibusters for judicial nominations, much of the media has been in full swoon.
[Unidentified Female:] Showdown averted on Capitol Hill. There's something for everyone in this bipartisan agreement hammered out last night.
[Chris Matthews, Host, "hardball":] So, David, who are these 14 magicians who cut the deal tonight?
[Gloria Borger, Cbs News:] Last night's deal was an extraordinary one, brokered by a bipartisan group of senators who disregarded the power and the money of outside special interests and worked without their own leaders to cut a deal.
[Kurtz:] So why are journalists lionizing the so-called "gang of 14"? Joining us now: Michelle Cottle, senior editor at "The New Republic"; and Jonah Goldberg, editor-at-large for "National Review Online." Welcome. Michelle Cottle, "Washington Post" news story talked about the courage of these senators to risk the wrath of partisans on both sides. Why is the press just genuflecting at the feet of these moderate lawmakers?
[Michelle Cottle, Senior Editor, The New Republic:] Well, anytime you have somebody going against their party, like think of them as mavericks, I mean, look at how popular John McCain has been over the years way before this. The press likes gray areas, and they like people who they see as standing up to kind of the traditional interest groups on their side.
[Jonah Goldberg, Editor-at-large, National Review Online:] Yes, but there's something missing in that, in that we're not seeing the Democratic moderates being lionized nearly to the extent we're seeing the Republican moderates being lionized.
[Kurtz:] Because?
[Goldberg:] Because in some ways, to borrow a phrase that Howard Fineman used about the Republican Party when there was the Colin Powell boomlet, is that the media really wants a Republican Party they can live with, and that they want a moderate Republican Party. They like the idea of a moderate Republican Party. They want a Colin Powell party, a John McCain party. And they just think this is wonderful. To listen to the giddiness that Katie Couric had on "The Today Show" for how it's now hip to be a moderate was just the most extreme example of a certain level of wish fulfillment that is running its course throughout the entire media.
[Kurtz:] And, of course, John McCain got the most attention of these 14 senators, the Republican moderate or centrist or deal-maker, made all the morning shows. And let's take a look at what some of the people on the air have had to say about Senator McCain.
[Unidentified Male:] We're going to turn now to the man of the hour, Senator John McCain. He brought the Senate back from the brink of what they were calling the nuclear option. McCain is finished for '08.
[Matthews:] To run for president, you must look strong. McCain is the one looking strong now. He is looking effective now.
[Kurtz:] Are journalists going back to the Straight Talk Express in 2000 campaign, just in love with this guy?
[Cottle:] Some of them haven't left it. I mean, there are still a huge chunk of...
[Kurtz:] They're still on the bus?
[Cottle:] They're still on the bus. There are waiting for him to ride again. I mean, what he does better than anything else, better than poke his base in the eye or alienate his party leaders, is woo the media. They just can't get enough of him. It's what he does.
[Goldberg:] Yes, I think, you know, John McCain in 2000, he kept using this terrible "storming the Death Star" analogy when he was talking about running against his own party, essentially. And I think it has sort of gone to seed in his brain that, you know, he's the Jedi here to save the Republic, and that he is fighting all forces and...
[Kurtz:] And more conservative Bush loyalists don't get the same treatment from the press?
[Goldberg:] Of course, well, obviously not.
[Kurtz:] Bill Frist, for example?
[Goldberg:] Obviously not. Although the idea that Bill Frist is some sort of rabid right-winger is kind of odd. The reality is, is that they just like John McCain because he makes Republicans look bad.
[Cottle:] That's not...
[Goldberg:] I think that's exactly it.
[Cottle:] He's charming, he cracks jokes, he talks to them.
[Goldberg:] That's gravy. They like him, but as a political image they...
[Cottle:] You're so cynical.
[Kurtz:] But when it comes to booking guests on the subject, other than McCain, who always seems to be everywhere, it does seem that cable networks in particular, and the broadcast networks as well, go to the partisans on the left and the right. Let's take a brief look at some of what has been on the air this week.
[Sean Hannity, Co-host, "hannity & Colmes":] Isn't that what this deal, this backroom deal, among 14 people, allows the Democrats to basically characterize anybody as extreme.
[Kim Gandy, Now:] It's not really a compromise. It's a lot like a mugger who says, give me what I want or I'll shoot you. Or, give me what I want and I won't shoot you, and saying that that's a compromise.
[Kurtz:] Doesn't television have a fatal weakness for polarized politics? As long as they can get somebody on the left and somebody on the right to beat each other's brains out, it's good television, right?
[Cottle:] Oh absolutely. You want drama, you want tension, you want conflict. You don't want somebody coming on, saying, well, this is the reasonable position and everybody agreeing and hugging. That's boring.
[Kurtz:] Does that fairly reflect the story? The story being that this was at least one instance in which people this group in the center, so to speak, came together to save the day?
[Goldberg:] They didn't save the day. This is what drives the base on both sides. All they did was kick the can down the road. This memorandum of understanding, whatever it's supposed to be called, all it does is it postpones this. And I think in many ways, for the media to cheer something like this, when in reality all they're going to do is make this fight uglier and more partisan three months or six months from now...
[Cottle:] Well, that's what the media likes. Then we get to get back out there and we get to do this all over again.
[Goldberg:] I agree. But I think what really explains more the media here is the cynicism of the media, where they actually don't believe in sort of ideological differences. They look at things, everything has got two sides, therefore the answer must always be in the middle.
[Kurtz:] I was referring to save the day as the storyline that has emerged, which is clearly nobody can agree on what this agreement does anyway. Now, I want to turn to "Newsweek." On Thursday, "Washington Post," "New York Times," front-page stories about newly declassified FBI documents in which detainees allege that, yes, there were instances, up to a dozen, according to these papers, in which the Koran abused, kicked, dropped on the floor or put in a toilet. Now this comes after "Newsweek" has been beaten, flogged, tarred, feathered for its story, which it retracted and apologized for. Does this in any way vindicate "Newsweek?"
[Cottle:] Well, no, I mean, on some level, "Newsweek's" problem was they said that this was in a government report and they sourced it weakly, and it wasn't there. Now...
[Kurtz:] They sourced it to a source who backed off. So they still made a mistake.
[Cottle:] They sourced it to a source who backed off, but I mean, that said, this puts the light to all of the kind of hyperventilating from the right about, oh my God, how could you ever have believed something like this would happen? We would never, ever possibly think of doing something like this. Well, from what we know of what they have done, what has been proven that they've done, of course this is not a far-fetched accusation. So on the substance maybe, but "Newsweek" would have still been in trouble because they said it was in this government report.
[Kurtz:] And these allegations by detainees have been in the press before, going back a couple of years.
[Goldberg:] I think Michelle's essentially correct on that. I think that a lot of people on the right went immediately into this very defensive mode towards the media, because they do believe that there is a pervasive anti-Bush, anti-military bias in the media. I think there is a lot of merit to that point, but they went overboard with this gotcha-aha-"Newsweek"-lied-people-died, trying to stick it back in the face of what their perceived enemies. And the reality is, of course this story was plausible. Of course it was. It has been in the media for a long time. I think there are a lot of people on the right who sort lost their senses when they started talking about how that we should somehow apologize or make account for the fact that these savages are killing people over this story.
[Kurtz:] OK. But is your view of this influenced by the fact that it was "Newsweek's" Mike Isikoff who was in the bull's-eye, and you obviously became friendly with him during the Clinton-Lewinsky business?
[Goldberg:] It's not like Isikoff and I play poker or anything. But no, I think knowing the fact that Michael Isikoff is not by any stretch of the imagination some Chomsky-reading, you know, crazy left- winger, does influence some people's opinion on this.
[Cottle:] And that's fair.
[Kurtz:] I want to quote you, because you wrote in "The New Republic," this is when the administration was just going ballistic, Scott McClellan, the Pentagon, against "Newsweek." You said that, quote: "Destroying the credibility of the entire mainstream media would be just fine with most Republicans, especially those in the White House. They are at war with a liberal, elitist mainstream press." And you went on to say, Michelle Cottle, that: "The press is ill- equipped for this kind of combat." Why?
[Cottle:] Well, on some level, journalists are in this phase where they back down immediately. You know, they have...
[Kurtz:] They back down? "Newsweek" was wrong.
[Cottle:] They have no, no, no, I'm not I'm talking about...
[Kurtz:] Generally speaking.
[Cottle:] Generally speaking, and also on this, "Newsweek" was wrong, but "Newsweek" was not part of some kind of plot. You know, there were congressman out there saying this was fabricated, that this is and there are Republican activists out there saying, this is kind of amoral, unpatriotic, some kind of intentional effort to undermine the armed services. That's ridiculous. And journalists should have come out swinging, saying that's absolutely way out of control.
[Kurtz:] Are liberals just trying to change the subject here, pointing to other allegations to get "Newsweek" off the hook?
[Goldberg:] I think critics of the Bush administration are pointing to these things. And I think journalists have every right to point to these other allegations.
[Kurtz:] Why has it gotten so little coverage, particularly on television on Thursday, barely mentioned. I mean, "Newsweek" was the national obsession for two weeks and now no one seems to care about that.
[Goldberg:] And I actually don't think anyone is actually surprised that this might have gone on. Although to be fair...
[Kurtz:] Given what we know about other abuses.
[Goldberg:] ... the stories that came out this week were all from former detainees. And there is a lot of reason to believe that al Qaeda and these guys have a lot of incentives to muddy the waters. So I mean, we don't know for sure that these events actually happened. All we know is that detainees said they happened.
[Kurtz:] We can never really totally resolve this because of that very question. And we need to leave it there. Michelle Cottle, Jonah Goldberg, thanks very much for joining us. When we come back, Alexandra Pelosi's flying circus. The documentary filmmaker and author gives us the lowdown on covering presidential politics and how she became part of the story.