Admits he can't figure it out: Convention coverage gives us a chance to watch the fraudsters at work.
We don't mean convention speakers, horrible though they may be. We refer to the corporate pundits who are paid gigantic sums to pretend that they're providing news, information, analysis.
During a modern convention week, they're forced to speak for hours each night. And uh-oh! They aren't reading staff-prepared text. They're forced to perform off the cuff!
This can produce remarkable moments. Consider what Chris Matthews did during the 1 A.M. hour, very late Wednesday night.
Matthews sat with two conservative guests and with corporate liberal Joan Walsh. Early in the hour, he asked conservative honcho Matt Schlapp to explain all the Hillary-hatred.
"The level of personal attack on Hillary Clinton, we've never seen it before," Walsh had said. Matthews took over from there.
Walsh probably meant that we've never seen such conduct at a major party convention. As she obviously knows, we've seen these levels of Hillary-hatred many times in the past—for example, during the first ten years of Matthews' own "cable news" program.
Whatever! After citing the cries of "Lock her up," Matthews turned to Schlapp and began expressing his puzzlement about all the Hilary-hatred. We'll give this segment a Wednesday dateline, although it was past the midnight hour when Matthews voiced his heartfelt incomprehension:
MATTHEWS (7/20/16): Why— Don't tell me email, that's a recent event. Why do these people—you said it's a raucous event. Why do they, and have they, for years, maybe twenty years, hated Hillary Clinton?...Matthews couldn't figure it out. Walsh seemed puzzled too.
They hated her during Whitewater. They hated her—they say Vince Foster.
WALSH: All these things that never panned out.
Already, Matthews' question was strange. As we've painstakingly documented, Matthews was one of the most repellent, craziest Hillary-haters during the 1990s, the very era he referenced.
By the end of 1999, he was savaging Candidate Gore every night of the week. Presumably, this was warming the heart of Jack Welch, his corporate owner, the man who made him so rich.
But as we've recorded in detail, Matthews' trashing of Hillary Clinton, a Senate candidate, was quite lunatic at that time—and we do mean totally crazy. Convention cries of "Lock her up" have nothing on Matthews' past conduct.
We'll provide the same old links below. But late Wednesday night, in the 1 A.M. hour, Matthews just couldn't figure it out. He knew that Bill Clinton was a bad guy. But why did so many Republicans seem to hate Hillary so?
MATTHEWS: Let's get back to this, because— Look, I've been a critic of the Clintons. I didn't like the way they raised money in 96 at all, the Motel 6, bringing people in overnight. I didn't like— But that was Bill Clinton.He didn't like the use of the Lincoln Bedroom. But that was Bill Clinton, the puzzled multimillionaire said.
And Bill Clinton, of course—Hillary Clinton, she didn't go after him, but she stuck by him. Bill Clinton was the bad guy, lying about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky all those months. Why is Hillary the bad guy?
(In 2005, of course, USA Today reported that President Bush had used the Lincoln Bedroom for fund-raising purposes just as much as Bill Clinton did. Neither Matthews, nor anyone else, said a word about that. For our real-time report, click here. Admit it, though! You've never heard of this!)
At any rate, Matthews was still completely puzzled by the GOP's Hillary-hatred. That said, the con man really jumped the shark when he went on to make these remarks about those weird Republican men:
MATTHEWS: I think there's something that a lot of men in the Republican Party don't like about Hillary Clinton...There's something about her personality that gets to them. I want them to tell me what it is...Schlapp said it's the fact that she lies so much; after all, Comey said! At any rate, when Matthews went to commercial break, he sadly offered this:
I think there's something about her very rich education, incredibly high level of education, her intellectual ability. There's something in there culturally that you guys really don't like.
"We still haven't gotten to the bottom of the Hillary-hatred." Frankly, Matthews was stumped!
Matthews is a con man, of course, a consummate cable fraud. So is Walsh, his trusty companion, who has sat loyally by his side when he staged this same cons in the past.
Walsh refuses to mention the truth. Matthews is simply a fraudster.
Why are we calling so many names? Because Matthews was a lunatic Hillary-hater during the period in question! And because he expressed exactly the types of complaints about the horrible, know-it-all Clinton he now ascribed to Republicans. Briefly, let's review:
In December 1999, Clinton announced that she would run for the Senate. She would oppose Rudy Giuliani, one of Matthews' most manly of men.
As the race began to take shape, Matthews engaged in viral, unfettered, undisguised, lunatic Hillary-hatred. It took some of the very forms he now seems to wonder about.
We've recorded the facts many times. But due to the press corps' ironclad code of silence, it never creates a wider discussion about the way this decades-long con game has worked.
Kevin Drum won't discuss this matter; neither will Jonathan Chait. Rachel Maddow calls Chris her "dear friend." Walsh is a regular, active part of this rolling cover-up / Soviet-style disappearance.
Why do we call this a fraud? Because of all the Hillary-hatred Matthews kept exhibiting right through 2008! But since he mentioned the 1990s, and since he mentioned Clinton's educational status, let's revisit a bit of his own Hill-hatred during that horrible time frame.
Early in December 1999, Matthews was trashing Candidates Gore and Clinton pretty much every night. On December 6, he conducted a crazy interview with Gail Sheehy concerning her recent biography, Hillary's Choice.
Matthews' behavior was crazy this night. But in these excerpts, he seemed to reveal one possible source of his own Hillary-hatred:
MATTHEWS (12/6/99): Here's the weird thing about this dysfunctional relationship, and you've been sorting this out as an author for so many months. You have one partner on the team that thinks they're always right. They think they're better than us morally, politically, culturally, and intellectually and every other way. The other person believes they've never done anything wrong.Furiously, Matthews explained what "this woman" seemed to think. For a lengthy treatment of his conduct that week, see THE DAILY HOWLER, 6/27/08.
If you have one who's a born cover-up artist who can't even turn in an honest golf score, and the other one who thinks she's always right about everything, God help us!
MATTHEWS: Do you think she could have been elected president on her own?
SHEEHY: I think she thinks that she can be at some time in the future, but I don't think that means that she would be inattentive as a senator. I think she would be—I know she would be a workhorse.
MATTHEWS: No, but does she think that she came out behind in this deal? I get the feeling she's got this moral superiority that somehow he was lucky to have her, but she wasn't lucky to have him, like she could have gotten there with any guy—as that little story you tell in the book goes, any guy she could have dragged into the presidency—because she was the superior moral, intellectual and cultural and political force, and he was just some bumpkin she picked up and dragged along like a barnacle behind her rear end. I mean, I have to wonder. This woman seems to think that she should be president. It's an accident of history that he is and not her.
According to Matthews, the Clintons thought "they're better than us morally, politically, culturally, and intellectually." In particular, Hillary Clinton "has this moral superiority" which has her thinking that she was "the superior moral, intellectual and cultural and political force" in her marriage, and that Bill Clinton "was just some bumpkin she picked up and dragged along."
Matthews seemed to spill with an obvious type of gender resentment this night. Meanwhile, how had this woman managed to screw up the Clinton health care proposal so badly? In words which dripped with resentment and anger, a red-faced crackpot explained, persistently stifling Sheehy:
SHEEHY: Well, I think she thought she knew what she was doing, and she thought Ira Magaziner would be—It wasn't just Hillary Clinton! It was all those "propellor heads" (read: Ivy League grads) with whom she surrounded herself. (Magaziner was widely portrayed in the press as the ultimate Ivy League egghead.)
MATTHEWS: The guy with the propeller on his head!
MATTHEWS: I mean, why did she hang around with that clack? Those guys have never been elected to anything, they've never run for anything. Why does she trust those kinds of guys?
SHEEHY: Well, she—
MATTHEWS: They're all lefties and propeller heads! They're worse than she is!
During this period, Matthews kept pimping the wondrous, regular-guy Giuliani. His overwrought trashing of Candidate Clinton was just this side of insane.
Matthews derided Clinton as "Evita" and "Nurse Ratched" right through 2008. It got so bad that Howard Kurtz even did a profile of Matthews' Hillary-hatred in the Washington Post. See THE DAILY HOWLER, 2/27/08.
(Kurtz: "In recent weeks, Matthews has...likened her to Evita Peron, 'the one who gives gifts to the little people, and then they come and bring me flowers and they worship at me because I am the great Evita.' " TV's little boy was still mad.)
Around that time, a change in corporate ownership led to a change in corporate policy at MSNBC, a ridiculous corporate "news org." After Obama won the nomination for president, Matthews reinvented himself as an unfettered Hillary fan.
Late Wednesday night, Matthews staged his latest scam, in which he feigned confusion about the type of Hillary-hatred he worked so hard to establish within the mainstream press. As she has done in the past, Walsh agreed to forget the history behind this relentless scam.
Rachel will never tell you this. Chris Hayes is "all in" on the suppression of this journalistic history. Joan Walsh frequently sits at the con man's side when he produces these gong shows in which, Soviet-style, his history disappears.
People like Matthews will do what it takes to keep their millions rolling in. People like Maddow, Hayes and Walsh will play along with the game.
Can we talk? Matthews' years of crazy misconduct helped establish the frameworks of understanding thanks to which Candidate Trump has a real chance to win this November. Few people worked harder to slander Candidate Gore. Few people worked harder to establish the press corps' standard narratives about Big Liar Hillary Clinton.
You will never see this matter discussed on The One True Liberal Channel. The corporate pundit corps' code of silence also helps explain why Candidate Trump may win.
Meanwhile, our lizard brains tell us to adore our Rachel, who loves her "dear friend" Matthews so much. Watching her clown on her nightly program, we can tell that the orange-shoed star is just very much on our side.
Candidate Trump may win this fall. If he does, it will be because of the world Chris Matthews made with the help of his corporate friends.
Chris was puzzled late Wednesday night. He just couldn't understand all the Hillary-hatred!