there you go. that's it for now. this is mike huckabee from new york. good night and god bless. stay tuned for justice with judge jeanine. bartiromo. "media buzz" with howie kirk is coming your way next. on the buzz meter, she resigned from cbs news after failing to get most of her investigative reports on the air. she talks to me about media buy backs and what cbs did to some of her best stories. >> it never runs or it dies the death of 1,000 cuts. some of us say, if it is something that will be changed and revised, and shortens, and altered, it is a shadow of its former self if it does air at all. >> why cbs changed their report

when barack obama took office and why she quit? >> the spin wars over kathleen sebelius resigning. al sharpton outed as a mob informant. does this mire the msnbc's pundit's image. is stephen colbert taking over for "david letterman." >> this man has influenced every house after him and a few before. i do not envy whoever they try to put in that chair. >> can he succeed without playing a conservative bafoon. i'm howard kurtz and this is "media buzz." president obama was sure heaping praise on kathleen sebelius announcing her departure at hss secretary. you would never know the white

house wanted her out there according to the various versions leaked to the press months after some commentators were calling for her to be fired. they worked hard to stage manage her exit with expert handling of the media. >> she has symbolized, personified, the catastrophic disaster that obama care has been substantively and procedural. i think he would rather have someone else at the helm. >> now kathleen sebelius has to go. why now? because the administration can't exist stepping on its tail and turn it into a story about firing people for obamacare failures. >> joining us, lauren bush and rick grinnel and bill press. "the new york times" gets this leak. walk us through the spin. >> gets this leak.

it happens late in the day. this is the swan song that the white house was able to put out to "the new york times" for sebelius. they called her a fierce advocate, said she was tenacious. they had all of these wonderful things to say. in that same article, they did ha say she was a cold comfort because of how terrible obamacare was. in the leak, they were able to put their big old smin pin on i. >> what fascinated me were the unnamed administrative aids that said there was frustration at the white house over sebelius's performance. there was this concern if she stayed in the job, it would result in lasting damage to the president's legacy. they wanted an hss head who was not battered and bruised?

was this to cover up the fact she was kind of sort of fired? >> they were very concerned about obama's legacy. it is very telling when you look at the "new york times" story, front page how it started. they said obama lost confidence in kathleen sebelius when she bombed her jon stewart interview. >> the first time that jon stewart has played a role in knocking out a cabinet member. >> it is indicative of who president obama is. you can mets up a website. you can absolutely tank the health care system but if you bob a jon stewart viinterview a you ruin the president's credibility with hollywood, you are out. >> she gave an interview and said it was a logical time to leave. how different would it have been had she departed even with these official words of praise while the website was busted. >> april 1, i'm in the rose garden. president obama announces 7.1 million people signed up for

obama care. big celebration. as i was leaving, i said to a young press man, reporter, this is a test. what was the most significant thing about that speech today? >> he said, i don't know. what was it? >> he never mentioned kathleen sebelius. she was sitting right in front of him. anybody watching it should have known she is history at that point. >> but she wasn't on the day. it was president obama, vice president biden. she was in the front row but as far as the cameras, she was not there. >> did you think that the press swallowed this spin or not so much? >> i think everybody knew she was going but it was just a matter of time. i really do. i think we all demanded her head right away, because the media, politicians, because of the website launch. the problems with it. i think obama was playing us better. he would get some credit for playing us the way he did.

he said, i'm not going to bow into it. a week after it comes out, it reminded me of all these ceremonies i watched in news rooms. >> "the daily show" business got a lot of press. there was also this moment not too long ago when an oklahoma anchor, kathleen sebelius, let's take a look. >> now, that's going to be -- still continue to be a tough sale. we will see how that plays out over the coming months. >> secretary sebelius thank you so much for being with us. i think we have probably lost sound or something. >> i can hear you. >> it's still painful to watch. >> six seconds is an eternity in television news. if you can't fill that space. it is not the first time she has stumbled. she has stumbled in front of congress. she has stumbled with the daley

show. she had a problem at the end when she was reading her speech and said, oh, a page is missing and she had to go on to the next one. it was just so indicative of the way that she has performed as a p.r. advocate for the white house. >> the media didn't do that. the. "the wall street journal" and "the washington post" had stories about her resignation in the context of who's next. they completely forgot about the fact that she was a failure and went on to the next nominee. the bush administration secretaries, cabinet secretaries who decided to step down or get fired, who were controversial. >> like donald rumsfeld. >> or gone za less. >> they did not get the same treatment. it wasn't let's move on to the next nominee. >> i have to say in her defense, she gave the obama administration, the biggest embarrassment of the last six

years. she also gave them their biggest success. it balances. it wasn't pretty. >> on the one hand, she didn't write the code. so she is not solely responsible for the website batching but she ran that department and failed to warn the administration. did the press make her a scapegoat for all the things that went wrong with this program? >> no, i don't think so. there are some good things about the program. the website was botched. it should never have happened. somebody had to pay the price. >> the nominees or cabinet officers who got pushed out were beaten up by the press. >> i remember a lot of beating up on donald rumsfeld. i don't know where you were. i don't think he was treated gingerly by the press. >> that's not my point. >> the story that came out. "the wall street journal" and "the washington post" focused on the next nominee. they didn't rehash her career.

>> in the article, in "the new york times" article, they called her a proven manager. they said they did give that information to the media. whether or not they took it and ran with it was a different story. >> i was struck by the contrast between the public words of praise and these quotes about, she was a liability. we wanted her out of there. the president's legacy. they don't come from nowhere. they come from people in background whispering to reporters. i want to turn to one more interview where jeb bush talked about immigration amidst context of chatter whether he wouldfor . let's look at that and the reaction from some conservative commentators. >> they broke the law but it's not a felony. it's an act of love or commitment to your family. >> hillary gets to say, i'm the first woman president and jeb gets to say, i'm the third bush president. that's not a good matchup. >> the statement he made about illegal immigrants acting and

being an act of love is kind of bizarre. >> i ask you this lovingly, if that was a trial for jeb bush, conservative pundits really shot it down. >> i don't think it was a trial pa loon. i think the media in d.c. and new york absolutely want to see jeb push as a nominee. they want to see a bush/clinton rematch. >> for whatever reason, they are comfortable with him. >> they like his stance on immigration? >> maybe, maybe not. the simple fact is this crowd in washington is propping him up. i don't see the grassroots wanting him to come up as the nominee. he hasn't been around for ten years. the media missed that. >> to stick with immigration, bill, more commentators on your side liked what bush had to say, a compassionate view of the illegal immigrants and why they come here, to feed their families, than did the more

conservative types. >> it looks to me like he is looking for an excuse not to run for president when he says something like that. he came up with this common core curriculum for education. basically, the federal government came. no one is saying he has to do it. >> the media aren't saying he has to do it. >> his mama is saying, no, i don't want him to run. >> the media is in interest frenzy about 2016 and jeb bush, let's face it, he sets himself apart from the other candidates. >> let's go to chris christie and bridge gate and what happened with him. he was the front-runner. the media needs another front-runner of the establishment party. they look to jeb who is one of the two political dynasties in the country. it is the bushes or the clintons. >> do you agree with rick that because this started, before that appearance in texas where we talked about illegal immigration was an act of love. a lot of pundits saying it would be nice if he got in. is the press rooting for him.

>> we love to -- reporters love to build people up. you build up a candidate and then what do you do? you tear them down? >> they only build up people they know. they are miss ag lot ing a lot people. these people are not getting there. they need a name they know from washington, d.c. >> bush has to be in the mix. they are also talking a lot about marco rubio and ted cruz and rand paul. >> we don't know what jeb bush is going to do. i think you are right. he is a bush. send me a tweet this hour. when we come back, al sharpton, using his nbc platform to play down a report that he spied on the mop.

>> and cheryl attkisson. >> when they call and that pressure borders on

the reverend . >> reverend rat revealed after he was playing defense both on the cable channel and on nbc. charp son says he went to the fbi after organized crime figures threatened him for seeking a greater role by blacks in promoting musical acts.

law enforcement officials say he agreed to cooperate after meeting with an undercover fbi agent trying to gauge his interest in a drug deal. >> i did the right thing working with authorities. i didn't consider myself, quote, an informant, wasn't told i was that. i was an american citizen with every right to call law enforcement. >> al sharpton says he was looking good fighting crime by spying on the mafia and reporting certain crime families. did they give us the whole story? >> he certainly did and nbc is msnbc trying to protect their guy who is the host. this story should be all over the mainstream media i think. if it was a conservative that had his own show, this would be front and center, "new york times" material. it is not. they are trying to protect their guy, msnbc. you can't go there and talk about al sharpton because you

ignite some sort of race issue. >> it was 30 years ago and he did work with law enforcement. so why should it be as big a story? >> i read about it in "the new york times," more than one story in the "new york times." i don't think this story was hiding. you are right. it has been reported since 1988. he wrote about it in his book. >> moy question is, what's wrong with helping the fbi get members of the mob family? some of his evidence, police say, fbi said, led to convictions. >> it was reported, from c-17, which is what his name was. he denies being flipped. there are a lot of officials sort of off the record saying he was ashley flipped, did something wrong and ratted on the genevieve family. >> he said there was lying, he fabricated this story, he hadn't decided out of his patriotic duty to risk his life by

recording these crime family members that he, in fact, was filmed in 1983 during a sting talking about cocaine with an undercover fbi agent. that's a very different kind of tale than the way al sharpton is portraying it. >> there are not a lot of swing voters when it comes to al sharpton. you either love him or you hate him. in terms of how this is affecting him and his reputation, i think he is going to skate on this, whether or not he flipped or he didn't flip. >> this was reported just as he was getting ready to have his national convention. if he did such a good thing, bill, why does he seem to be playing defense on this story? >> i thought he did the smart thing, not by ignoring the story but going out the next day saying here is what i did. i am damn proud of it. what he should do is sue all those that showed old pictures

of him when he weighed 400 pounds. >> i covered him. he never apologized. look at what saturday night did with this last night. >> let's get down to business, shall we? >> business, okay. you heard it's snowing outside. >> snowing? it's june. i came here to get some cocaine. >> referring to cocaine, obviously. the al sharpton that we are seeing here is nowhere near the al sharpton who runs his show at msnbc, who makes a lot of money running that show and who is running this network and so a lot of people are willing to forgive whatever it was. >> bill press, rick grennell, thanks so much for joining us my take on someone who

survived an appearance on stephen colbert and an interview with sharyl attkisson and how

sharyl attkisson is an emmy-award-winning reporter that has interviewed a lot. >> an expert in counter terrorism and a top diplomate will in essence be contradicting part of the obama administration that counts on benghazi. >> she resigned last month after years over why most of her scoops weren't getting on the air. we sat down earlier here in studio 1. >> sharyl attkisson, welcome. >> thank you for having me. >> you had been covering the benghazi story with cbs.

they recently testified it was the p.r. people that removed the references to al qaeda from the infamous talking points. is that significant at this point. >> in a way, because it was so different than what was said closer to the act happening. when morrell was asked these questions or they were asked in front of him, he didn't offer up the information. in one case, when he did answer a specific question, he said it was not the cia. it was the fbi that made the changes. >> fox news and conservative media have been flogging this for a year and a half trying to turn this tragic afactor which the country was unprepared to turn it into a scandal. >> that's a strategy in and of itself. if you disagree with damaging facts have o things that have happened on your watch and you can controversialize it or call it political, perhaps some people won't listen. if you liken it to watergate,

watergate was a political scandal. it didn't mean it wasn't a legitimate issue to look at. i don't think anybody today would argue it wasn't. there is this tendency to use a strategy that says, it's political. therefore, don't listen to it. i think there are many valid questions still to be asked. >> why did cbs lose interest in your reporting on benghazi and obamacare to where you were having difficulty getting on the air? >> i think that's part of a broader trend that's happening not just at cbs but there seems to be the last couple of years much less interest in original, investigative, in-depth reporting that hasn't been seen elsewhere. there seems to be a advice certainly reaction to doing story that is could ruffle feathers whether it is people in the political spectrum or corporate interests. there has come to be a narrowing universe of stories that are desired by the broadcasts and it leads us with sometimes

newscasts that don't dig very deep. >> how did you reach the point that you gave up a 20-year career at cbs news and said, i want to be let out by a contract, i need to leave? >> in the end, it was pretty easy to want to leave. there really wasn't much left for me to do. i am not the only way that felt that way about the type of reporting i do. other correspondents that feel they bring very good original reporting to the table, not just at cbs but other networks, feel as though they are not being appreciated for the type of work they do. they are being asked to copy reporting from other media outlets which is not what we consider our objection. >> what were the objections? that you didn't have something nailed down or allowing an anonymous source or obsessed with benghazi or obamacare? >> none of those things were said to me. i think it was more when someone, a broadcast doesn't want a story, they don't say those things to you.

they simply don't air the story. they may even say they love the story and wish they could run it and they intend to run it. >> but -- >> it never runs or dies the death of 1,000 cuts if some of us say. if it is something they don't like or want, it will be changed and revised and shortened and altered that it is a shadow of its former self. that is not a good operating environment for the type of reporting i do. >> you were going to leave about a year ago and i spoke to cbs news chairman, jeff faber. how did he get you to stay and why did you ultimately leave anyway? >> i was still upped contract, which was a compelling argument if they didn't want me to leave. i needed to work with them on that issue. jeff fager, as always, is very sympathetic and empathetic, he seemed to agree, we had a meeting of the minds as to what the news was about and what my

role was and should be. i agreed to give it more time. there is a difference between some managers wanting and believing in a mission and it actually translating to the broadcast, which are, bay and large, very independent in some ways. the translation never got made. it is more of a trend than something that just involved me at cbs. >> the question has come up about liberal bias. this is often thrown as news organizations. do you think some of these sensitive topics, do you think that cbs has been too timid in challenges this administration? >> the press seems to be very shy about challenging the administration as if it is making some sort of political statement rather than doing our jobs as watch dogs. i didn't run into that same kind of sentiment as i did in the obama administration what i covered the bush administration very aggressively on the freedom and lack of information and poor management of the food and drug administration, the halliburton

questions of fraud. the bait and switch of t.a.r.p., the bank bailout program. all of those stories under bush were met with a good reception. these were different managers. nobody accused me of being a mouthpiece for the liberals at that time. >> let me make sure i understand. you aggressively reported on various bush administration problems and scandals and those pieces by and large got on the air but in the obama administration, not so much. that would suggest there is a political aspect to it? >> i think there is a political aspect on the part of some people. cbs news is not a mono lit thick organization. we know we have a lot of different personalities. we have bosses that are at their heart great journalists but don't let that play. in the bigger picture, there is a tendency to avoid certain controversy, because of the pushback and the well-o

well-orchestrated campaign that comes before us. that includes some conservative/corporate stories. there is this competing issue of bias if you want to say there is some sort of liberal political bias at play, there is also, i would argue, a competing corporate bias. instead of leading to a perfect balance of news, because those two things have a good, natural tension, i think it has led to a very narrow universe of stories they are willing to cover at all. >> when you were pursuing obamacare problems and benghazi and some others involving this administration, some on the right were cheering you were. you were almost painted as a conservative within a mainstream network. >> did that portrayal bother you? >> it didn't bother me at all. >> was it an effort to discredit you? >> yes. >> you were doing stories for idealogical reasons. >> that was part of a strategy or campaign, specially from

people that don't like the stories you are doing. that didn't bother the same people the way that conservatives did. i am happy if the stories i do receive legitimate recognition. it is not why i do one thing or another. i think it has been an effective strategy to try to turn factual stories into a controversy or controversi controversialize the reporter so some of the public won't listen to the story. >> tweet me your thoughts. next, sharyl attkisson on what the obama administration did to pressure her and her bosses is stephen colbert the guy to take on jimmy fallon and jimmy kimmel?

now, back to "media buzz."

>> more with my conversation with the woman that quit cbs news, sharyl attkisson. >> you left in part to write this book which is called "st e "stonewalled." what are the forces of destruction and intimidation? >> any journalist who has been covering washington for a few years would agree. they have agreed over the unprecedented secrecy and lack of responses and so on that there are-dr there is pressure coming to bear on journalists for just doing their job in ways that have never come to bear before. there have always been tensions and calls from the white house under any administration when they don't like a particular story. it is particularly aggressive under the obama administration, a campaign that's very well organized and designed to have a chilling effect. to some degree, it has been successful in getting broadcast

producers who don't really want to deal with the headache of it, why put on these controversial stories that we are going to have to fight people on when we can fill the broadcast with other perfectly decent stories that don't ruffle the same feathers. >> so you are saying that you and other journalists have made these observations. are you saying you personally got pushback from the obama administration and white house officials or they went over your head and tried to apply pressure to your boss sns. >> both. they worked through you me and they often went over my head to the bosses. i didn't always know what they did so. they would sometimes refer to it later or i would be coped on an e-mail or bosses would copy me on an e-mail. they would consistently tell me if i would write an article on line, which would be the fallback position when something couldn't get on television, but it was still a great story and i would circulate it online, they

could call about those or a headline they didn't like about the online article. these articles were perfectly defense i believe, legal, accurate, factual, legitimate. i feel like we didn't defend them in some cases as strongly as we should have. when they call and bear that pressure, it borders on inappropriate if it is part of a campaign to stop, influence and manipulate the reporting. >> what would some say to you? how is this more than what goes on every day in washington? >> remember than providing the information i think they are required to provide, the public information we own in answering questions, it was a lot of object skew skags, accusations, saying things are phoney scandals, bogus, not real, giving misinformation and false information. that's provably true in some cases and modifying when they are caught doing so and you point out that what you said earlier isn't true. they may now in retrospect admit

that but kraft a slightly different story. it is a teasus process that results in very little real information. i believe the public owns the information that they are guarding as if they are some sort of corporation almost with p.r. officials. they think we are not entitled to see it or have it. >> did you feel like at times you were fighting a two-front war with the administration to pry information and deflect these charges as what you are presenting at bogus and with your own management team to get something on the cbs evening news and sunday morning. >> i think that's true of me and a lot of reporters. part of it is the job. it's expected. you have to put your sources internally to get them on television. you have to fight the outside forces that don't like them. those two things combined were stronger and more forceful than they have ever been in my 20 years at cbs the last couple of years. >> you said that leaving cbs news was an easy decision

because you reached a point where you hit a wall and most of your stories weren't getting on the air. you had come up with newsworthy information but it wasn't making air. on a personal level, when you think about walking away from a place that had been your professional home, talking to your husband about it, twaewasnt hard? >> it wasn't in the end. there was really nothing left meaningful for me to do. it eased into that way of being the last couple of years. >> you could have at least served there until your contract had run out and kind of shown up and done what they wanted you to do? you decided to take a stand. >> i thought that too. i thought that really i could have stayed there as long as i wanted to. i could have done day of air stories and weather stories and reported for anything that was happening at the moment that they wanted me to do but i found it increasingly difficult as a journalist to have such terrific access, probably better than i

ever have had to stories and sources and really good information and yet have almost no outlet for what to do with it. to disappoint people over and over again, to get sources to go out on a limb and convince them to come forward and tell you what they know and then have to go back to them after all of that time and time again. i said, i know i said this was a really important story worth going out on a limb for but actually nobody wants it. it is the kind of thing you can't do to people. >> sharyl attkisson, thanks very much for joining us. >> thank you. >> you can read her work at sharyl attkisson.com. julia louie dreyfus, the star of veep poses in a state of undress. it shows her back adorned with a fake tattoo of the constitution. lots of news outlets pounce on a factual flub. it turns out that anybody think the media from more interested in a history lesson than in bare

skin? >> what stephen colbert told me about his political leanings and whether he is right for david letterman's desk. sk

nation, no one more

qualified than me to talk about stephen colbert. i appeared when hillary clinton was appearing against barack obama. >> when people said hillary clinton was inevitable. >> she was not inevitable. she was unkillable. you cannot stop her. you can chop off her head and she will crawl toward you. >> when colbert takes over cbs's "late show." he won't be appearing as his character but as the real stephen. here he is outof character explaining to tim russert how he puts together his comedy show. >> we show up exasperated or angry about something and we try to turn that into jokes six hours later. >> can he succeed without the stick. haven't interviewed him, i can tell you he is a democrat. he says he has no political axe to grind. he didn't know when launching

his show whether it would last below an eight-week tryout and he sat next to michelle obama at the state dinner. >> a couple weeks ago, "saturday night live" started making fun of us, us, journalists, said we were in the tank for obama. >> do you really think that late night comedy shows sh you have any influence on what goes on in politics? >> stephen colbert will soon have a lot more influence in "david letterman's" chair. whether he can beat jimmy fallon and jimmy kimmel, that's another story. u

ing. time now for our video

verdict. mika brzezinski was at the white house to moderate a roundtable on the equal pay act, an issue the anchor has enthusiastically embraced. >> how do women speak out? i could say something it's easy. >> sure. >> my boss is behind me. my boss is progressive. i can get in their face. i have a powerful job. >> this is the concern that the president has is that there are so many women who are afraid of retaliation, who cannot afford to lose a job. >> what transparency does in my opinion, and everybody knows where i stand on this, but what it does is it gets people from being in amanda's situation or lily's situation where they probably had misgivings about coming forward. >> i like mika but for her to moderate an event set up by the white house and ask no skeptical questions and make a pitch for an equal pay bill makes it look

like the administration's propaganda machine. >> she's a liberal and it's expected. i would like a contrary point of view that says 88 -- that women were paid at 88% of men staffers, that wasn't addressed in this interview. that would have been nice, but we know her politics. >> it's about appearance. if sean hannity had gone to the bush white house and monitored a roundtable of karl rove he would have been barbecued but because there was a fair debate with joe scarborough i'll give it a 3. >> 6. >> 6, okay. >> talk about in your face, joy bay her, the formerview and hln host is performing at a roast for the new jersey governor and, boy, does she let have chris christie have it. >> blocking three lanes on the bridge. what the hell is he doing, scanneding in the middle of the

bridge? why doesn't he get up here at the microphone because he's such a coward. >> because i don't get paid for this. [ inaudible ] >> let me put it to you this way in a way you can appreciate. you're toast, okay? >> well, i don't know. i think she was a little bit over the top there, but the grainy footage actually made it seem like it was this nefarious plot to embarrass chris christie. >> the secret event. >> joy behar is a liberal comedian, everybody knows that. christie wasn't the one being roasted. it seemed like a touch of meanness. fat jokes about blocking the bridge. >> i agree. i give it a 3. >> my verdict 3. >> we actually agree. that never happens. >> still to come, your best tweet and the tiny news organization that broke the story of a congressman caught on tape kissing a staff member. i'm tony siraga and i'm training guys o leak a little,

to guard tir manhood with depend shields and guards. the discreet protection that'just for guys. now, it's your turn. get my training tips at guardyourmanhood.com top tweets, on my interview with sharyl attkisson, excellent segment. maybe we'll get back to professional, honest journalism. stephen colbert headed to cbs. who cares, it is motherly a trade of one liberal for another. he's a young smarter letterman, much like the early dave. and on the sebelius resignation.

the male msm class did a hatchet job on sebelius and seem to be unair wear of the difference between past mistake and successful outcome. >> can't agree. tired of that. i think she deserved the coverage she got. >> gender not a factor? tip of the hat for a tiny newspaper out of louisiana that broke a pretty big story this week. you've been seeing the grainy security video of congressman vance mckalter, a family values republican kissing a woman on his staff. she's resigned, mccallister hasn't. >> i talked to the publisher. this brings up an interesting point about small newspaper. he said even the smallest of weekly newspapers can make a difference, and he owns leave it them, another was a finalist for a pulitzer. >> did he say how he got the scoop? >> dropped in his income. >> this is kind of gross, conservative website bright bart.com is featuring posters

featuring a photoshopped version of nancy pelosi skantly clad twerking in a miley cyrus pose. now that is pretty low. >> and it's hypocritical. >> can you imagine how sarah palin how crazy bright bart news would have gone or any other conservative outlet. we need to stop putting women in the left. >> and women on the right and left should denounce this kind of ugliness, as we just did. >> that's it for this edition of "media buzz." i'm howard kurtz. give us a like on our facebook page. check out our home page and follow us on twitter. back here next sunday morning at 11:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. eastern with the latest buzz.

good morning to you and your family. you're watching "fox & friends" first. >> we do begin with this fox news alert. hate in the heartland. a 73-year-old gunman opens fire outside kansas city, leaving two people dead at a jewish community center and one more at a jewish retirement home. >> kelly wright has the latest on this story for us this morning, including the suspect's ties to the ku klux klan. >> even more disturbing is the possibility, the motive may have been over religion. the alleged shooter was heard yelling hile hitler before opening fire on two jewish communities. glen frazier cross, he also goes by the last name miller, is now in custody.