Watergate: Would such an investigation occur today?

I think the Clinton scandals are indicative of what we'd hear--everything ad nauseum.

Scandal sells. Its all about the money--

The entire Bush administration's links to the oil industry have been reported-- Links to the Bush and Clinton WHs with Enron have been explored...

Reporters like Hersh are digging for anything they can find. I think the Press is doing it's job.

I do wish they'd confine themselves to the facts, and leave the editorializing to the OpEd pages, but in the wide view, with all the varied sources, I can't complain.

Excellent question. I'd tend to doubt it, being as this is the most secretive, least likely administration to release info in a long time. and they control all three branches.

If the same things happened, the press would have a field day but Bush would still be elected.

Terrific responses -- thanks!

Sofia, I was thinking about Hersh (and Krugman and Herbert, among others) as I wrote that, but Craven has pretty much put his finger on it, Bush would still be elected -- in my view because it's the WAY things are presented that counts, not the SUBSTANCE. A simply recounting of illegalities would not do the trick. We have to go Hollywood, dramatize, use startling visuals and corrupted "facts."

But that's our fault, not the media's. We pay them. And in that sense, Snood, it's all four branches, including the press. Even Democrats (except this one) pay the bastards by buying their advertisers' products, writing a check for the cable bill... Can you imagine the damage we could do collectively by cancelling all our payments to them?