BY GEORGE – AT 8:31 A.M. ET:  The George Stephanopoulos story at ABC keeps growing.  It is devastating for ABC News, for he is their chief anchor, presiding over several shows.   It's now been revealed that not only did George not disclose a $50,000 contribution to the Clinton Foundation, a direct conflict-of-interest with his journalistic responsibilities, the actual amount was $75,000.  From WaPo: 

Revelations that George Stephanopoulos made donations to the Clinton Foundation in recent years, while failing to disclose them in relevant news reports, are generating a world of trouble for ABC News and its chief anchor...

...Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a presidential candidate, said that the donations essentially disqualified Stephanopoulos from moderating debates in the 2016 race. “It’s impossible to divorce yourself from that, even if you try. I just think it’s really, really hard because he’s been there, so close to them, that there would be a conflict of interest if he tried to be a moderator of any sort,” said Paul.

Yippee for Rand.  It's about time there were real consequences for journalists who violate basic ethics.  If I were the GOP national chairman, I'd demand that George recuse himself from all political reporting during the 2016 election campaign, and that GOP candidates for president refuse to be interviewed by him. 

Stephanopoulos is listening. He told Politico’s Dylan Byers today that he won’t be moderating a February 2016 Republican presidential debate. “I think I’ve shown that I can moderate debates fairly. That said, I know there have been questions made about moderating debates this year. I want to be sure I don’t deprive viewers of a good debate.”

Those are the words of a wounded talent. Earlier today, ABC News and Stephanopoulos himself apologized for the donations but stood pat on his suitability to cover politics. “We stand behind him,” said an ABC News statement, in part. So why not just steamroll the resistance and insist that the anchor remain the designee to moderate the debate?

Withdrawal from the debate gives the anchor’s longtime critics an opening: If Stephanopoulos is essentially conceding that his donations could well deprive “viewers of a good debate” in February 2016, doesn’t it stand to reason that any other involvement in the coverage would also deprive viewers? Now that he has retreated, how does he advance?

He doesn't.  The deed is done.  Stephanopoulos worked for the Clinton White House.  He should have done handstands to prove that he could overcome his partisan past.  He did not.  His recent interview with the author of "Clinton Cash" was so tough that the author is now demanding that he be re-interviewed. 

Peter Schweizer, author of “Clinton Cash,” sat through a tough interview with Stephanopoulos over his book’s suggestion of overlaps of interest between donors to the Clinton Foundation and State Department business while Hillary Clinton was running the agency, from 2009 to 2013. ““Really quite stunned by this,” Schweizer told Bloomberg in an e-mail. It’s “a massive breach of ethical standards. He fairly noted my four months working as a speech writer for George W. Bush. But he didn’t disclose this?”

COMMENT:  We have two of the three major network news operations involved in scandal.  NBC News is still coping with the Brian Williams's vivid imagination.  It is an opportune moment for the elders of mainstream journalism to have a conversation with themselves, and the public, about standards.  Don't hold your breath.  "We stand by our story" is still the flagship excuse in American journalism.  In European journalism, the situation is even worse.

May 15,  2015