Posted on 07/22/2004 10:37:58 PM PDT by conservative in nyc
"Meanwhile, the Republican hyperventilating is overdone. The same Congressional leaders who shrugged at the leaking of a C.I.A. agent's identity to punish her husband, a critic of administration policy, demand hearings on Mr. Berger. The politicians should all let the Justice Department do its job."
Too bad this writer does not do what he requires the "politicians" should do, as of yet there has been no finding that anyone leaked "Valerie's" name to punish her husband. Only accusations by a serial liar, her husband.
Again.... would this have been the editorial had Condi Rice been caught stuffing top secret terrorism documents in her bra to smuggle them out of the National Archives?
The NYT is an utter fraud...
More like my "ter-let" (to quote the great New Yorker, Archie Bunker). Contains the same stuff as well.
On a more serious note, the writer that pointed out that the Washington Post's coverage of this story has been faster, more accurate, and more thorough, is correct.
It's not just this story. The Times is full of itself (see my first paragraph for a graphic simile that fits) and is arrogant enough to believe that it can do stuff like: bury this story and put it down to deadline (hot tip: the Post's deadline is within minutes of the NYT's, and many dailies that covered the story close editorial earlier); continuously slime the troops (40 days and 40 nights were enough for God to drive the iniquity from the earth, but not enough for the Times to exhaust the front-page potential of Abu Ghraib); and, last but not least, run the Elisabeth Buhmiller front page spin-push editorial on Cheney (that ran using the worst of the Post's techniques -- nameless sources who may only be Elisabeth's imaginary friends from when the other kids shunned her in childhood). They (the Times editorial staff, not Elisabeth's fantasy playmates) think they can do this, and the years of Jayson Blair, and Charlie LeDuff's front-page completely plagiarized story (with no consequences to Charlie: unlike poor Jay he's a hip minority), and Dowd's ellipses, without taking a credibility hit.
Press here to flush.
Recently other papers have been gloating over the Newsday/Hoy/Chicago Tribune/etc circulation scandal (the papers claimed hundreds of thousands, in the aggregate millions of readers that they never had -- and have been fleecing their advertisers of millions for years) but the Times, usually so quick to air other's laundry (geez... we're back in your dryer... we have to stop meeting like this!) hasn't had a lot to say. I wonder if their ABC circulation is a valid number, or if it's only as reliable as the information in the paper.
I have an opinion on how reliable that is but I shan't bore you with it.
The New York Times. Don't forget to put down the lid.
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
Apologies, but I can't figure out whose book you mean. Did Lanny Davis write a book (will paper bear that?) Or the reporter? Or do you mean Clinton's thousand-page Reich of navel-gazing?
I wouldn't buy it but I'd pirate the audio if I had a long flight coming up.
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
Yep. And according to Martin Peretz of The New Republic, who is a longtime Democrat, Valerie Plame's identity was an open secret in the Georgetown cocktail party set.
Just another data point of the Jayson Blair Chronicles that proves the best use of this fish wrapper is material for the compost pile!
Wanna bet?
The difference between DRAFTS (with handwritten NOTES on them) and Copies, is the thrust of the distortion, that is not being adequately pointed out, by Our Side.
Gee, who mentioned altering records...?
Once again...why is it so difficult for the supposed "elite intellegentsia" to comprehend that what Bergler pilfered were not "copies" of anything. They were instead "original drafts" of a report in progress. Each one of these "original drafts" was unique in that it contained handwritten notes from various contributors.
If a little old lady like myself can grasp that, why can't the the "smartest people in the world"?
BINGO!
These are not COPIES - they are all ORIGINALS and ONE-OF-A-KIND ... Probably with HAND-WRITTEN marginal notes and REDLINED by SPECIFIC Cabinet Members and the President and Vice-Pres, etc.
Right now, the DEMAND should be that the Archives release information as to WHICH copies are now gone (probably forever) --- does it include the copies with Berger's notes on them? Clinton's? Half-Bright's? Clarke's? ... WHOSE COPIES are gone?
I do NOT want them to release the 15-30page document itself, just reveal which copies Berger eliminated.
.
Your post needs repeating on EVERY Burglar thread.
I would also LOVE to know what was editted into and out of the final document as a result of these marginal notes and redlines of these drafts, but again, that might be damaging to security.
I would NOT be at all surprised if there was allusion to the Sudan/OBL incident... (that the 'Toon keeps saying didn't happen) --- the 9/11 Commission may have come to a very different conclusion about the significance of that if it were referred to in one of the marginal notes of a draft of this document.
Apparently this editorial has selectively forgoten that the whole leaking of CIA members names was a complete LIE by democratic activists.......
Ah, the Great Grey Whore continues her march into hell.
Truth to Tell:Tell It Early , Tell It All,Tell It Yourself:Notes from My White House Education, Lanny Davis' opus on selectively leaking damaging information at a time of your choosing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.