FITZMAS!

Give truth back!

ESTEN!

A Zed?

Hello, Dah-link!

if you want to be a junkie, remember: zed is dead.

Well, they couldn’t disclose this little fact-morsel with the article because it would make clear to any reader what we at FDL already know: A G E N D A.

The most amazing thing about Howell’s piece was that she didn’t even feel compelled to mention that the Post had run another partisan, pro-Libby editorial, by Byron York, the day before Toensing’s.

You wonder just how stoopit she things her, and the Post’s, readers are sometimes.

O/T – sorry.

Do you think that Fitz wanted 12 jurors so that the D attorneys would state for the record that they’re OK with 11….thereby rendering any appeal by the D on this issue moot?

I mean, did Fitz want this?

typo alert:
it’s hapless Ombudsperson

That should be ‘its’, no apostrophe in it.

I would say there’s a very real conflict of interest there. It ought to be as obvious to WaPo as it is to us. Certainly it should be jumping up and biting the corporate lawyers.

Isn’t Vicky also involved with Scooter’s funding? If so, that should have raised a big red flag too.

Let’s not forget that Victoria Toensing’s married to Joseph DiGenova, who was another GOP operative making the cable-show rounds as an “expert” during CoupGate (aka the get-Clinton witchhunt).

punaise @
6

if you want to be a junkie, remember: zed is dead.

Yikes, should I see a doctor?

There’s no way to get the stink off of that.

I remember Bob Woodward doing a Larry King interview at some point. He claimed that the whole Plame ordeal was much ado about nothing. This was shortly before his role in the affair became public.

OT-maybe. Actually I’m hoping that this will be just on topic enough to be applicable. I am about to send the following letter to Bob Schieffer due to his interview from Feb. 22 on Imus:

Dear Mr. Schieffer,

I would like to tell you how much I have enjoyed you for years as a telejournalist and how much I expect to enjoy your particular slant on the news for years to come. I would like to tell you that, and a few weeks ago, I could easily have written such a letter. However, I heard your comments on the Imus show on February 22, 2007, and as a result, I could not ever write such a letter again. Instead, I’m writing to tell you that I am ashamed that such a seasoned, experienced and seemingly competent purveyor of news could advocate not enforcing the law of land because he’s afraid that the deleterious affects on others in his profession will bring freedom of the press to an abrupt halt. Well, Mr. Schieffer, of late, the press has neither been free, nor have they exhibited the expertise to be called the press. They are not our daddy’s Fourth Estate. Many in the main stream media have openly given up free press status to become stenographers and propagandists for an arguably corrupt federal administration.
What worries me is that apparently you can’t tell the difference between a free press and one that has been pressed into the service of the government. Obviously the “free press” feels no shame at the fact that they’ve allowed their talents to be hijacked by politicos who have charmed them, like Svengalis, into putting out propaganda. They have demonstrated their willingness, nay, eagerness to be used in an abhorrent fashion to lie us into war and to lie to us about how that war was going. They have been prevailed upon not to give reports that were not government approved, not to tell us about illegal secret prisons, that the government (which, in this country, is us) employs torture as a tactic, prisoner abuse, and any number of other illegal activities that this administration has resorted to in the pursuit of a shadow they like to call international terrorism. Too much of the time “the press” has acceded to the wishes of the government without questioning whether it’s in the country’s best interest that they do as they’re told. They have been threatened with prison if they do not divulge who told them about illegal NSA spying. You know there is something wrong when an colleague of your with the stature achieved by Tim Russert can say in open court, without any apparent compunctions, that when he talks to public officials, he always considers what they say as “off the record” unless otherwise specified. When did this change occur? Public officials should mind their words when talking to reporters, not the other way around. That’s why they’re called “public” officials. Where is your concern, sir, for the fact that this administration outed a spy with over two decades of experience–a spy who was working on national security issues including what weapons of mass destruction can be found in Iraq and Iran? Where is your concern for the fact that a member of this administration saw fit to lie about it to the FBI, to the Grand Jury, and thereby attempted to obstruct justice? Thus “the press” is becoming complicit in remaking our country into a police state, but you, Bob Schieffer, are more concerned that your associates may lose their access. Too bad you’re not more concerned that they have already lost their integrity, because I’ll never be able to look at you the same again.
Many members of the press have gotten fat and lazy and have become accustomed to the lifestyles of the rich and famous. The press’ credibility has been eroded due to their complacency and willingness to do the government’s bidding. When it all went south and we all found out much of what the press was spewing forth was untrue (something which certain elements of the government still deny…think Feith, Cheney, et al) they were embarrassed, whether they admit it or not. Many in the free press have a lot to answer for. Unfortunately, due to the law of unintended consequences, good, hard working journalists like Dana Priest, Seymour Hersh, Walter Pincus and even Murray Waas and Dan Froomkin are also likely to be caught in the wrong net. I wish it could be otherwise, but when journalists insist on becoming part of the problem instead of part of the solution, and when they become active participants and accomplices in government crimes, what are you gonna do?

I hope that you have given serious reconsideration to your previously faulty conclusions about whether the Libby case should have been actively pursued or not, because there is another serious related issue involved here that your declarations indicated you have not considered. At issue is whether a patriotic private citizen who knows that the government is misrepresenting pertinent information of interest to the general public in their crucial decision about a rush to war has a right or even a duty to reveal that information publicly, or whether his voice should be silenced because his wife is a spy, even though that person acquired that information independently (I believe that’s called “the public’s right to know”.) That’s called freedom of speech, and it’s another aspect of the same right you’re worried about impairing. At issue is also how far the members of the government should be allowed to go in pushing back against that private citizen when he blows the whistle on them. There is far more to this case than you and Imus have allowed, and insofar as you have influence over the public’s perceptions, you, sir, have done the public a disservice by so glibly and arrogantly dismissing the Prosecutor’s judgment and supplanting it with your own. After all, considerations of this nature are what you pay Prosecutors for. I therefore submit that you (and Imus) should be ashamed of yourself. Thank you for your time and attention, and your previous efforts at good journalism, and I’m so sorry this time you seem to have fallen flat.

Your comments would be appreciated!

Phoenix Woman @ 11
Let’s not forget that Victoria Toensing’s married to Joseph DiGenova, who was another GOP operative making the cable-show rounds as an “expert” during CoupGate (aka the get-Clinton witchhunt).

So yes, that means that Toensing is Natasha and DiGenova is Boris. :-) (Here’s some pics of her and her hubby, for those who feel like Photoshopping them onto the Boris-and-Natasha graphic.)

Somewhere in these threads recently, someone claimed that Boris and nNatasha had also been listed as members of the Advisory Committee to the Libby defense fund, but that their names were pulled prior to the WaPo piece. Worth some investigation, istm.

Said it before, will say it again. Debbycakes thinks she exists to defend the WaPo staff. That’s not her fucking job.

Her job is to act as the readers’ representative. I’m now convinced that she’s part of a deliberate attempt to subvert the ombudsman role, rather than just a slightly clueless insider who hasn’t worked out why she’s getting paid. She’s a flack, pure and simple.

And let’s also not forget that Sticky Vicky T had the hotline phone to Wolf Blitzer to deliver insta-flackery on CNN.

dannyM @ 13

There’s no way to get the stink off of that.

I remember Bob Woodward doing a Larry King interview at some point. He claimed that the whole Plame ordeal was much ado about nothing. This was shortly before his role in the affair became public.

But he’s Bob Woodward! And this is the Washington Post! Columnists might be biased? Oh no. These are Very Serious Thinkers. And the rest of us are just so…”shrill”.

Don’t you get it?

Hey, Rocky!

Watch me pull a rabbit out of this hat!

OT I posted this earlier but didn’t realize I was a couple threads back, oops.
Further Adventures in Reading the New York Times.

In today’s Times, there is an article entitled “U.S. Says Raid in Iraq Supports Claim on Iran” by James Glanz and Richard Oppel with Michael Gordon and Scott Shane contributing. The Times has been sensitive to criticisms on this issue. This article shows that the authors have tried to address some of the concerns raised while at the same time continuing in many ways to miss the forest for the trees.

The title is less inflammatory by not appearing to state an assertion as a fact but it remains misleading. The “US” in question is not the President, the Vice President, or the Secretaries of State and Defense, it is a single military weapons expert Major Marty Weber. Now it is nice that the Times has actually named him instead of referring to him as an anonymous source but if we are to go to war with Iran I would like it to be on something more than his say so. The “Iran” in the title is equally nebulous. Are we talking the Supreme leader Khamenei, President Ahmadinejad, al Quds, some other governmental entity, or does it mean simply a smuggling conduit?

Now to be fair to the authors some of this is addressed in their opening paragraph.

A raid on a Shiite weapons cache in the southern city of Hilla one week ago is providing what American officials call the best evidence yet that the deadliest roadside bombs in Iraq are manufactured in Iran, but critics contend that the forensic case remains circumstantial and inferential.

So it is manufacture of EFPs (explosively formed projectiles), a more lethal type of IED used by some Shia militias against armored Humvees that we are talking about. Moreover, in a new attempt at balance, the Times immediately adds the caveat “but critics contend that the forensic case remains circumstantial and inferential.” Seriously though, does the Times really need critics to assess whether evidence is circumstantial or not? Isn’t this a job that, oh say, its own reporters could and should perform?
This gets back to my central criticism of the Times coverage of the whole Iran-Iraq connection: it lacks critical thinking and investigation by Times reporters. For many reasons, Iran is involved in Iraq. Yet the nature of that involvement is seldom explored by the Times and its reporters, and no attempt is made to integrate such an understanding into an article like this one. The Iranians wish to ensure that Iraq’s majority Shia prevail in the ongoing civil war and that they will have influence over whichever Shia group eventually dominates. The Iranians also seek to weaken American influence there and generally, both militarily and diplomatically. As to this second point, most of it is being accomplished by wrongheaded Bush policies and the Sunni insurgency. They don’t need to get involved in it. Some level of Iranian military aid and expertise to Shia groups on the other hand to prevent us from dominating them is not only likely it is predictable. It is also a fairly easy way for them to establish cred among Iraqi Shia and their leaders. That it creates a certain amount of pain for us is simply a bonus.

If you look at things this way, it helps explain why the Iranians are doing what they are doing and why they are doing it the way they are. They are not interested in turning Iraq into a surrogate military conflict with us or stabbing us in the back. They are pursuing their own policy objective which is to increase their influence in a troubled neighbor with a Shia majority and vast oil reserves.

The real story here, however, is not Iran but the Bush Administration. This is the story that the Times doesn’t cover and, by not doing so, all of its stories have an air of bias and incompleteness about them. For instance, the Times article fails to note that the evidence presented did nothing to bolster recent claims by the Bush White House of an al Quds involvement. As it has from the beginning, the Times continues to ignore the relative importance of the EFP issue which has accounted for less than 8% of American deaths in Iraq in the last 2 1/2 years (if you believe the government’s figures). For myself, I would be a lot more concerned about the other 92% but that is just me. Finally, there is the question of timing. The Times has occasionally mentioned that there has been a recent increase in EFP attacks (again the numbers are dubious) and it has, as it does in this article, mention the charge by critics that this is part of a build up in tensions in order to justify possible military strikes against Iran. Yet as I pointed out above this is a situation that has been known for 2 1/2 years. The Times may not have the answers but its reporters should be asking the questions and they should not be taking the first simplistic response they get as gospel. That’s where critical thinking and investigation come in, two qualities which sad to say remain absent in the Times coverage of this issue.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/26/world/ middleeast/26weapons.html?_r=1&hp&oref=s login

I don’t think that they have any ethics. They should however, be in favor of full disclosure. In the end providing information is the only way they will survive in the marketplace. Right now the best reason to read the op-ed pages is to see where the conventional wisdom is, not to get information on issues of public import. Even worse, the news portion of the paper is coming closer to the op-ed in its approach to its readers. When the news becomes entertainment and propaganda the press will have no protection at all.

Teh funny from the Howie-the-Ho talk:

Aspen, Colo.:“The only poll I’ve see says 70 percent of Americans find the Libby trial to be very important.”

Okay, I’ll bite. Who was doing that poll and what was asked. The Libby trial is the biggest fiasco in Washington D.C. special prosecutor jurisprudence.

Aspens, indeed. And in case you’ve forgotten, here’s Sticky Vicky proving that she can make a concerned-viewer call to Blitzer and get on the teevee.

BLITZER: Stand by for a moment, Jeff. Victoria Toensing has called us. She’s a former Justice Department official. She’s a well-known Washington attorney. Vickie, you’re hearing the discussion I’m having now with Jeff Toobin, and you wanted to weigh in. So go ahead. What’s your point?

“Today on Washington Journal, we’re only taking calls from hack lawyers.”

Always nice to have that power over the press: do she and Joe have incriminating negatives of every editor and producer in DC?

Ann in AZ @ 14: “Your comments would be appreciated!”

Paragraph breaks would be nice. As posted, it’s kind of unreadable.

bdu @ 12

punaise @
6

if you want to be a junkie, remember: zed is dead.

Yikes, should I see a doctor?

nahh, it’s a line from a Curtis Mayfield theme song to a’70s movie (Superfly), with Freddie in lieu of Zed.

NBC has a story on whether the tomb of Jesus has been found. I think the piece of evidence that clinched it was they found his cell phone.

PJ at 10 — Dang — I always throw in an inappropriate apostrophe when I’m tired. Thanks much for the heads up — I’ve fixed it.

pseudonymous in nc @
17

Said it before, will say it again. Debbycakes thinks she exists to defend the WaPo staff. That’s not her fucking job.

Her job is to act as the readers’ representative. I’m now convinced that she’s part of a deliberate attempt to subvert the ombudsman role, rather than just a slightly clueless insider who hasn’t worked out why she’s getting paid. She’s a flack, pure and simple.

Come on. That’s like suggesting that someone would take on the special prosecutor’s role for a real estate investigation, and use it to subvert that position by pursuing completely unrelated charges on something like oral sex.

Oh, wait…

I happened to ask Toensing about any conflict of interest in her WaPo chat (Prescott, AZ question) and needless to say, she was less than forthcoming and sequed into a non-answer:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01472.html

Prescott, Ariz.: It has been said that you are a well-known attorney in the D.C. area. One of the big themes in this case is how the personal and professional entwinement between media and government had tainted much of the Iraq war reporting at the time this story started and continued as it evolved. That said, as a well-known attorney as well as a media pundit, do you have any personal or professional ties to people involved in this case that we should know about in order to assess the motives of your opinions and judgments on this case?

Victoria Toensing: Without question, I know people on the defense team. Most white-collar crime lawyers know each other in Washington, so that’s not unusual. Actually both of Libby’s lawyers are Democrats.

But let me tell you why I became quite interested in this case. About the time that this matter was evolving my husband and I were threatened with going to jail by a U.S. Attorney who abused his powers. He threatened to put us in jail if we did not testify against our own clients — he saw that issue as the same reporters’ privilege. And by the way, we won — but it took more than a year and many sleepless nights.

As for ethics in journalism and full disclosure, politics and media have become so intertwined and incestuous that it would probably be easier for them to note when there wasn’t a tie-in somehow. If anything, that is the one lesson that the Libby trial has taught us.

dannyM @ 13

There’s no way to get the stink off of that.

I remember Bob Woodward doing a Larry King interview at some point. He claimed that the whole Plame ordeal was much ado about nothing. This was shortly before his role in the affair became public.

I happened to be watching. It was all around the tease that he had a bombshell to reveal.

The result of his duplicity is that his reputation has been irreparably damaged.

I find it absolutely fascinating how hard some factions of the media are trying to pretend that what Cheney/Libby/Rove et al did, wasn’t wrong. They refuse to own up to the fact that they were cynically played.

Ethics? Most, if not all Republicans’ “ethics” are the antithesis of all I have ever been taught about ethics by my family, teachers, clergy men and women, and others. Unfortunately, a few members of my party (Dems), are liars too.

CHS- gmail me if you need backstage help right now. RBG can give addy.

froggermarch @
16

Somewhere in these threads recently, someone claimed that Boris and nNatasha had also been listed as members of the Advisory Committee to the Libby defense fund, but that their names were pulled prior to the WaPo piece. Worth some investigation, istm.

The wayback machine has two versions of the committee page from mid-2006. Neither Toensing nor DiGenova is shown as a member, on either version of the page.

How ironic, Christy! I just order Rocky and Bullwinkle DVDs and here we are with a terrific diary featuring the villains from the cartoon!

Remember this quote?

Fearless Leader: Gentlemen, I’m afraid your hour has come
Bullwinkle: Is that standard or daylights savings time?

It seems that, in these most auspicious times, the press is treating these issues as Bullwinkle did. UGH!

Blogger ethics panel!

JGabriel @ 23

Ann in AZ @ 14: “Your comments would be appreciated!”

Paragraph breaks would be nice. As posted, it’s kind of unreadable.

JGabriel, thank for your comment. Actually, in the letter there are paragraph breaks, but for some reason they didn’t show up well when I copied it from Word. The only one that showed up was the last one. I also found one of my mistakes after I posted. Believe it or not, I proofed it myself about a half dozen times before I posted here, and I also did spell check and grammer check in word, but it seems after the first few times, you rarely catch your own mistakes. That’s what editors are for. Thanks again.

I personally believe WaPo should also have disclosed that Toensing was a member of the Bush/Cheney Transition Team serving in effect as a “key policy advisor”.

I’d also like to know if she has any current financial relationship to the current administration.

“Cheney warns Pakistan” What are we going to do? Nuke ‘em?

Others have noted (my version of “some say“) that Victoria Toensing’s claim to have written or crafted the IIPA does not stand up, in that her employment in Detroit did not end until the Senate Committee had reported the bill out to the floor for debate. Some say she has modified her CV from its original claim of authorship of the IIPA to now read “worked to ensure passage of the IIPA.”

Since Ms. Toensing hangs most of her “Plame wasn’t covert” argument on the five-year timeline in the IIPA she alleges she wrote, I think timelines are very important in assessing her own credentials. TradMed seems not so interested in pursuing this inquiry, being so busy taking her calls while on the air and all…

Ann in AZ @
36

JGabriel @ 23

Ann in AZ @ 14: “Your comments would be appreciated!”

Paragraph breaks would be nice. As posted, it’s kind of unreadable.

JGabriel, thank for your comment. Actually, in the letter there are paragraph breaks, but for some reason they didn’t show up well when I copied it from Word. …

That explains it. Copy the text into notepad first, edit it there, then post it here.

Word will introduce a lot of invisible characters and other ‘noise’ that will get screwed up when copying it into a text editor like the one here on FDL.

Cleaning it up in a a regular text editor, like Notepad, rather than a word processing program should make it more readable for us here.

How long will it be before the lack of ethics and corruption presented by the Republican Party in general, and the Bush Administration specifically, begins to show up in our youth? It’s already happening. As in ‘hey, everybody does it’. I’m already hearing this from a few of my high school students.

Ann in AZ: More concise is better. (A lesson I have yet to learn myself.) Think of the audience….he is more likely to read two or three shortish paragraphs, than anything lengthy or involved. He is a journalist and needs it in bite size pieces.

I can give more comments if you want ….erkroeker at yahoo dot com

Ethics were among the first casualites when the Republicans sold their souls to the Bush Family.

Hoie Annis Kurtz trophy husband of gop operative Sherry Annis. Kurtz wouldn’t know a conflict if he fell over it

And we aren’t the only ones who have been waiting for a court decision. The Hague ruled that Serbia will not be held responsible for committing genocide against Muslims.

TRex @ 19

Hey, Rocky!

Watch me pull a rabbit out of this hat!

Again???

Phoenix Woman @ 15

So yes, that means that Toensing is Natasha and DiGenova is Boris. :-) (Here’s some pics of her and her hubby, for those who feel like Photoshopping them onto the Boris-and-Natasha graphic.)

Oh, that one image just made it way too easy, here you go:

http://www.fdiskc.com/img/wantedTnD.jpg

Here is the lawschool exam question for criminal procedure. In the course of examining the juror the judge finds out that there has been a vote to find the Defendant not guilty on the Cooper count. In fact the foreperson has already filled in the form. If the judge adds a juror and then the jury is hung with the new juror on the Cooper count is it a mistrial or a dismissal? Is any jury marking on the special verdict form of no effect until the complete verdict is rendered? Is there any law out there on multiple count charges and adding jurors midstream?

hackworth @ 46

TRex @ 19

Hey, Rocky!

Watch me pull a rabbit out of this hat!

Again???

That trick never works!

This is off-topic, but speaks to the issue of media complicity. From Operation Falcon

Operation Falcon: Blueprint for removing dissidents and political rivals

The Bush administration has carried out three massive sweeps in the last two years, rolling up more than 30,000 minor crooks and criminals, without as much as a whimper of protest from the public.

Operation Falcon is the clearest indication yet that the Bush administration is fine-tuning its shock-troops so it can roll up tens of thousands of people at a moment’s notice and toss them into the newly-built Halliburton detention centers. This should be a red flag for anyone who cares at all about human rights, civil liberties, or simply saving his own skin.

…cont…

Without fanfare, Bush has taken control of all armed forces and militias inside and outside of the country and now has a monopoly on all the state-sanctioned tools of organized violence. It’s a coup that could never have succeeded without the tacit cooperation of the media.

Bush is now free to declare martial law in response to a natural disaster, a pandemic or a terrorist attack. The congress is powerless to stop him.

…cont…

In fact, the American Enterprise Institute, to which the Bush team is closely aligned, has already “issued proposals for the operation of Congress following a catastrophic terrorist attack”. They advocate the “APPOINTING” of individuals to the House of Representatives “to fill the seats of dead or incapacitated members, a first in American history” “The Continuity of Government Commission is self-commissioned’, its members being neither elected nor appointed by any government body and mostly made up of professional lobbyists”.

(Read the whole article: http://www.conservativeusa.org/cog-ronpaul.htm) (Coincidentally, Newsweek article “White House Rehearses for Domestic Attack” 2-23-07; “The White House is staging a high-level exercise Saturday to test responses to the prospect of a massive domestic terrorist attack.” These drills are a critical part of the C.O.G. regimen dating back to the Reagan administration)

According to the AEI’s plan, the future United States congress will be comprised of lobbyists and industry representatives. What else would one expect from an organization that believes that corporate interests should determine policy?

The whole pattern of media complicity takes a much more sinister turn than mere unethical CYA.

dab_from_CT @ 30

I find it absolutely fascinating how hard some factions of the media are trying to pretend that what Cheney/Libby/Rove et al did, wasn’t wrong. They refuse to own up to the fact that they were cynically played.

Is there a Media Version of Stockholm Syndrome? Is it called Beltway Syndrome?

froggermarch @
16

Somewhere in these threads recently, someone claimed that Boris and nNatasha had also been listed as members of the Advisory Committee to the Libby defense fund, but that their names were pulled prior to the WaPo piece. Worth some investigation, istm.

I have never seen them listed as being on the Advisory Committee. Both are quoted on the site in support of Libby:

Former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova: “”I think this is a very serious development for the prosecutor [the Bob Woodward story]….By alleging that Mr. Libby was the initial source he publicly bootstrapped his case on this fact. That is now totally false and requires him now under Justice Department guidelines to seriously consider dismissing the case because you cannot indict when there’s a reasonable doubt and I believe now that there is a reasonable doubt about Mr. Libby’s state of mind.” (Joseph diGenova on Fox News, 11/16/05)

Former Deputy Attorney General Criminal Division, Victoria Toensing: “He [Patrick Fitzgerald] has been investigating a very simple factual scenario and he’s missed this crucial fact. It makes you cry out for asking well, what else did he not know? What else did he not do?” (Fox Special Report With Brit Hume, Nov. 16, 2005) “Bob Woodward remembers telling Walter Pincus about Valerie Plame. . And Walter Pincus says, he doesn’t recall any such conversation. Should Walter Pincus be indicted? That’s basically the kind of case against Scooter Libby. . [P]eople have different memories in all good faith. ” (CNN’s “The Situation Room,” November 12, 2005)

http://www.scooterlibby.com/nothearing/

Looseheadprop – I thought it was you that disputed my thought there might be a downward departure on a potential Libby sentencing; but I could easily be wrong and certainly don’t want to atribute something falsely. I will rephrase that one of the regular princip[als here thought I was off base to contemplate downward departure, Indeed they may be right, I was merely thinking off the top of my head in response to a question that had been posted. It is impossible to get a true bead on sentencing ranges without knowing what counts are returned as convictions, but I’ll take a preliminary look tonight just for grins. I’ve never sentenced a client on perjury and got a not guilty on the only obstruction case I had, so my earlier thoughts were very speculative.

dab_from_CT @ 30

..The result of his duplicity is that his reputation has been irreparably damaged.

The result of his duplicity is that his reputation has been irreparably, and deservedly damaged.

Christy,

I’m so glad you posted an article on Toensing’s Op-Ed and the WaPo’s ombudsman amazingly inept defense of the paper’s failure to attend to journalistic ethics and principles. Deborah Howell deserves all of the responsible and resonably articulted criticism we can give her.

Please join me in offering her some more LINK HERE.

LINK HERE

It’s actions like this that are killing newspapers. Circulation is going down, and people (like us) are getting their information elsewhere. While it should be obvious that speaking truth to power sells (witness Keith Olbermann), these amoral bastards can’t see the monetary forest for the ideological trees. People are begging for the truth, but the MSM isn’t delivering. They may try to compete in the “tubes”, but buying ink by the barrel doesn’t apply here; so far, they don’t do it very well — their arrogant sense of entitlement colors everything they produce. A janitor with ideas and a computer — or an ex-movie producer with a laptop — can be just as influential as these smarmy bastards. In the end, it will kill them. Hell, they’re dead already, and they don’t even know it. Here they come — dead newspapers walking!

Hey Rocky, watch me pull a pardon out of this asshat.

-GSD

bdu @
47

Phoenix Woman @ 15

So yes, that means that Toensing is Natasha and DiGenova is Boris. :-) (Here’s some pics of her and her hubby, for those who feel like Photoshopping them onto the Boris-and-Natasha graphic.)

Oh, that one image just made it way too easy, here you go:

http://www.fdiskc.com/img/wantedTnD.jpg

NOTE TO MODS: I vote we replace the graphic up top with this fine specimen!

NOTE TO READERS: I vote we SPOTLIGHT this post to the washington post’s big cheezes. (TeddySF: what are those email addys, again?)

help your
libido
and
sayno
to
wapo
and also
give
the heaveho
to
modo

NOTE TO MODS: I vote we replace the graphic up top with this fine specimen!

I’ve got it, I’ve got it!

Whether you believe Toensing wrote the law or not, all you need to do is read the statute and understand (I think some here can do this) that the elements necessary to charge anyone with “leaking” never existed in this case. There is no bar keeping someone like Toensing from exercising her right to free speech, even if she wrote a brief that was used in this action, unless of course she was attempting to have something published that was not factual, which is not the case.
I worry about some of the poster here trying to figure out how many fairies can dance on the head of a pin, but losing their grasp of reality. Krauthammer is right about the BDS thing.

Done!

Everybody hit refresh!

Ann in AZ @ 36

JGabriel @ 23

Ann in AZ @ 14: “Your comments would be appreciated!”

Paragraph breaks would be nice. As posted, it’s kind of unreadable.

JGabriel, thank for your comment. Actually, in the letter there are paragraph breaks, but for some reason they didn’t show up well when I copied it from Word. The only one that showed up was the last one. I also found one of my mistakes after I posted. Believe it or not, I proofed it myself about a half dozen times before I posted here, and I also did spell check and grammer check in word, but it seems after the first few times, you rarely catch your own mistakes. That’s what editors are for. Thanks again.

Ann, you might try using Notepad (if you’re in Windows) or another text editor instead of Word, and then using the Enter key twice to provide the “paragraph” break.

Since blogs are at the low end of text handling, Word tends to loose its paragraphing (and many other of its formatting whistles and bells) when copied and pasted into places like blogs.

I use a text editor (TextPad) for writing blog stuff.

ombudsman@washpost.com

executive.editor@washingtonpost.com

I really hope that the dismissed art-curator juror confesses to reading The Ombudswoman’s Apologia this past weekend. Then there’ll be some chatter about what’s jury tampering and what’s not.

TRex @
62

Done!

Everybody hit refresh!

sweet

TRex @
62

Done!

Everybody hit refresh!

Nice job! Er, anyone out there a lawyer specializing in Libel/Slander defense? :)

Oh, that one image just made it way too easy, here you go:

http://www.fdiskc.com/img/wantedTnD.jpg

NOTE TO MODS: I vote we replace the graphic up top with this fine specimen!

Too arty! /ex-juror
-

Breaking News:

Dick Cheney warns the entire world. “Do what we say or else the Persian Oil Giant gets one right between the eyes.”

-GSD

Neil at 4:20, thanks for the excellent suggestion and the link at 4:21. I would strongly urge all FDLers, who have time, to post a comment. You are welcome to cross post it here too. Beware, however, WaPo is not as user friendly as FDL, it won’t recognize quotation marks, apostrophes, commas, and parentheses, to name a few. Here’s what I commented a few days ago :

Ms. Howell, as per usual, your facts are wrong here: “Its been a disaster for the media journalists were forced to reveal anonymous sources, though most did so only after getting their sources permission.”
If you’d bother to read your own newspaper, you would know that journalists did not have to reveal their sources to the Grand Jury, either before or after getting the sources permission. Also, see page 78 of ANATOMY OF DECEIT by Marcy Wheeler. You are an ongoing disgrace to the once good name of the Washington Post and Journalism.

flounder @
28
Victoria Toensing: But let me tell you why I became quite interested in this case. About the time that this matter was evolving my husband and I were threatened with going to jail by a U.S. Attorney who abused his powers. He threatened to put us in jail if we did not testify against our own clients — he saw that issue as the same reporters’ privilege. And by the way, we won — but it took more than a year and many sleepless nights.

What the hell is Natasha talking about here? There is no, nada, nil…evidence that she ever filed any action against Fitz regarding her testimony in the Libby Trial. She and Boris were never thought to have known that Libby or other WH officials leaked anything to the media relating to Plame.

Is she now asserting that she and hubby DO have evidence relating to this?

Isn’t this a confessioj that she was personally involved in the case…and this should have been one more element to disclose to the readers of the WashPo?

Or is she just an inveterate liar? Her amicus brief was on the behalf of the MEDIA…she LOST that case! LOST IT! That’s why Judy sat in jail for two months!

If anything it seems that Vick/Natasha is a bit deranged…a paranoic with delusions of grandeur who thinks she won cases in court that either never existed or where her arguments were used by the Judges as spare toilet paper.

JGabriel @
40

Ann in AZ @
36

JGabriel @ 23

Ann in AZ @ 14: “Your comments would be appreciated!”

Paragraph breaks would be nice. As posted, it’s kind of unreadable.

JGabriel, thank for your comment. Actually, in the letter there are paragraph breaks, but for some reason they didn’t show up well when I copied it from Word. …

That explains it. Copy the text into notepad first, edit it there, then post it here.

Word will introduce a lot of invisible characters and other ‘noise’ that will get screwed up when copying it into a text editor like the one here on FDL.

Cleaning it up in a a regular text editor, like Notepad, rather than a word processing program should make it more readable for us here.

We call it ‘text laundering’.

TRex @
62

Done!
Everybody hit refresh!

Glad to be of service to the cause, use it early and often!

I have seen no evidence that anyone except the WaPoO techs read our commentary about their drivel. Lately, emails appear to have little effect as well. But, I enjoy reading the commentary, especially the wingnuttia swarm around Vickie when her piece first hit the web.

Natasha is, I believe, speaking about a completely unrelated case brought by another USAttorney, c’ape.

Jacqrat @ 67

TRex @
62

Done!

Everybody hit refresh!

Nice job! Er, anyone out there a lawyer specializing in Libel/Slander defense? :)

As a libel lawyer, there can be no problem here: fair comment after all. And truth is always a defense in any event…..

Very OT but here is a nice image of an Indian Ocean typhoon striking Madagascar today.

http://www.goes.noaa.gov/FULLDISK/GIIR.JPG

Hey,GSD
Nice comment over at Think Progress today,perhaps you’ll see ‘ol Debbie on your used paper next.
Yuk

very good Trex. but i want to see the long long teeth of victoria toensing.
like the rodent family, she has to continually gnaw on something (the truth) to keep her teeth from growing down to her boobs.

Hey DiGenova, lose the cheesy Ron Jeremy mustache.

P.S.

Your wife is fair game.

How do you like that statement thrown back at you?

-GSD

TeddySanFran @ 73

I have seen no evidence that anyone except the WaPoO techs read our commentary about their drivel. Lately, emails appear to have little effect as well. But, I enjoy reading the commentary, especially the wingnuttia swarm around Vickie when her piece first hit the web.

Well, that’s why I suggested a liberal dose of SPOTLIGHT. This feature allows the FDL commenter to add his/her comments TO the WaPoO in their brief paragraph. I’ll be the farm that the WaPoO’s competition would LOVE to read what we have to say to them!

Thanks to bdu, John Casper and TeddySanFran for their fine additions to this already-fine post.

GSD @ 80

Hey DiGenova, lose the cheesy Ron Jeremy mustache.

P.S.

Your wife is fair game.

How do you like that statement thrown back at you?

-GSD

ZING!!

So what if the juror saw the Oscars and thought with all the Al Gore love, and the awesome Ellen joke about the 2000 selection, that Juror just had to tell the judge she was tainted…

You know there is always one in a dozen crowd-

Thanks Hugh at 4:37, great photo.

You guys! I’m, like, so bummed!

Tacitus (aka Josh Trevino) has unplugged his blog and fled the TOOBZ!

TeddySanFran @ 39

Others have noted (my version of “some say“) that Victoria Toensing’s claim to have written or crafted the IIPA does not stand up, in that her employment in Detroit did not end until the Senate Committee had reported the bill out to the floor for debate. Some say she has modified her CV from its original claim of authorship of the IIPA to now read “worked to ensure passage of the IIPA.”

Since Ms. Toensing hangs most of her “Plame wasn’t covert” argument on the five-year timeline in the IIPA she alleges she wrote, I think timelines are very important in assessing her own credentials. TradMed seems not so interested in pursuing this inquiry, being so busy taking her calls while on the air and all…

If Vicki dear really had something to do with IIPA, my suspicions are that she would have been philosophically, and perhaps even practically, instrumental in its castration as a real, working law.

Somebody got to that law and ensured that it would never, ever be prosecutable because of the addition of the “intent” component.

As I (and many others read it), you can only be prosecuted under IIPA if you “intended to identify and expose covert agents”.

IANAL, but it sure sounds like a law that was “intended” to be all appearance and no substance.

If Vicki had her hands on this law as she says, the smart money would bet on exactly which words have her fingerprints!

TRex @ 19

Hey, Rocky!

Watch me pull a rabbit out of this hat!

Again?!? That trick never works!

Sophist @
50

This is off-topic, but speaks to the issue of media complicity. From Operation Falcon

Operation Falcon: Blueprint for removing dissidents and political rivals

The Bush administration has carried out three massive sweeps in the last two years, rolling up more than 30,000 minor crooks and criminals, without as much as a whimper of protest from the public.

Operation Falcon is the clearest indication yet that the Bush administration is fine-tuning its shock-troops so it can roll up tens of thousands of people at a moment’s notice and toss them into the newly-built Halliburton detention centers. This should be a red flag for anyone who cares at all about human rights, civil liberties, or simply saving his own skin.

…cont…

Without fanfare, Bush has taken control of all armed forces and militias inside and outside of the country and now has a monopoly on all the state-sanctioned tools of organized violence. It’s a coup that could never have succeeded without the tacit cooperation of the media.

Bush is now free to declare martial law in response to a natural disaster, a pandemic or a terrorist attack. The congress is powerless to stop him.

…cont…

In fact, the American Enterprise Institute, to which the Bush team is closely aligned, has already “issued proposals for the operation of Congress following a catastrophic terrorist attack”. They advocate the “APPOINTING” of individuals to the House of Representatives “to fill the seats of dead or incapacitated members, a first in American history” “The Continuity of Government Commission is self-commissioned’, its members being neither elected nor appointed by any government body and mostly made up of professional lobbyists”.

(Read the whole article: http://www.conservativeusa.org/cog-ronpaul.htm) (Coincidentally, Newsweek article “White House Rehearses for Domestic Attack” 2-23-07; “The White House is staging a high-level exercise Saturday to test responses to the prospect of a massive domestic terrorist attack.” These drills are a critical part of the C.O.G. regimen dating back to the Reagan administration)

According to the AEI’s plan, the future United States congress will be comprised of lobbyists and industry representatives. What else would one expect from an organization that believes that corporate interests should determine policy?

The whole pattern of media complicity takes a much more sinister turn than mere unethical CYA.

Please read Jane Smiley’s comments about martial law (although I think that a better term is a state of national emergency): http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..41674.html

The NewsHour is finally getting around to doing a story about the firing of US attorneys. Some dumb cluck on defending the firings, the jobs are inherently political, no disruption of cases, etc.

RF @ 83

So what if the juror saw the Oscars and thought with all the Al Gore love, and the awesome Ellen joke about the 2000 selection, that Juror just had to tell the judge she was tainted…

You know there is always one in a dozen crowd-

Any juror that is concerned enough about being tainted to speak up about seeing or reading something about the case over the weekend cannot be a stealth wingnut. It’s way too honest an act.

Deacon Blues @ 57

It’s actions like this that are killing newspapers. Circulation is going down, and people (like us) are getting their information elsewhere. While it should be obvious that speaking truth to power sells (witness Keith Olbermann), these amoral bastards can’t see the monetary forest for the ideological trees. People are begging for the truth, but the MSM isn’t delivering. They may try to compete in the “tubes”, but buying ink by the barrel doesn’t apply here; so far, they don’t do it very well — their arrogant sense of entitlement colors everything they produce. A janitor with ideas and a computer — or an ex-movie producer with a laptop — can be just as influential as these smarmy bastards. In the end, it will kill them. Hell, they’re dead already, and they don’t even know it. Here they come — dead newspapers walking!

Yes, one has to wonder if thery are serious about boosting their sagging ratings or are they simply monopolising information distribution. But similar patterns can be seen in many US business sectors. Auto mfg has been slumping for 30 years and still being whipped by Japan and Korea. Big Pharma sells pills by golfing with doctors rather making better products cheaper. Where is this efficient Free Market they keep telling me about? It doesn’t seem to be working for them.

bdu @ 47

Phoenix Woman @ 15

So yes, that means that Toensing is Natasha and DiGenova is Boris. :-) (Here’s some pics of her and her hubby, for those who feel like Photoshopping them onto the Boris-and-Natasha graphic.)

Oh, that one image just made it way too easy, here you go:

http://www.fdiskc.com/img/wantedTnD.jpg

Perfect! And I see it’s already replaced the original up top.

I read earlier that deliberations continued with the remaining 11 jurors. I’m confused. Will another juror be selected to replace the one that was fired? Or does that not happen once deliberations start? And can this be used later for mistrial?

jim @
76

Jacqrat @ 67

TRex @
62

Done!

Everybody hit refresh!

Nice job! Er, anyone out there a lawyer specializing in Libel/Slander defense? :)

As a libel lawyer, there can be no problem here: fair comment after all. And truth is always a defense in any event…..

Interesting, does it work the other way? Can a newspaper be charged with printing as news statements which they know or should know are false?

GSD @ 80

Hey DiGenova, lose the cheesy Ron Jeremy mustache.

P.S.

Your wife is fair game.

How do you like that statement thrown back at you?

-GSD

Heh!

Quick (I hope) GeekQ: I often see “beware the Zig” but I can’t grok why. Since it’s just HTML I wonder, can it put extra load on the servers? (HTML is executed in the browser, no?) Or do zigs cause more need for moderation? Education pls.

I have been advised that Olbermann will do a special comment tonight. If so; yum.

Hugh @ 88

The NewsHour is finally getting around to doing a story about the firing of US attorneys. Some dumb cluck on defending the firings, the jobs are inherently political, no disruption of cases, etc.

The dumb cluck defending the firings earlier today on SitRoom was diGenova, although he did say that DoJ should not have mentioned performance issues since they had complete right-to-fire without them.

Ii’s all about framing. Check out how Political Wire spins these numbers:

Clinton, Giuliani Continue to Lead
A new national Zogby telephone poll finds Sen. Hillary Clinton leading the 2008 Democratic presidential race with 33% support, followed by Sen. Barack Obama at 25% and John Edwards at 12%.

On the Republican side, Rudy Giuliani gets 29% support with Sen. John McCain at 20%.

Key general election match ups:

* Giuliani 47%, Clinton 40%
* McCain 47%, Clinton 39%
* Obama 46%, Giuliani 40%
* Obama 44%, McCain 40%
* Giuliani 46%, Edwards 40%
* McCain 47%, Edwards 38%

-GSD

Clinton is leading only she isn’t when matched up against Republicans. Obama is leading but not in the generic Democratic Party match-up.

GSD @ 80

Hey DiGenova, lose the cheesy Ron Jeremy mustache.

P.S.

Your wife is fair game.

How do you like that statement thrown back at you?

-GSD

“Your wife is fair game”. That could be scary. Depending on the context, naturally.

Isn’t the really big issue about the firings that the “replacements” aren’t getting approved by Congress? (I don’t mean to imply that the firings themselves aren’t serious.)

TeddySanFran @
64

ombudsman@washpost.com

executive.editor@washingtonpost.com

I really hope that the dismissed art-curator juror confesses to reading The Ombudswoman’s Apologia this past weekend. Then there’ll be some chatter about what’s jury tampering and what’s not.

Christy or looseheadprop – would 18 USC 1504 apply in the set of circumstances that Teddy mentioned?

Whoever attempts to influence the action or decision of any grand or petit juror of any court of the United States upon any issue or matter pending before such juror, or before the jury of which he is a member, or pertaining to his duties, by writing or sending to him any written communication, in relation to such issue or matter, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.

Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the communication of a request to appear before the grand jury.

Toensing is more like “fairly gamey”.

-GSD

Gore/Clark.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 92

I read earlier that deliberations continued with the remaining 11 jurors. I’m confused. Will another juror be selected to replace the one that was fired? Or does that not happen once deliberations start? And can this be used later for mistrial?

No, no, and no.

Badwater @ 89

RF @ 83

So what if the juror saw the Oscars and thought with all the Al Gore love, and the awesome Ellen joke about the 2000 selection, that Juror just had to tell the judge she was tainted…

You know there is always one in a dozen crowd-

Any juror that is concerned enough about being tainted to speak up about seeing or reading something about the case over the weekend cannot be a stealth wingnut. It’s way too honest an act.

My guess — and aren’t we all guessing? — is that the juror start to bolster some argument with illogic from Deborah Howell and her compatriots stopped her immediately, asking “Where did you get that?” or “How do you know that?” It’s not clear whether the art-curator confessed or whether her peers went to the judge.

I am partial to this argument, since it happened to a jury I served on long ago over a weekend, resulting in the juror’s dismissal. (Not the Deborah Howell part; I added that for spite….)

cinnamonape @ 70

…What the hell is Natasha talking about here? There is no, nada, nil…evidence that she ever filed any action against Fitz regarding her testimony in the Libby Trial.

I don’t think Natasha was referring to the Libby Trial, but instead was referring to some other case where she was a Defense attorney and the Federal government was dueling with her.

Suzanne Somers living up to her reputation as a dolt by saying she really likes Newt Gingrich as presidential material.

-GSD

John Casper @ 100

Isn’t the really big issue about the firings that the “replacements” aren’t getting approved by Congress? (I don’t mean to imply that the firings themselves aren’t serious.)

Yup. Previously, vacancies were filled by judge-panels in the districts, but the Patriot Act changed that, letting the AG appoint interim USATs not needing confirmation and with indefinite terms.

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 105

Oklahoma kiddo @ 92

I read earlier that deliberations continued with the remaining 11 jurors. I’m confused. Will another juror be selected to replace the one that was fired? Or does that not happen once deliberations start? And can this be used later for mistrial?

No, no, and no.

LOL!
This has been another episode of short answers to confused questions.

Special comment by Olbermann is on Condi. Rice has gone bonkers on history.

GSD #98

I am deeply skeptical of these polls. I often wonder where Clinton gets all her support when she is so strongly disliked by so many. I would like to know what groups in the electorate support her, how informed they are, and if this support is for her or just in opposition to someone else.

Yes that was pretty darn funny. Wasn’t it.

TeddySanFran @ 108

John Casper @ 100

Isn’t the really big issue about the firings that the “replacements” aren’t getting approved by Congress? (I don’t mean to imply that the firings themselves aren’t serious.)

Yup. Previously, vacancies were filled by judge-panels in the districts, but the Patriot Act changed that, letting the AG appoint interim USATs not needing confirmation and with indefinite terms.

And wasn’t that Arlen Specter or someone from his office that slipped that language in?

Dan Froomkin and a few colleagues excepted, the WaPo has skidded sharply right since its Woodward & Bernstein heyday.

I think this is overt on its OpEd page, covert in its hiring of reporters, headlines, and editing, and more surreptitiously in having an Ombudsman who purports to represent the interests of readers. That latter would be true in a Jesuitical sense, since I’m sure Karl Rove and Dick Cheney could be considered readers. Whether they are the readers most readers imagine, is another thing entirely.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 113

Yes that was pretty darn funny. Wasn’t it.

Sorry. Not really trying to make fun.

It just struck me as funny for the answer being so cryptic.

S.O.S. in MA @ 96

Quick (I hope) GeekQ: I often see “beware the Zig” but I can’t grok why. Since it’s just HTML I wonder, can it put extra load on the servers? (HTML is executed in the browser, no?) Or do zigs cause more need for moderation? Education pls.

It blows the margins here. If you have too many nested blockquotes, then you have to scroll to the right to read all of the comments.

That scroll bar you see over on the right-hand side of your web page? You’d have another one at the bottom of the web page for scrolling over to the right.

FWIW, Olbermann is all over Bush for supplying Sunnis (connected to Al-queda) to fight the Shia in Iraq.

Mad Dogs at 5:08 pm

Bullseye. I have seen it many times.

What is the conflict? Victoria Toensing, an expert on the law that she helped craft, wrote an Op-Ed. An opinion piece setting forth her point of view.

Separately, she played a limited role in WaPo’s legal team, by supporting the argument that no crime had ever been committed in the underlying premise of the Fitxgerald investigation. Neither role was concealed, neither role was inconsistent. It would be like saying that Floyd Abrams could never write an Op-Ed for the NYT.

Why are Victoria Toensing and WaPo the perpetrators of a “conflict” when Linda Greenhouse, the committed liberal who “reports” on the Supreme Court for the NYT, gives a speech in which she asserts that the Court has become a kind of haven for facsist thinking? The Linda Greenhouse case is much worse inasmuch as she issuppoed to be providing “reporting” on the subject and not Op-Ed pieces.

Here’s a timely program about how our wounded soldiers are treated.

“The TV Watch: ‘To Iraq and Back’
ABC’s Bob Woodruff has recovered after a brain injury.”

The program and Woodruff are not funny.

But the following is to me: When I first read the headline I read it as “Bob Woodward” and I thought that this explains Woodward’s conduct. But it’s obvious that Woodward has not recovered.

There was mentions of threats of libel suits posted above. I just wanted to clarify something I found out earlier today online:

Federal Court Reaffirms Immunity of Bloggers from Suits Brought Against Commenters

This is breaking news – Just came out today.

Oh, goodness, Elephant Man, you came to the wrong party.

Who wants to go first?

John Casper @ 117

FWIW, Olbermann is all over Bush for supplying Sunnis (connected to Al-queda) to fight the Shia in Iraq.

This reminds me of the support for the mujahideen in Afghanistan. I remember some saying at the time that it would come back to bite us. It was hell on the Soviets but led not only to the formation of al Qaeda but radicalization in many Moslem countries as those who had fought in Afghanistan (referred to as Afghanis) returned home bringing jihadist ideas with them.

The person who met me at the airport my very first trip to Russia, 16 hours of travel, ridiculous fatigue, said these words: “Hi, I’m Natasha. Boris couldn’t make it.”

So I decided I was living in a cartoon and just went from there. Rocky and Bullwinkle, that’s where I learned my Russian accent.

I have been away from this party for 4 hours, did Jane ever get her wallet back?

AZ Matt @ 126

I have been away from this party for 4 hours, did Jane ever get her wallet back?

Yes, and her phone.

Elephantman at 5:10 pm

“What is the conflict?”

Did you read her op-ed?

Have you listened to Scooter’s GJ testimony?

She “set forth” obvious falsehoods.

Scooter said Cheney told him that he had Bush’s permission to out Plame. The problem is no one followed the declassification process, because Bob Novak and the Chicago Sun Times aren’t part of it.

You’re welcome to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

Victoria is trying to drum up new business for her law firm. If she tampers with a jury, she doesn’t care. Victoria doesn’t like perjury and obstruction when it concerns consensual sex, but it’s ok with her, when it enables Bush to invade and occupy a foreign country, get 3,000 soldiers killed for no reason, destabilize a region, all for the bargain basement price of $267,000,000 per day.

Pectopah @ 51

dab_from_CT @ 30

I find it absolutely fascinating how hard some factions of the media are trying to pretend that what Cheney/Libby/Rove et al did, wasn’t wrong. They refuse to own up to the fact that they were cynically played.

Is there a Media Version of Stockholm Syndrome? Is it called Beltway Syndrome?

It’s called Potomac Fever. Leads to delusional thinking.

Elephantman #119

It’s about truth in advertising. There is a difference between a point of view and having an undisclosed legal and/or business relationship.

*xyz @ 127

AZ Matt @ 126

I have been away from this party for 4 hours, did Jane ever get her wallet back?

Yes, and her phone.

That is good to hear, thanks!

TRex @ 122

Oh, goodness, Elephant Man, you came to the wrong party.

Who wants to go first?

The mods may not thank you ;)

flounder @ 28

I happened to ask Toensing about any conflict of interest in her WaPo chat….

Fan mail from some flounder?
[Rocky and Bullwinkle]

Some more Snow sarcasm?

Asked in a press briefing Monday what he thought about Al Gore’s documentary film, “An Inconvenient Truth,” winning an Oscar, Snow said, “I’m happy for him,” and mused, “It’s good to have a second career.”

Hi VG!

I love ‘dis place.

I think I just saw a strawman go tumbling by.

Re: Hugh @ 112,

The posters on the myspace political forums once had a fun little game – 10 or 20 of the Democrat hotshot presidential contenders were all stacked, started with 10 points each, and posters gave plus 1 and minus 1 point every time they voted – So they removed the contenders who sucked, and bumped up their favorites.

Needless to say, Kerry, Clinton, Lieberman, Biden, etc were the first to go. The ones that lingered on the boards the longest were Obama, Feingold, and Gore.

Just wanted to bring it up – Myspace is a pretty random group of people, and to see Clinton get buried so damn quick was something everyone seemed to agree about – Republicans or Democrats alike. I too, have trouble with polls where Clinton seems to dominate, when my personal experience shows either the opposite of that, or a sort of hopeless backing of Clinton.

egregious @ 129

Pectopah @ 51

Is there a Media Version of Stockholm Syndrome? Is it called Beltway Syndrome?

It’s called Potomac Fever. Leads to delusional thinking.

You know, I think there is an element here that this Media actually enjoyed about its captivity. It didn’t have to check sources, listen to editors, it just got to play video games and have fun all day.

deleted by author

Bustednuckles @ 134

Hi VG!

I love ‘dis place.

I think I just saw a strawman go tumbling by.

didya now? I have to say that my tinfoil hat has been flying in and out of the cupboard all day long, apparently with a mind of its own.

GSD @
80

Hey DiGenova, lose the cheesy Ron Jeremy mustache.

P.S.

Your wife is fair game.

How do you like that statement thrown back at you?

-GSD

I was just going to say he looks like a 70’s porno star…wacka wacka

My favorite all time cartoon is “Crusader Rabbit”.

In 1948, Jay Ward (of Rocky and Bullwinkle fame) teamed with animator Alex Anderson and sold NBC-TV a series of cartoons featuring Crusader, a crusading rabbit, and Ragland T. Tiger, his sidekick. FYI only…

Hugh @ 130

Elephantman #119

It’s about truth in advertising. There is a difference between a point of view and having an undisclosed legal and/or business relationship.

Whenever you read an “opinion” piece it’s really important to have an understanding of where the author is coming from. Particularly with political commentary. That’s why there is always a short synopsis of a person’s position and/or background included with each piece. It was completely dishonest for the Post not to include information that would inform the readers what Toensing’s investment was in the subject matter.

Phoenix Woman @
87

TRex @ 19

Hey, Rocky!

Watch me pull a rabbit out of this hat!

Again?!? That trick never works!

‘OK…Watch me pull a dick out of my hat, then.’

;>)

‘OK…Watch me pull a dick out of my hat, then.’

Finally!
We know where the “Undisclosed Location” is!

AZ Matt @ 126

I have been away from this party for 4 hours, did Jane ever get her wallet back?

Yup, all’s well. A nice lady gave her back her wallet and cell phone, the power went back on, Marcy’s filigh arrived at 11pm and Pat is returning Jane’s glasses. And the jury will come back tomorrow and Marcy will be there for the verdict.

What about Swopa’s jacket vest?

Hugh @ 20

OT ….

In today’s Times, there is an article entitled “U.S. Says Raid in Iraq Supports Claim on Iran” by James Glanz and Richard Oppel with Michael Gordon and Scott Shane contributing.
…..
Now to be fair to the authors some of this is addressed in their opening paragraph.

A raid on a Shiite weapons cache in the southern city of Hilla one week ago is providing what American officials call the best evidence yet that the deadliest roadside bombs in Iraq are manufactured in Iran, but critics contend that the forensic case remains circumstantial and inferential.

…………
…………
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/26/world/ middleeast/26weapons.html?_r=1&hp&oref=s login

The photos that are shown, just like the previous photos of “discovered weapons manufactured in Iran”, clearly show the weapons are marked in English. The manuals shown are also written in English. How can anyone possibly believe an Iranian company would only use English on their products. Absurd. It would be much easier to argue that the weapons were made in Alabama by Sessions Inc. and distributed by the Lieberman Trucking Co. of Crawford Texas. At least for the Iraq “discoveries” and “intelligence” they were sufficiently plausible that some were foolish enough to believe it. This time, no one should be suckered. Just a little due diligence and you would never fall for the B.S. that emanates from this administration. Please contact your Senators and Congressional Reps. and inform them of this “perspective”. Before you do contact them, please write your comments more clearly than mine.

P.S. I fantasize that one day I might be able to write like Christy.

From previous thread and logorrhea @41
I thought I read somewhere (here at FDL maybe) that Walton is tough at sentencing. Not sure if I have this right.

You might have heard that from me. IANAL, but I was watching Newshour last Friday and Ray Suarez was interviewing Carol Leonnig and when Suarez asked what sort of sentence would be expected in the case of a conviction, Leonnig said that while Walton was considered to be a clear, no bones about it judge, he was also known by the defense bar as somewhat of a long ball hitter…in that he attaches long penalties.
(this is from my memory, so I might have placed a word or two wrong here)
I then asked if any lawyers could substantiate what Leonnig said, but I never saw a reply. I would still be curious to know if anyone else knows anything about Walton’s sentencing reputation.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 141

My favorite all time cartoon is “Crusader Rabbit”.

I loved Crusader Rabbit. Boy, that’s a blast from the past.

And what exactly does this have to do with Britney? :) Besides that, the NY Times sucks. More than the Washington Post? I dunno…

BTW Arianna Huffington has a nice piece about the Murtha plan and misrepresentation of it in the media. Murtha had been criticized for announcing his plan on the partisan MoveOn.org. It appears that wasn’t true. The media was too eager to, ahm you know, check its facts.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..42158.html

Separately, she played a limited role in WaPo’s legal team, by supporting the argument that no crime had ever been committed in the underlying premise of the Fitxgerald investigation.

Elephantman, so far at least, the WaPo hasn’t “supported the argument” that the earth is flat. The CIA requested the investigation and the DoJ complied. If you’ve got an argument, make it to them. Victoria says she doesn’t “know” that Plame was covert. I guess as long as she refuses to look at the flat forehead obvious evidence, such as in the transcript of the Scooter trial, she can remain ignorant. Kathie Martin, Marc Grossman, Craig Schmall, Bob Grenier, David Addington, all thought her identify was classified. Victoria, however, doesn’t “know,” this.

The “underlying” crime, however, is the occupation of Iraq.

Bustednuckles @ 146

What about Swopa’s jacket vest?

Was that the poodles’ chew toy?

HotFlash @ 145

AZ Matt @ 126

I have been away from this party for 4 hours, did Jane ever get her wallet back?

Yup, all’s well. A nice lady gave her back her wallet and cell phone, the power went back on, Marcy’s filigh arrived at 11pm and Pat is returning Jane’s glasses. And the jury will come back tomorrow and Marcy will be there for the verdict.

Great news, thankyou.

I just loved Rocky and Bullwinkle, even more as I got older. I miss the Fractured Fairy Tales the most. Elephant man tried, but it just wasn’t the same.

One day, a million or so years hence, the spear-using chimps will look upon this time and marvel. The rot in our institutions is so pervasive that it’s only our ignorance that holds them up.

Elephantman @
120

What is the conflict? Victoria Toensing, an expert on the law that she helped craft, wrote an Op-Ed. An opinion piece setting forth her point of view.

Separately, she played a limited role in WaPo’s legal team, by supporting the argument that no crime had ever been committed in the underlying premise of the Fitxgerald investigation. Neither role was concealed, neither role was inconsistent. It would be like saying that Floyd Abrams could never write an Op-Ed for the NYT.

Why are Victoria Toensing and WaPo the perpetrators of a “conflict” when Linda Greenhouse, the committed liberal who “reports” on the Supreme Court for the NYT, gives a speech in which she asserts that the Court has become a kind of haven for facsist thinking? The Linda Greenhouse case is much worse inasmuch as she issuppoed to be providing “reporting” on the subject and not Op-Ed pieces.

Elephantman, I’d advise you to do a little research (you know–so you might learn some FACTS) about the role Toensing played in teh friend of the court brief (and the WaPo’s role in it, and so on). BC you clearly don’t know WTF you’re talking about at this point.

When you’ve done that, please come back and we’ll have some fun, ‘kay?

Oklahoma kiddo @
134

Some more Snow sarcasm?

Asked in a press briefing Monday what he thought about Al Gore’s documentary film, “An Inconvenient Truth,” winning an Oscar, Snow said, “I’m happy for him,” and mused, “It’s good to have a second career.”

Probably envy ;)

Also, if you want to read what Judge Walton said re 11 jurors, it’s here , and there is much discussion both learned and not, scattered in the tread below. At one time ther were three live threads so a lot of stuff got asked and answered multiple times.

Good gravy. Snow’s finally cleaned off the driveway, but the bullsh*t keeps rolling in the door. I see we’ve had yet another visit from a “minder”.

That’s the third entity today. Wonder if they are all sockpuppets or unique individuals.

But it is rather amazing how they cannot see problems they would otherwise see if the parties were reversed.

Let’s say a Democratic operative who’d worked as a staffer on key Democratic legislation in decades past, who’d also worked as a “key policy advisor” for the current administration, just happened to write a fallacious op-ed against the prosecution for the local paper in whose home distribution area there was a trial against a Democratic senior administration official. And said Democratic operative, an attorney by education if not by current practice, just happened to sit at the defense’s table within hours of said op-ed being published.

I cannot imagine for a second that the Wurlitzer would not go absolutely batsh*t crazy and rain down a sh*tstorm on the theoretical Democratic opposition, or the paper of record for its unethical behavior.

Can you?

Nicole Bell over at C&L has this from the Daily Telegraph:

Telegraph.co.uk:

It may sound like a resource for fans of jam but Conservapedia is an attempt to redress the supposed liberal bias in Wikipedia. Not content with having their own news channel, America’s conservatives want their own facts too. Soon they’ll be breaking off and forming their own country.

Among the criticisms the founders of Conservapedia make of their better-known rival are its use of BCE/CE for dates instead of BC/AD and the fact that it sometimes uses British rather than American spellings.

I think anytime Trex runs short of ideas of things to shred, this will be the perfect source, one nice, central repository of wingnuttery for all to laugh at!

What happened to DON’T FEED THE TROLLS?

Rayne @ 159

Good gravy. Snow’s finally cleaned off the driveway, but the bullsh*t keeps rolling in the door. I see we’ve had yet another visit from a “minder”.

That’s the third entity today. Wonder if they are all sockpuppets or unique individuals.

But it is rather amazing how they cannot see problems they would otherwise see if the parties were reversed.

Let’s say a Democratic operative who’d worked as a staffer on key Democratic legislation in decades past, who’d also worked as a “key policy advisor” for the current administration, just happened to write a fallacious op-ed against the prosecution for the local paper in whose home distribution area there was a trial against a Democratic senior administration official. And said Democratic operative, an attorney by education if not by current practice, just happened to sit at the defense’s table within hours of said op-ed being published.

I cannot imagine for a second that the Wurlitzer would not go absolutely batsh*t crazy and rain down a sh*tstorm on the theoretical Democratic opposition, or the paper of record for its unethical behavior.

Can you?

I want that looking glass of yours, Rayne!

Ann in Az wrote a letter to Bob Scieffer that she posted in #14. She requested – “Your comments would be appreciated”. JGabriel in #23 and Mad Dog at #64 gave some editorial aid but I have not yet seen any response to the substance of the letter. Ann – I think your letter is well posed. Your combination of praise for his past work along with your current criticism is a very nice double edged sword, from my point of view.

Let us know if you get anything better than a form letter type of response.

emptywheel!! You waiting to board?

HotFlash @ 145

AZ Matt @ 126

I have been away from this party for 4 hours, did Jane ever get her wallet back?

Yup, all’s well. A nice lady gave her back her wallet and cell phone, the power went back on, Marcy’s filigh arrived at 11pm and Pat is returning Jane’s glasses. And the jury will come back tomorrow and Marcy will be there for the verdict.

good news bad news on my front: I was able to switch my flight from the Dulles to the National Flight.

But then I discovered the National flight was over an hour delayed.

Good news bad news. I get to sit in a bar, rather than a cab. I get into Plame house later.

But I’ll make it for the verdict. Soon as I walk in, the jurors are sure to say, “okay, finally, we can finish this thing. Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty”

darkblack @
143

‘OK…Watch me pull a dick out of my hat, then.’

;>)

db, what a DICK!

Oklahoma kiddo @
141

My favorite all time cartoon is “Crusader Rabbit”.

In 1948, Jay Ward (of Rocky and Bullwinkle fame) teamed with animator Alex Anderson and sold NBC-TV a series of cartoons featuring Crusader, a crusading rabbit, and Ragland T. Tiger, his sidekick. FYI only…

You, Siun and hpschd (Mr HotFlash) are the FDL Crusader Rabbit fanclub. I have never seen this rabbit, but I am fond of Usagi Yojimbo. Do you suppose they are related?

emptywheel @ 165

Heh. Enjoy your enforced beer-thirty!!

Thanks Marcy for being here. For Jane and for us and for the nation.

It matters.

Good luck Marcy.

I’m hoping for the verdict in the AM.
Although this extended Fitzmas party is pretty good, IMO.

See you all tomorrow.

emptywheel @ 165

HotFlash @ 145

AZ Matt @ 126

I have been away from this party for 4 hours, did Jane ever get her wallet back?

Yup, all’s well. A nice lady gave her back her wallet and cell phone, the power went back on, Marcy’s filigh arrived at 11pm and Pat is returning Jane’s glasses. And the jury will come back tomorrow and Marcy will be there for the verdict.

good news bad news on my front: I was able to switch my flight from the Dulles to the National Flight.

But then I discovered the National flight was over an hour delayed.

Good news bad news. I get to sit in a bar, rather than a cab. I get into Plame house later.

But I’ll make it for the verdict. Soon as I walk in, the jurors are sure to say, “okay, finally, we can finish this thing. Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty”

Universe unfoldin’ as it should. Campai!

Rayne @ 168

emptywheel @ 165

Heh. Enjoy your enforced beer-thirty!!

Ouch. Twist my arm. OWWWWW!

Okay. Pity there’s not better beer here. I’d rather be drinking the homebrew that that nice FDL reader brought us!

I’m very busy in meetings tomorrow. I hope the jury stays out for another day.

running and hiding for my life. . .!

egregious @ 169

Thanks Marcy for being here. For Jane and for us and for the nation.

It matters.

PS: Thanks for being such a nice, tough, facts-on-straight RUGBY playing, leather jacket-wearing source of TRUTH for our side, too.

All in all, swapping cab time for bar time doesn’t seem so bad — and I notice that you’ve adopted the blue locals’ habit of calling National Airport by its pre-Just-Say-No name. I approve, emptywheel!

Pachacutec @ 173

I’m very busy in meetings tomorrow. I hope the jury stays out for another day.

running and hiding for my life. . .!

What time are your meetings? Maybe we can arrange it so you can come in in time for Fitz’ statement from in front of Prettyman…

HotFlash @ 167

Oklahoma kiddo @
141

My favorite all time cartoon is “Crusader Rabbit”.

In 1948, Jay Ward (of Rocky and Bullwinkle fame) teamed with animator Alex Anderson and sold NBC-TV a series of cartoons featuring Crusader, a crusading rabbit, and Ragland T. Tiger, his sidekick. FYI only…

You, Siun and hpschd (Mr HotFlash) are the FDL Crusader Rabbit fanclub. I have never seen this rabbit, but I am fond of Usagi Yojimbo. Do you suppose they are related?

;0) ;0)

I’m trying to convince my husband we ought to drive down.

Olbermann… roasting Rice.

TeddySanFran @ 175

All in all, swapping cab time for bar time doesn’t seem so bad — and I notice that you’ve adopted the blue locals’ habit of calling National Airport by its pre-Just-Say-No name. I approve, emptywheel!

I studied Peters Stalin Lenin Kruschev Gorbachev Eastern Europe long enough to know better than to endorse that kind of pop hagiography.

Know what I mean, egregious?

emptywheel @ 176

Pachacutec @ 173

I’m very busy in meetings tomorrow. I hope the jury stays out for another day.

running and hiding for my life. . .!

What time are your meetings? Maybe we can arrange it so you can come in in time for Fitz’ statement from in front of Prettyman…

I’m in Gaithersberg until at least 1:30 PM.

Jacqrat @ 174

egregious @ 169

Thanks Marcy for being here. For Jane and for us and for the nation.

It matters.

PS: Thanks for being such a nice, tough, facts-on-straight RUGBY playing, SWOPAleather jacket-wearing source of TRUTH for our side, too.

dab_from_CT @ 149

Oklahoma kiddo @ 141

My favorite all time cartoon is “Crusader Rabbit”.

I loved Crusader Rabbit. Boy, that’s a blast from the past.

;0)!

rocket scientist @ 163

Ann in Az wrote a letter to Bob Scieffer that she posted in #14. She requested – “Your comments would be appreciated”. JGabriel in #23 and Mad Dog at #64 gave some editorial aid but I have not yet seen any response to the substance of the letter. Ann – I think your letter is well posed. Your combination of praise for his past work along with your current criticism is a very nice double edged sword, from my point of view.
Let us know if you get anything better than a form letter type of response.

Thanks rocket scientist for reminding me that I too wanted to respond to Ann in AZ.
Ann, I also wanted to tell you that I thought your letter was very well written—impressive, even. I do agree with those who commented that it might be a bit long—only because it is doubtful that Schiffer and Co. will read all of it, but I thought you did a great job at developing your ideas and expressing yourself. Thanks for sharing.

Pachacutec @ 181

emptywheel @ 176

Pachacutec @ 173

I’m very busy in meetings tomorrow. I hope the jury stays out for another day.

running and hiding for my life. . .!

What time are your meetings? Maybe we can arrange it so you can come in in time for Fitz’ statement from in front of Prettyman…

I’m in Gaithersberg until at least 1:30 PM.

Oh, easy. I’ll tell the jurors to start filling in the forms just after lunch. That might get you time to get into the courtroom, even! But certainly for Fitz’ rare presser.

Olbermann on Rice. Whew!

Olberman preparing genmaicha, from the smell of it.

Ha! Scarborough’s face looked like he just choked on a lemon.

KO on Rice;”use the Google”
a classic smackdown

Funniest KO rant yet.

emptywheel @ 180

TeddySanFran @ 175

All in all, swapping cab time for bar time doesn’t seem so bad — and I notice that you’ve adopted the blue locals’ habit of calling National Airport by its pre-Just-Say-No name. I approve, emptywheel!

I studied Peters Stalin Lenin Kruschev Gorbachev Eastern Europe long enough to know better than to endorse that kind of pop hagiography.

Know what I mean, egregious?

And now we do the samething with naming rights for sports stadiums, just like the soviets did for city names. Funny how tax dollars are usually used to build a stadium, then a corporation gets to name it.

Just like tax dollars are used to build highways and airports only to be named after sitting congressmen.

There is a reason you have to be dead to be on money or stamps.

emptywheel: Know what I mean, egregious?

Da.

Thanks for Special Comment may be directed to:
dabrams@msnbc.com
kolbermann@msnbc.com
countdown@msnbc.com

Joke Line on Scarborough now — where’s my remote??

Not Joe Klien!My eyes!Arrrgh!

Tell you what. If I need to pay attention, text message me. Interrupt me. Fair enough, love?

EW, you have ground transportation? Your flight seems late, late, late and metro closes at midnight.

Sometimes? Many times? Most times? Perhaps all times. I really don’t care for Klein.

Pat_AlexVA @ 196

EW, you have ground transportation? Your flight seems late, late, late and metro closes at midnight.

Um, what do you mean? I was planning on a cab. Those run past midnight, right?

Buchanan is being Buchanan too. Mute.

new thread folks!

everyone I know calls it “National”. ;)

Oklahoma kiddo @ 179

Olbermann… roasting Rice.

Sure he isn’t frying Rice or maybe steaming Rice?

new thread

EW – I could pick you up at dca & drive to adams; it would save waiting in the cab queue. marybeth

Taxi should be fine… Seems like you might be on last flight. (I’ve never closed DCA). If you have any trouble, call.

TeddySanFran @ 193

Thanks for Special Comment may be directed to:
dabrams@msnbc.com
kolbermann@msnbc.com
countdown@msnbc.com

Joke Line on Scarborough now — where’s my remote??

Done. To KO with cc: to Abrams. ;0)

AZ Matt @ 202

Oklahoma kiddo @ 179

Olbermann… roasting Rice.

Sure he isn’t frying Rice or maybe steaming Rice?

;0)!!!

WaPo media critic Howie Kurtz chatz at Noon Eastern tomorrow. Questions may be submitted anytime….

Valley Girl @
201

everyone I know calls it “National”. ;)

Same here. Nobody in DC uses the R-word to refer to it.

posaune @
204

EW – I could pick you up at dca & drive to adams; it would save waiting in the cab queue. marybeth

Wow, thanks.

Since it’s just a short cab ride, it’s probably easiest if I just do the cab. Don’t want to get anyone out in the middle of the night, you know.

Thanks, though.

JGabriel @
23

Ann in AZ @ 14: “Your comments would be appreciated!”

Paragraph breaks would be nice. As posted, it’s kind of unreadable.

I agree – I simply can’t and don’t read long posts with no paragraphs. I don’t allow them in my students’ papers or theses- for the same reason – that they are not reader-friendly.

Does anybody besides me remember the late Fred Friendly. He worked with Murrow, ended up helping to build PBS. In any event, he used to do a roundtable series on PBS about the press and ethics. His thought, contrary to Howard Kurtz, was you have a right to print anything you want to, but questioned, is it always right to print it? During roundtable discussions he set up scenarios, eliciting answers from his panel about how far they would go to publish a story. As he moved along, the story would gain more and more nuance to see when the various panel member’s ethics kicked in. Don’t laugh, Geraldo Rivera was actally on one of those panels.

Fred Friendly was also way ahead of the curve recognizing that TV news was much more concerned about making money, than informing the public. This man was a giant in the news industry, he also taught journalism and ethics at Columbia. If anyone is interested in how it used to be, how it should be, I suggest you google Fred Friendly.

Pachacutec @ 196

Tell you what. If I need to pay attention, text message me. Interrupt me. Fair enough, love?

EW, LISTEN. In more ways than one.

MSM wants a Republican prez in ‘08. but, if the best they can do is a Conservative “Goldwater girl” like Hillary, then they’ll settle for that.

So, despite what people say about Hillary you can expect the press to call her the front-runner.

I remember Fred Friendly. I did not know of the connection to Murrow, though. Doesn’t surprise me. He was wonderful. I miss him. Not too many could compare to him now. Maybe Bill Moyers.

Mad Dogs @ 117

…It blows the margins here. … You’d have another one at the bottom of the web page for scrolling over to the right.

Funny; I’ve seem lots of superthin squooshed-at-the-top-of-Zigs text, but nary a horiz scrollbar I can remember. Maybe because I use latest FireFox/MacOSX (??). But at any rate, thx for the info, Mad Dogs. Zigs certainly don’t help the look of things hereabouts… :)

TeddySanFran @ 175

All in all, swapping cab time for bar time doesn’t seem so bad — and I notice that you’ve adopted the blue locals’ habit of calling National Airport by its pre-Just-Say-No name. I approve, emptywheel!

I had a prof in college (Texas A&M University) who referred to “Jersey Ave.” but which we students knew only as “George [H. W.] Bush Parkway.”

And here in Dallas, I’ve seen an uptick lately in the use of “State Highway [161]” rather than “President George W. Bush Tollway.” There might just be hope for us Texans after all.

Elephantman @ 120

What is the conflict?… Linda Greenhouse …

Couldn’t disagree more, Elephantman. Best way of capsulizing my response would be “You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.”

Phoenix Woman @ 209

Valley Girl @
201

everyone I know calls it “National”. ;)

Same here. Nobody in DC uses the R-word to refer to it.

Anyone’s who questions why you don’t refer to it as RR National Airport you tell them:

“…Its true name is Washington National Airport. It is properly named after the FIRST President of the United States.”

*xyz @
127

AZ Matt @ 126

I have been away from this party for 4 hours, did Jane ever get her wallet back?

Yes, and her phone.

Woo-hoo!! Can I gedda “Fitz!?”

In a similar sin of omission, WaPo’s “Think Tank Town” published a piece by Gio Batta Gori called “The Bogus ‘Science’ of Secondhand Smoke.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01158.html

WaPo’s bio of Gori at the end of the piece neglected to mention Gori’s extensive work for tobacco companies, instead reaching back 30 years to cite to his work at the National Cancer Institute. Thus, the bio made Gori appear, to the casual observer, virtually above bias, with no conflict of interest worth mentioning.

Almost immediately, commenters took WaPo to task for this flagrant failure to properly inform its readers.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..7012901158

Gori’s tobacco work is common knowledge; the best precis is at SourceWatch.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/ind…..Batta_Gori

It’s a month later now, and WaPo has refused to clarify the bio.