Slow on the draw. Well, I never intended this to be a rapid-response blog: but it's kind of a pisser that I've had so much job-related work to do today, so little time to get in on the whole Richard Clarke extravaganza. Then again, with Billmon and Josh Marshall on the case, my little bloggy half-acre is pretty much put to shame, anyway. The particular news in Times-land is the assignment of neo-con blowup doll Judith Miller to write the paper's first, entirely buried (A19!) report on Clarke's accusations. I'm assuming anybody who makes it here has already been there, but just in case, and for the record, Billmon dissects Miller's piece in this post (scroll down, the Whiskey Bar always has great comments activity), and Josh Marshall says just about everything I would have said (dammit!) here. (By all means follow Josh's link to Slate, a piece I missed in its first appearance, where Jack Shafer takes Miller apart for her avoidance of the issue in the aftermath of her tendentious and almost entirely false reporting on the subject of Iraqi WMDs.)

Actually, one thing Josh Marshall doesn't say that I will, even though it may be obvious. Giving Judy Miller first crack at the Clarke story, and burying it back by the obits (strange feeling of déjà vu writing that): doesn't take a degree in Kremlinology to know that the Times is sending a message, and that the primary intended recipients of that message are Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie. This is more than just prophylaxis; it's all but a pledge of fealty. We'll have to report on this, says the Times, but we're not going to do anything to try to take you guys down. It's the kid-glove treatment the whole way with this one.

posted by michael  2:49:06 PM  
tell me about it []