What is Happening to the NY Times? Not One Single Word About McClellen's Bush Bombshell

[babylonsister]

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28872

What is Happening to the NY Times? Not One Single Word About McClellen's Bush Bombshell
Submitted by davidswanson on Wed, 2007-11-21 16:43. Media

By Ostroy Report

snip//

"I stood at the White House briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the senior-most aides in the White House: Karl Rove and Scooter Libby," McClellan wrote. "There was one problem. It was not true. I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice president, the president's chief of staff and the president himself." At the time, the chief of staff was Andy Card.

Let's take a minute for some quick background: The Busheviks lied about Iraq's alleged WMD arsenal in the run-up to the invasion. They also claimed that Niger was selling Yellowcake uranium to Saddam Hussein. They sent Ambassador Joe Wilson to Africa in '02 to investigate. He came back and reported that he found nothing to substantiate this claim. Despite this finding, Bush re-stated the claim in his January '03 State of the Union Address to bolster his case for war. Angered by this blatant lie, Wilson wrote an op-ed piece in July '03 titled "What I Didn't Find in Africa." This pissed off the Bushies, and in a criminal act of retaliation they revealed the identity of Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, who at the time was a covert CIA operative. And then they told former Cheney chief of staff Scooter Libby to lie about it all during special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's CIA leak investigation. And then, as payback for his cover up, Bush commuted Libby's sentence after he was convicted of obstruction of justice, perjury and lying to investigators. And now it's being revealed by McClellan that he was instructed by his bosses--including the president and vice president--to stand before the media and voters and lie about it all as further protection against the erupting scandal.

Wow. Bush and Cheney shouldn't just be impeached...they should go to jail. Which is exactly where you or I'd be if we manufactured WMD evidence, outed a covert CIA agent as revenge against her whistle-blowing husband, and then obstructed justice with more lies and a criminal cover up.

But where the hell is the NY Times on this story? Nowhere. Incredibly, not one solitary word in Wednesday's newspaper. This is a huge bombshell with monumental ramifications--criminal behavior on the part of Bush, Cheney, Rove, Libby, Card-- which could and should finally take down this corrupt, disgraceful administration. Could be the biggest political scandal since Watergate. And how is it covered by the Times? It's not. I'm starting to think this once relevant newspaper must be secretly owned by Rupert Murdoch.

Where is the firebrand journalism that the venerable Washington Post demonstrated back in the 70's in serving to take down the corrupt Nixon administration? How is it possible that a story this important goes unreported in the NY Times? It's a sad commentary on the mainstream media overall. They've given this corrupt, criminal administration a virtual pass since it stepped inside the White House in 2000. It's allowed the Busheviks to lie, cheat, deceive, steal and bully with impunity. All you need to do is watch a Bush press conference in the White House press room to see just how neutered the press is. Bush is nasty, condescending, unrevealing, taunting and cavalier as he side-steps the issues and offers inane muck instead. And the press allows it. You can see the fear in their eyes, hoping that Bush doesn't publicly ridicule them, as he has done so often when he hears a tough question he doesn't particularly like. The media ought to be ashamed of itself. And now the Times seems to have joined this pathetic group.

[rodeodance]

1. WASN'T IT IN A BLOG (NYT)???

[Ghost Dog]

50. Big story for the BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7105001.stm (check out Ms. Flame's comment).

And also repeatedly on BBC World Service Radio this evening.

Edit to add: I see the story is also absent, so far, in Thursday's NYT-owned, Paris-published International Herald Tribune (according to web site).

[City Lights]

52. Imagine that! A link to the story right on the front page of their site!

Here it's buried. Our media whores are a disgrace. :argh:

on edit - when I checked their site it was the second story under "Americas." Now you have to click on the "Americas" link to find it. Oh well, it's still better than here.

[Ghost Dog]

54. See this page:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/programmes/newshour/

Listen to the report you see at the top "Uproar Over Excerpt" (here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/ondemand/rams/nh47388____2007.ram )



If, as I do, you have a problem, try listening (it's the third item or so) to the latest (at this time) Newshour as broadcast here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/worldservice/meta/tx/newshour2000?size=au&bgc=003399&lang=en-ws&nbram=1&nbwm=1

Edit: I'm relistening now... It's the No. 1 Item in the intro; then lower down (after Sarkozy and Hillary) in the summaries; then, keep on listening and you'll hear a full report, with interviews, immediately following the summaries).

[City Lights]

55. Thanks, Ghost Dog!

:hi:

I did have trouble initially, but your last link worked fine. I had to pause it when Countdown came on because I didn't want to miss KO's coverage. ;-) I'm going to listen again later.

[mod mom]

2. What's happening? Wasn't it apparent after the silence over the election thefts?

Corporations are working in their best interest-there is only a indy fourth estate.

[deutsey]

3. I guess Judith Miller isn't available to do the story? n/t

[kansasblue]

4. McClellen is backing off, 'correcting' his statement.

never met that Bush was involved. I wonder what's going on behind the scenes.



Publisher: McClellan isn't alleging Bush took part in 'conspiracy to mislead'

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Publisher_McClellan_didnt_have_proper_flak_1121.html

[underpants]

11. LOL

Are they going to have to reprint all those books that the Conservative Book Club was going to buy? No rush it isn't due until April anyway

[Virginia Dare]

31. They'll have to change the title to "Redacted"....n/t

[lonestarnot]

42. "Redacted Pile of Shit For Use in Wiping"

[Ravy]

38. The implication is that Bush was directly lied to as well.

So Bush should go on record as to who lied to him, and when he found out the truth.

[fooj]

5. Treasonous complicity.

[soleft]

6. It's not in any of the NY papers and on CNN

You have to go to the politics section to find it.

[seemslikeadream]

7. Still has the bucket

[KansDem]

8. Maybe they'll "sit on this story" a few years...

...then publish it only when the neo-cons say it's "o.k."

I mean, it's not as if this hasn't happened before!

[Mabus]

9. They haven't been able to confirm it

and you know how the press doesn't like to speculate.

:spray: :rofl:

[Krashkopf]

12. Confirm WHAT?

McClellan is not denying that he said it.

The fact that he said it is NEWS!

Dear NYT: You are a "News"paper. Report the DAMNED news, please.

Krash

[Mabus]

14. Take it easy,

Are you not familiar with sarcasm? I thought the spraying and rolf smilies were a clue that I wasn't being serious.

[babylonsister]

20. Good point, Mabus. They are, after all, the soul

of discretion! ;-)

[Mabus]

34. And the paper of record.

Publishing the truth, the whole truth and nothing but what Bush said. :scared:

[Rex]

10. They have to ask permission to release any story that could 'harm'

the WH. Donchaknow? The NYT is a company of idiots and cowards and I hope they all burn in Hell.

[Bozita]

13. Went through my paper NYT today looking for some mention.

Not a word.

[gatorboy]

15. Why isn't McClellen in cuffs right now?

Seriously? :shrug:

[Blue_In_AK]

16. That's surprising.

It even made it into the Anchorage Daily News up here in the hinterlands.

[driver8]

39. Ha Ha -- I used to deliver that paper!

I lived on Adak for two years with my family (Father was career Navy). I used to deliver that paper when I was 12. Mondays sucked the most because I had to deliver Sunday AND Monday's paper as there was no plane on Sunday. Man, was that bag heavy!

[Blue_In_AK]

48. I'll bet it was heavy...

The Sunday paper by itself must weigh five pounds with all the ads and such in it. How did you like Adak? I've never been out there, but always pictured it as just kind of a barren rock stuck out in the middle of the ocean. Am I wrong?

[driver8]

49. Adak was an amazing place to be a kid!

There was so much to see and do on the island and, because the island was almost all military, we had a lot of freedom!!

You are right, the island is pretty barren but quite beautiful, as well. The side of the hill behind our house was FULL of bald eagles -- how many kids can say that they saw bald eagles everyday?

Here is a photo of Adak -- the houses in the foreground are my old neighborhood. This photo was taken from on top of the hill that I mentioned earlier.

IMG]

[Blue_In_AK]

58. Oh, that's not so bad.

I didn't realize there were hills out there. I'm glad you enjoyed your time in Alaska - there's noplace I'd rather be.

[H2O Man]

17. NYTimes:

I'll try to link the NY Times article:


Ex-Bush Spokesman’s Tantalizing Snippet on C.I.A. Leak
By Mike Nizza

The hints of intrigue and betrayal at the trial of I. Lewis Libby Jr. over the leaking of a C.I.A. agent’s identity grew even more intriguing today as a snippet made the rounds from the forthcoming memoir by Scott McClellan, who was President Bush’s chief spokesperson in 2006.

In the 121 words released by the book’s publisher, PublicAffairs, Mr. McClellan appears to hold President Bush partially responsible for statements to the White House press corps in 2003 that later proved to be inaccurate — that Karl Rove, senior counselor to the president, and Mr. Libby, vice president’s chief of staff, never leaked the identity of the agent, Valerie Plame (emphasis added)....

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/ex-bush-spokesmans-tantalizing-snippet-on-cia-leak/?hp

(I haven't bought today's paper, so I can't say if the article appears in it or not.)

[Cleita]

21. Although I haven't combed the website, it seems not to be

important news to the NYT.

http://www.nytimes.com/

[H2O Man]

22. Their article

that I linked is provides some details. The snippet from the book, which will be released next spring, does not appear to provide anything new.

[Cleita]

25. I did a search at the NYT website after I posted to you.

The only articles that turned up were links to articles in AP and Reuters. NYT has not written a single article on it. Methinks they are waiting to do a hit piece on Scotty and are waiting to get the talking points from the WH. :tinfoilhat:

You have got to admit this is front page news and not to cover it or to perhaps bury it in the book review section is a stunning omission.

[H2O Man]

29. It is odd.

I "google" the different reports on the snippet, and found the NYTimes article. But I don't find it on their site.

The NYTimes allowed for some of the absolute worst "reporting" on the WMD baloney, thanks to Judith Miller & Co. People should be suspicious of anything they write, because of that.

The paper had some of the better reporting of the Libby indictment and trial of any of the corporate media sources. Certainly, they had weaknesses, in part due to the conflict of interest involving Judith Miller connection to Libby. But, while not as good as David Shuster's reporting on MSNBC, it was better than most.

I do not think that the snippet tells anything new. Certainly, the fact that McClellan was saying things that were proven false is known. The Libby trial documented without question that Rove, Libby, Cheney, and Bush were involved in the public response to the scandal, which involved distortions and outright lies. Also, as McClellan mention's Card, I'd note that in November '05, the NYT had an article on him and his association to the scandal.

Is it possible that Scott could provide some new information on the scandal? Yes. And for that reason, the NYT should definitely be focused on it. I think that it is unlikely that Scott knows anything that Mr. Fitzgerald hasn't heard, probably from him. But it is newsworthy, because it appears to indicate abuses of the power of office that congress can hold them accountable for.

[City Lights]

30. It's there, but you have to dig. Scroll down to their "News from AP" link -

below their "reader's comment" section. :eyes: From there click on the "more AP news" link. Then under "AP indexes," click on "Politics." Scroll down til you find it.

It's fucking outrageous. :nuke:

[Cleita]

32. I think NYT has become a propaganda news source and not

worthy of being taken seriously anymore. I'm surprised they didn't cover it in the book review section in one paragraph on the bottom left hand corner because that's exactly what they did metaphorically by not covering this as front page news.

[spanone]

33. they do have a story on it, but i had to search mcclellen's name to find it

interesting...when you search his name on the www.nytimes.com website it comes up...when you click, it goes to the 'U.S.' section of the paper and there is the story. yet, when you go directly to the 'U.S.' section, the story does not appear.
i could not find the story without doing the search...someone else try.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-CIA-Leak-McClellan.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[spanone]

43. Hardball just reported that the Washington Post Buried this story on Page 15

[Cha]

18. Rec'd! At LEAST we have people like

Andy Ostroy on this! nyt's prolly been waitin' for scotty to backtrack.

[Cleita]

19. Thom Hartman just mentioned it on his radio show.

He said of the MSM, only Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman addressed this. He too was amazed that he could find nothing on the NYTimes.

It makes me think more and more that the White House is threatening and blackmailing the media not to carry any stories that make them look like the treasonous criminals that we know they are.

This is a stunning omission.

[hvn_nbr_2]

23. "All the news that fits the neocon masters' agenda" nt

[City Lights]

24. The NYT sucks. The story is there, you just have to dig for it.

:nuke:

It can be found through their AP wire link. x(

Former Aide Blames Bush for Leak Deceit

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: November 21, 2007
Filed at 11:50 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Former White House press secretary Scott McClellan blames President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for efforts to mislead the public about the role of White House aides in leaking the identity of a CIA operative.

In an excerpt from his forthcoming book, McClellan recounts the 2003 news conference in which he told reporters that aides Karl Rove and I. Lewis ''Scooter'' Libby were ''not involved'' in the leak involving operative Valerie Plame.

''There was one problem. It was not true,'' McClellan writes, according to a brief excerpt released Tuesday. ''I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest-ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice president, the president's chief of staff and the president himself.''

Bush's chief of staff at the time was Andrew Card.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-CIA-Leak-McClellan.html

[Cleita]

26. This is front page news. This omission really reeks.

I am waiting for their hit piece on Scotty, which will no doubt be put on their front page then. Taking bets at the window now!

[City Lights]

28. We need to overthrow the government and the media!

:patriot:

[Bozita]

53. It did not make it into today's print edition.

[City Lights]

56. Thanks for the info., Bozita.

The WaPo carried it on page 15, and the NYTimes didn't bother at all. :mad: :grr:

[tjwash]

27. Yesterdays headline was how great everything is in Iraq.

They are fucking Pravda now.

[tridim]

37. Except everyone knew that Pravda was BS.

The NYT was and probably still is well respected by the vast majority of readers.

[Dude_CalmDown]

60. Exactly. The most damaging liars are the ones that have perceived credibility.

Even the wing-nuts don't believe what Fox says - but too many people still trust the NY Times.

[Kurovski]

35. K&R. (nt)

[donkeyotay]

36. They probably have bush lying and laughing about it on tape

but they're going to sit on the story until after the 2008 elections.

[leftofthedial]

40. they haven't said anything of importance since Clinton left office

and they quit yammering about Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky.

The NY Times is a waste of trees.

[lonestarnot]

41. It's fucking an national emergency and we hear fuck nothing!

[Disturbed]

46. The NYT had the Illegal Spying by the NSA, approved by

Busholini & sat on the story until after the '06 Elections. Something stinks. Is it a Bio-weapon?

[graywarrior]

44. It's Thanksgiving, and you know what Friday is.

Shop shop shop. No one cares about Scotty when K-Mart opens at 1 am.

[EFerrari]

45. These are the same @ssholes that refused to report Ohio

and that sat on illegal wiretapping for a YEAR.

Please. We know what's up at the NY Times. They are whores and anyone who buys that fish wrap is abusing fish.

[EFerrari]

47. Reminder: The New York Times is not the "liberal media".

{Let's remember, let's be the Memories.)

Mr. Okrent

I personally think it's outrageous that the Times
failed to cover the Conyer's hearings.

And now, Mr. Blackwell is sabotaging the Ohio recount
in violation of OH state law.

Is the Times going to ignore this whole story? I'd
like to know so that I can reconsider my subscription
options. If the Times won't cover the news, I have to
find a paper that does.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth Ferrari

San Francisco CA
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=5629422

[Catherine Vincent]

51. The CSPAN moderators should mention that the next time republican

callers call in bitching about them reading from the liberal New York Times.

[lovuian]

57. NYT is a Propoganda news network

Get it Got it

[upi402]

59. After K-O MSNBC was right back to the 'missing white chick' story again...

:boring:
The news has been cancelled. And they'd LOVE to cancel the newspapers too.

[earth mom]

61. FWIW, I first saw mention of it on Rosies blog.

Not the usual place to find such news, just like how I saw the reporting of the Kucinich-Cheney Impeachment on the CBS news at 3 AM! :wtf:

No, there's nothing to see here, move along. :puke:

[femrap]

62. I finished my Holiday Cards to

Pelosi and all of the Dems on the Judiciary Committee last night. The front of the card says 'Tis the Season.'

Open it up and I have written and used stickers (in capitals): 2 impeach 4 TREEson! save our counTREE! Crack W's nuts (NUTCRACKER STICKER)!

Now I'm going around and singing 'tis the season to impeach 4 treason. falalalalalalalalallala!'

Send those cards!

[Crabby Appleton]

63. Well, there is this in the NYT

Publisher Deflates Tantalizing Snippet on C.I.A. Leak
By Mike Nizza

Tags: intelligence, notes on the news, politics, washington

A 151-word excerpt from the memoir of Scott McClellan, chief spokesman to President Bush in 2006, was not meant to be as tantalizing as it sounded, according to the publisher of the book.


more
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/21/ex-aides-book-may-clear-bush-in-cia-leak/?hp

[opihimoimoi]

64. Its sickening and disgusting...our America has been sold to the highest bidder

[Beam Me Up]

65. What astounds me is that anyone here would take the corporate owned

news seriously. That anyone here would think they WOULD report or investigate this or any other of a number of stories we could name.

The NYT lost ALL credibility years ago. Anyone thinking the MSM isn't "doing their job" doesn't get it. They ARE doing their job: Cover up and protect any wrong doing by this or, indeed, any administration that the real Powers That Be want kept in office. The "real PTB," by the way, is obviously not 'We The People' work-a-day voting citizens of the United States. The "real PTB" put this administration in place, set the agenda and have kept it there and on target for all these years for their own purposes -- obviously not ours.