RWingnut attacks on the NYT reminds me of the attacks on Richard Clarke

[Roland99]

Remember Sen. Fristian on Clarke?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_03_21.php

"Mr. Clarke has told two entirely different stories under oath," Frist said in a speech from the Senate floor, alleging that Clarke said in 2002 that the Bush administration actively sought to address the threat posed by al-Qaida before the attacks.

Frist later retreated from directly accusing Clarke of perjury, telling reporters that he personally had no knowledge that there were any discrepancies between Clarke's two appearances. But he said, "Until you have him under oath both times, you don't know."

Uh, which was it, Fristian? Was he under oath twice or wasn't he?

In their rush to flood the M$M airwaves with their vile talking points, they trample and trod upon the truth in any attempt to spin things as a positive toward them and turn any attack on them into nothing more than cowardly complaints. It backfired on Fristian and it this story of the NYT's article on the SWIFT monitoring by the US will also soon wash away into the distance.