Skip to main content

Frank Rich - "I wanna be Woodward!"

The great Watergate coverup of 2005... Developing...

Over at Drudge Report - another Frank Rich hit piece prepares for the press!

UPDATE: Damn, I thought Frank was going to reveal that Jayson Blair was a pen name. Darn it to heck! Anyway, it turns out that Frank is pissed that the "Downing Street Memo" isn't getting any media attention. Man he must be getting flamed by the Moonbats . "Comon Frank! Help us out here!!"

Maybe Frank, the MSM isn't going after the story because there is NOTHING THERE TO COVER!

You know, after the MSM 2004 "Bash Bush Fest" where every inch of Bush's life was examined, and even if nothing was found - it was "RaThErEd Up", don't you think that this memo - written three years ago - would have got some traction - if there was anything there to look at? Would C-BS or P-MSNBC or SOMEBODY (besides those who have no oxygen left in their brains) have possibly missed out on "blockbuster"?

Man! What is with the "power trip" of the MSM. Ever since that old fart came out from the garage and said, "I'm, 'Deep Throat', the MSM has recovered their "woody" for the next BIG STORY. I'm sure that some cub reporter is out there thinking, Gee, we TOO can bring a President down!"

The pride and stuffiness of the MSM is mindboggling. Yet when they have there own crisis there is a "defensive tone", "How dare you question US?"

Again, ARROGANCE is a good read - IT hasn't recieved the attention it deserved and it actually SAYS something. Unlike most of Frank's 'commentary' work at the NY Times.


Joe said…
You note that it is odd that the media is covering a memo that was written years ago.

However, the memo only came to light on May 1st; hence, why it is an interesting story *today*.

Your reasoning is faulty in declaring that the age of the memo makes it of little interest. In fact, it is of interest precisely because of the date which it was written on -- during a time in which the president had stated that war was by no means inevitable.

The memo proves nothing, of course -- which is why it would be nice if journalists, asking hard questions, would find out what, if anything, is behind that.

It is certainly possible that there's nothing behind it -- but you can't know until you ask.

Skepticism is, as per your blog's tagline, "common sense".
MacRanger said…
Actually the 'memo' came to light during the 2004 election cycle, gaining coverage mostly overseas.

The London Times, along with a few blogs had "tipped" to it. Again, no traction.

Even this morning the WAPO is taking another memo that stated that Brit Officials were concerned about our post-war preparation (or lack of it).

Not much to this story we don't already know though. Pretty much the Administration admitted that they "goofed" on post war planning and underestimating the insurgency.

Thus the 'age' of the memo is relevant - it simply doesn't matter now and besides it's origins (which have been scrutinized) are 'iffy'. Thus no coverage.

But I don't think this will make it go away: The 'ground plan' for the hard left is to dig something up, and attempt to impeach Bush (not likely with a Republican majority) - but that is definitely their plan.

Popular posts from this blog

Calling Mr. Fitzgerald?


As I told you about in this post yesterday as a source confirmed to me that the Justice Department has launched a probe into the NSA leak. Mr. Risen, you are in trouble - prepare your defense. I told you so.

The White House will be announcing the probe at about 12:30pm. My source tells me that this probe will most likely result in another prosecutor being assigned as of course Fitzgerald is still busy/dizzy on the Plame/Game No-Leak. Additionally, other probes into other recent leaks such as the CIA 'prisons'leak is in the works as well. As I said, this is the NEW Bush - on the attack - it's no more Mr. Nice Guy!

About time! Also covering Michelle Malkin

*****End Update*********

UPDATE II: Looks like I owe my source big time as yet another tip comes true as the Washington Post is on the target list as well for the CIA Prison leak.

****End Update II*************************************

Update III: Via Fox: "The government has no legal right to…

Is the lid about to be blown off Able Danger?

Those who have been wishing for a full blown Able Danger investigation are about to get their wish. The "gate" has been unlocked.

9/11 Iraqi Connection

With Democrats calling for yet more investigations into pre-war intelligence, and Republicans like myself pushing back to help their 'sudden amnesia”, the growing stories of Able Danger and even China Gate, are beginning to make news.

The three main theories about why Able Danger hasn't gotten out of the "blog stage", are 1) To hide Clinton era responsibility for stopping the 9/11 attacks, and/or 2) To hide the truth behind China-Gate, or 3) The facts show that there in fact was a direct link between Iraq and 9/11.

Taking either one you can see why the Clinton worshipping MSM for the most part hasn't touched the story. Of the later point, Democrats, the MSM and even some of our investigations state that there was no 'direct' link between Iraq and 9/11. Say otherwise and the MSM will slice and di…

Able Danger - Pulling Back the Covers of the real Clinton Legacy

First, let's dispense with the bull crap. The meeting between Mohammed Atta and Iraqi Intelligence officer Al-Ani, on April 8th, 2001 happened.

Yet, just don't mention it to the MSM, becaue since May of 2002, the MSM declared an all out assault on the story. A meeting incidently, that the Czech government has to this date stood by.

Let's review a little history:

October 13, 2001: Story of the meeting is leaked from somewhere in the Czech foreign service.


October 20, 2001: Ny Times, John Tagliabue writes a story citing other Czech officials said the meeting never took place.


October 26, 2001: Czech Minister of the Interior, Stanislav Gross has a press conference not only confirming the orginal report but giving further details of Atta's other trip to Prague in June 2000.


October 27, 2001: The NY Times "recants" the October 20th denial.

The story continues it's oddessy of 'back and forth' until May 1st, 2002, when Walter P…