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 Batman...er, '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.

2 comments

  1. Joe  

    6/12/2005 02:49:00 AM

    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".

  2. MacRanger  

    6/12/2005 08:45:00 AM

    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.

Support our Vets!



Macsmind - Official Blog of The MacRanger Show on Blog Talk Radio