Monday, October 17, 2005

Somewhere shoes are waiting to drop

Syrian Shoes

Syria has their own prosecutor to worry about; Detlev Mehlis of Germany is investigating the Rafiq Hariri assassination. The Guardian:

There have been many unsolved assassinations in Lebanon since the end of the civil war, but unlike others before it, Mr Hariri's killing triggered a remarkable response: most people quickly assumed the Syrian government was responsible for the murder and, through huge street protests in the spring, they forced the Syrians to end their 29-year military occupation of Lebanon.

That was a humiliating setback for Damascus. But the results of this inquiry could have an even more profound impact on the Syrian regime's future.

White House Shoes

The fake memo in the Note is interesting, especially because they hint that there is solid reporting behind it, at some level. How many of these points will happen? Excerpt:

10. Bring back Cindy Sheehan — any way you can, as fast as you can.

11. Until/unless there are actual indictments, the press can be distracted by any news story that is surprising enough — it doesn't even need to be new. We know your plans now call for the hurricane czar to be nothing but a "coordinator," but maybe Don Evans would take the job after all. Anything to avoid a full week of unremitting chatter about nervousness at the White House.

12. In case of indictments, the President needs a more confident and consistent answer to "WDHKAWDHKI" (as we like to call "what did he know…"). He needs to make one statement that acknowledges he discussed the matter but makes it clear he knew nothing about the gory details. Then stick with it. We can calibrate it at the last minute to see if we want to show distance from Karl. The White House press corps will argue that indictments mean that you can finally discuss the case; you need to point out to them resolutely that the case is ongoing as long as there are pending legal cases.

15. And, perhaps most important: If someone is indicted, they're going to have to go — it's obvious to everyone inside and outside. So the President could help regain his footing and image of command by saying so in advance. In fact, this is conceding nothing — it is just a statement of reality. But it would go miles toward making him look like the boss, not a victim or a weasel.

Iraqi Shoes

Every expert and blogger and expert-blogger thinks the constitution will pass, in whatever form it currently has manifested itself. But, the odd voter turnouts raise concerns and the results will be audited by the Iraqi Electoral Division. AP:

"Statements coming from most governorates indicating such high numbers that require us to recheck, compare and audit them, as they are unusually high according to the international standards," the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq said in a statement.

Grey Lady Shoes

Not only does it still vex me that I can't read the op-eds without paying money, but also Miller's story is beginning to vex me.

Arianna Huffington is livid:

Yet, according to today's story, "Mr. Bennett, who by now had carefully reviewed Ms. Miller's extensive notes taken from two interviews with Mr. Libby, assured Mr. Fitzgerald that Ms. Miller had only one meaningful source. Mr. Fitzgerald agreed to limit his questions to Mr. Libby and the Wilson matter."

In what way was Libby the only "one meaningful source," if he didn't leak Plame's identity to Miller? Whoever gave Miller Plame's name was a pretty damned meaningful source. Although evidently not meaningful enough for her to remember who it was.

Arianna ally Ari Melber:

So at Libby’s request, she agreed to deliberately deceive her readers by describing him as a “former Hill staffer.” The scheme was absurdly misleading, as Arianna explained. It helped Libby trash Wilson without implicating the White House. In Miller’s words, “Mr. Libby did not want the White House to be seen as attacking Mr. Wilson.”

This misleading sourcing violates the New York Times official guidelines, a key fact the Times article ignored. The newspaper requires reporters explain anonymous sourcing arrangements without being “coy,” and “especially when we can shed light on the source’s reasons” (emphasis added). Can you imagine how that might read?


Anonymous Anonymous said...

why hasn't this source thing gotten more coverage? what is the times reponse?

12:27 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home