How to write a NYT article on an Obama controversy

posted at 11:36 am on June 18, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

The New York Times finally got around to reporting that the White House fired Inspector General Gerald Walpin, a week after it happened, when the Associated Press — to which the Times belongs — first put in on the wires.  They managed to include the Obama administration’s accusation of mental illness, and even threw in the part about Senators Claire McCaskill and Charles Grassley objecting to the firing.  But what did Neil Lewis and the Times forget to include in the story (via The Right Scoop)?

The White House said Wednesday that President Obama had dismissed a government agency’s internal watchdog because he was incompetent and had behaved bizarrely, disputing accusations that he was fired because he had uncovered embarrassing problems in the AmeriCorps program.

Last week, Mr. Obama abruptly fired the watchdog, Gerald Walpin, the inspector general of the Corporation for National and Community Service, who was a holdover from the Bush administration, saying little except that he had lost confidence in Mr. Walpin.

But the president quickly encountered resistance from the Senate, including from a fellow Democrat, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, who said Mr. Obama had not provided sufficient reason for the dismissal, as required under a recent law intended to protect the independence of the corps of inspectors general.

Lewis and the Times forgot to include in this entire article two very salient facts about Walpin’s termination:

  • The law governing the IGs require the White House to not just provide reasonable cause, but also a 30-day notice to Congress before taking any action.
  • Lewis neglects to mention anywhere in this article that the White House called Walpin first in an attempt to intimidate him into resigning.

Both of these points are key to understanding the abuse of power attempted by the White House with Walpin.  The White House wanted Walpin out, as well as discredited, as quickly as possible so that he could not interfere with a sweetheart deal to let a political ally off the hook for fraud.  This became especially important when Walpin began communicating to Congress about his opposition to the deal with Kevin Johnson in Sacramento.  They needed him out, and fast.

Instead of using the process that Barack Obama sponsored himself in the Senate, the White House tried to bully Walpin into quitting.  When that didn’t work, they publicly painted him as senile, a problem that would have been more appropriate to air in close consultation with Congress rather than in publicly-released letters after the attempt to bully Walpin.  After all, if Walpin is cognitively impaired, why go to him first?

The Times’ failure to include both of these facts — widely reported by actual news organizations for the last few days — puts this in the category of White House spin, and the Times as a mouthpiece for Barack Obama.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Do they give Pulitzers for re-stating press releases?

myrenovations on June 18, 2009 at 11:40 AM

From reading this article one must assume that anyone on the Left, the Dems, would care about abuse of power when it’s their Messiah doing it. We already know that Democrats have no conscience, no morals, no soul, so they obviously wouldn’t care about this in the least.

Jeff from WI on June 18, 2009 at 11:41 AM

Now come one Ed, the president asked the man to resign. What sane person would not simply do what the president asked?

I’m thinking that charge of “acting bizarrely” is accurate – after all it does take one to know one!

Larry Farr on June 18, 2009 at 11:41 AM

All the news that fits the narrative.

Mr. D on June 18, 2009 at 11:41 AM

the new york times should have property of oboobi tatoo’d on there arse………..

SHARPTOOTH on June 18, 2009 at 11:43 AM

The NYT just slightly rewrites the press releases they get from this White House and then publishes them.

I personally have no problem with media having a political slant…it’s impossible to avoid since human beings are involved. The neutrality of the MSM is not only a joke, it’s impossible.

My beef is that too many Americans still cling to this outmoded belief that all media, with the exception of Fox News, is unbiased.

Ignorance is our most expensive commodity.

Asher on June 18, 2009 at 11:43 AM

And of course, more people will read it on HA than in the NYT. Na na na boo boo, Pinch.

Akzed on June 18, 2009 at 11:43 AM

The Times also left out or distorted these essential points:

– There is no such thing as a “holdover” Inspector General; they are Presidential appointees per se, but not political appointees in the sense that a new President automatically replaces all of them. Generally they are left alone. It’s simply an accident of timing that Walpin was appointed by Bush, because the previous IG resigned.

– that the new IG law was co-sponsored by Senator Barack Obama, so these was no excuse that the President didn’t understand what was going on or that he was clearly violating that law.

The Obama campaign should be forced to count every New York Times story as a campaign contribution. This spin is sickening.

rockmom on June 18, 2009 at 11:44 AM

NYTimes – the toilet paper of record.

moonbatkiller on June 18, 2009 at 11:44 AM

The also failed to mention that it was Senator Obama’s bill.

mankai on June 18, 2009 at 11:44 AM

Do you need to go to J School to get that process correct?

Step two in follow up article: MAKE STUFF UP.

It looks like I might have a new career!

juanito on June 18, 2009 at 11:44 AM

off the hood hook for fraud

Ed, you racist!

loudmouth883 on June 18, 2009 at 11:45 AM

And of course, more people will read it on HA than in the NYT. Na na na boo boo, Pinch.

Akzed on June 18, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Not really. Hundreds of small local papers pick up NYT stories and run them uncritically. I get furious every time I visit my parents in Panama City, Florida because the paper there runs almost nothing buy AP and NYT stories.

rockmom on June 18, 2009 at 11:45 AM

How does it help the NYT to leave out hugely relevant facts of a story since they are hardly the only news source people will hear about this? The act seems to verify that they are not only failing because of new media but that they can’t even handle basic Journalism 101. We have to assume that they are only in existence to run advertisments and news articles are there to fill up that white space around them.

Cindy Munford on June 18, 2009 at 11:46 AM

What’s black and white and red all over?

The NYT’s balance sheet!

HA!

Thanks for that’n, Colbert.

Akzed on June 18, 2009 at 11:46 AM

disputing accusations that he was fired because he had uncovered embarrassing problems in the AmeriCorps program.

Foot fungus is an embarrassing problem. Jock itch is an embarrassing problem. Flatulance is an embarrassing problem. Theft of taxpayer dollars is a crime.

Laura in Maryland on June 18, 2009 at 11:46 AM

The difference between Nixon and Obama… R & D

mjbrooks3 on June 18, 2009 at 11:46 AM

Lewis and the Times forgot to include in this entire article two very salient facts about Walpin’s termination:

‘Forgot’…ummm..yeah.

They didn’t forget to get Bush’s name in there though.

Booosh = Bad!!

OooBammaa Smash!!

BigWyo on June 18, 2009 at 11:47 AM

The law governing the IGs require the White House to not just provide reasonable cause, but also a 30-day notice to Congress before taking any action

Which law is this, Ed? I’ve seen some mention of this in a bill that Senator McCaskill wrote, and then-Senator Obama even co-sponsored, but it has yet to become law.

The Monster on June 18, 2009 at 11:47 AM

The personal attacks on private citizens and political enemies by this administration is unprecedented, more like you’d see in Cuba than America.

It must be stopped!

Star20 on June 18, 2009 at 11:47 AM

No one reads that rag in NY except for left wing nutballs

Trust me.

blatantblue on June 18, 2009 at 11:47 AM

Once is a random event.
Twice is co-incidence.
Three times, and a pattern begins to emerge.

Just need five more to reach the level of firings that will arouse congress since 8 federal attorneys dismissed by Bush seems to be the standard.

Skandia Recluse on June 18, 2009 at 11:48 AM

I love the NYT’s TV commercials that they run in the Phoenix market. They feature the gay guy mooning over the Arts and Entertainment section, the lefty guy and gal who just love the editorials and the beardo professor type who appreciates the no-holds-barred reporting.

DrW on June 18, 2009 at 11:48 AM

Which law is this, Ed? I’ve seen some mention of this in a bill that Senator McCaskill wrote, and then-Senator Obama even co-sponsored, but it has yet to become law.

The Monster on June 18, 2009 at 11:47 AM

So you’re arguing that he’s just a horrifying hypocrite and not ncessarily a criminal (in this case)?

mankai on June 18, 2009 at 11:49 AM

no-holds-barred reporting.

DrW on June 18, 2009 at 11:48 AM

The gay guy likes that too!

Thank you! I’ll be here all week. Try the veal.

mankai on June 18, 2009 at 11:51 AM

Oh no! What are we going to do now that the NYT has become a mouthpiece for White House?

TubbyHubby on June 18, 2009 at 11:52 AM

Do they give Pulitzers for re-stating press releases?

Not yet, but the NYT will surely win the Obamapalooza Prize for Excellence in Scandal Spinning.

RandyChandler on June 18, 2009 at 11:52 AM

Lewis and the Times forgot to include in this entire article two very salient facts about Walpin’s termination:

The law governing the IGs require the White House to not just provide reasonable cause, but also a 30-day notice to Congress before taking any action.

Lewis neglects to mention anywhere in this article that the White House called Walpin first in an attempt to intimidate him into resigning.

You and NYT forgot a third one:

Walpin, who has been interviewed on numerous radio and television shows, shows no signs of any type of mental impairment, as the Obama smear meisters have claimed.

Blake on June 18, 2009 at 11:53 AM

Die, NYT! Die!

Blake on June 18, 2009 at 11:54 AM

BuffaloNews just inked a contract to print the National edition of NYT at their press facility… or as it will now be called, the toilet paper factory.

mjbrooks3 on June 18, 2009 at 11:54 AM

I found the perfect gift for our commander in chief. It will come in handy for his next television interview.

https://www.fliesaway.com/?mid=573792&a=55964&s=13814

If the shamwow guy endorses it, I’m sold!

scalleywag on June 18, 2009 at 11:55 AM

They also failed to point out they were part of the Democratic Party.

faraway on June 18, 2009 at 11:56 AM

The toilet paper of record.

PersonalLiberty on June 18, 2009 at 11:57 AM

Michelle obama’s areas of expansion are emmbarrassing problems. Missappropriation of funds exposed? How did ACORN hid it so long? They fired the board members that wanted an inquiry.
Freedom from information act

seven on June 18, 2009 at 11:57 AM

mankai on June 18, 2009 at 11:51 AM

LOL

cmsinaz on June 18, 2009 at 11:58 AM

The difference between Nixon and Obama… R & D

mjbrooks3 on June 18, 2009 at 11:46 AM

Don’t forget the teleprompter and compliant State Run Media.

Walter Duranty must be so proud.

rbj on June 18, 2009 at 11:59 AM

If the shamwow guy endorses it, I’m sold!

scalleywag on June 18, 2009 at 11:55 AM

Actually, that’s the Oxyclean guy, Billy Mays, not the Sham Wow guy.

Daggett on June 18, 2009 at 11:59 AM

While the GOP marketing and defense of its positions (or even the positions themselves sometimes), fighting against this type of reporting makes the job so much more difficult.

If the press leanings were reversed (i.e., they supported politicians that wanted to preserve the liberty enshrined in our federal consitution), the freedom of the states and we the people would mirror that that existed in early years of our country.

WashJeff on June 18, 2009 at 12:00 PM

off the hood hook for fraud

Ed, you racist!

loudmouth883 on June 18, 2009 at 11:45 AM

LOL – thought it was just me

Branch Rickey on June 18, 2009 at 12:02 PM

The NYT is just confirming the truth of what Ogabe learned by studying the Clinton presidency. Do whatever you want and let your minions in the media create the narrative to cover for you. Remember, this only works for Democrats, but you can double down on this if you’re also black. It’s an impenetrable ebony armor.

SKYFOX on June 18, 2009 at 12:04 PM

From Byron York on this:

At Wednesday’s meeting, Sen. Grassley’s staffers wanted to know more about the White House review. “Unfortunately,” Grassley writes in a letter sent late Wednesday afternoon to White House counsel Gregory Craig, “Mr. Eisen refused to answer several direct questions posed to him about the representations made in his letter.” Grassley says that since Eisen refused to answer the questions in person, Grassley would submit a dozen of them in writing. Here they are:

1) Did the [Corporation for National and Community Service] Board communicate its concerns about Mr. Walpin to the White House in writing?

2) Specifically, which CNCS Board members came forward with concerns about Mr. Walpin’s ability to serve as the Inspector General?

3) Was the communication about the Board’s concerns on or about May 20, 2009 the first instance of any communications with White House personnel regarding the possibility of removing Mr. Walpin?

4) Which witnesses were interviewed in the course of Mr. Eisen’s review?

5) How many witnesses were interviewed?

6) Were any employees of the Office of Inspector General, who may have had more frequent contact with Mr. Walpin than the Board members, interviewed?

7) Was Mr. Walpin asked directly during Mr. Eisen’s review about the events of May 20, 2009?

8) Was Mr. Walpin asked for his response to the allegations submitted to the Integrity Committee by Acting U.S. Attorney Lawrence Brown?

9) What efforts were made during Mr. Eisen’s review to obtain both sides of the story or to afford the Office of Inspector General an opportunity to be heard?

10) In addition to the claim that Mr. Walpin was “confused” and “disoriented,” the letter also says he exhibited “other behavior” that led to questions about his capacity. What other behavior was Mr. Eisen referencing?

11) If the initial and primary concern had to do with Mr. Walpin’s capacity to serve for potential health reasons, why was he only given one hour to decide whether to resign or be fired?

12) If Mr. Walpin’s telecommuting arrangements since the beginning of this year were a major concern, then why was Mr. Walpin not simply asked to stop telecommuting?

Grassley asks the White House for a response in writing by Wednesday, June 24.

JiangxiDad on June 18, 2009 at 12:08 PM

Actually, that’s the Oxyclean guy, Billy Mays, not the Sham Wow guy.

Daggett on June 18, 2009 at 11:59 AM

lol, thanks.

scalleywag on June 18, 2009 at 12:09 PM

Blah Blah Blah. This already is TONS more evidence than the insipid TROOPERGATE “scandal”. Let’s get on with an investigation. I smell abuse of power. Or maybe we can wait until two weeks before the next election to cause the most damage possible. Can’t we get the guy from Alaska to run it…… Oh NO Wait….he got a cushy job in the Department of he Interior, didn’t he???

Did the New York Times wait a week to talk about Palin’s LAUGHABLE “abuse of power”?? I don’t think so. How about Maddow? Olbermann? Schuster? They must be all over the Walpin story. If any of the five people that watch that “network” see this, let us know what they are saying over there.

Dan Pet on June 18, 2009 at 12:09 PM

The Times’ failure to include both of these facts — widely reported by actual news organizations for the last few days — puts this in the category of White House spin, and the Times as a mouthpiece for Barack Obama.

In other news today, the Sun rose out of the east.

Mike D. on June 18, 2009 at 12:09 PM

For the first time, since February 5th, 2008, I have actual “hope”. Read the headlines, I think the honeymoon is over. obamanomics and obamasoco is starting to be questioned, even by the moonbat rags.

This will be the final nail in the coffin.

HornetSting on June 18, 2009 at 12:11 PM

JiangxiDad on June 18, 2009 at 12:08 PM

Nice catch. It will be interesting to hear the rest of the story, should there be any answers forthcoming.

scalleywag on June 18, 2009 at 12:11 PM

How does it help the NYT to leave out hugely relevant facts of a story since they are hardly the only news source people will hear about this?

Cindy Munford on June 18, 2009 at 11:46 AM

Never underestimate the power of pure hubris.

Tonus on June 18, 2009 at 12:12 PM

Glen Beck had Walprin on the other day and there’s a video of Beck giving him a sanity test that is delicious and which the IG passes with flying colors. (I doubt Biden could pass such a test). This is clearly an abuse of power and the NYSlimes is once again showing that its thumb is always on the scale in its reportage of republican versus democrap scandals.

eaglewingz08 on June 18, 2009 at 12:13 PM

Don Feder: “Obama should have, “Made by the NYT” stamped on his tushie.”

Feder: Savage Blasts “Neo-Marxist Media” for Neo-Marxist President

The answer, as Savage correctly and courageously pointed out, is a media that colluded with his presidential campaign and now has become an adjunct of the White House press office.

Since The New York Times sets the agenda for the rest of the “neo-Marxist media,” America’s so-called newspaper of record is the chief culprit here.

Until conservatives acknowledge the fact that The New York Times and company are at war with basic American values — and begin fighting back — a nation with a conservative plurality will continue on a course charted by a neo-Marxist president.

TheBigOldDog on June 18, 2009 at 12:13 PM

It’s almost as if the NYT assumes (or knows) that Obama will never leave the Presidency, perhaps they already know he plans on activating his emergency powers “until the crisis is over.” :)

How else could you explain any kind of credibility exit strategy once he’s out of office…?

DrRansom on June 18, 2009 at 12:15 PM

“DEAD!DEAD!DEAD!”

– Rahm Emanuel

fogw on June 18, 2009 at 12:16 PM

I’ve noticed that flies are attracted to both the Obamas, and my dogs droppings. Any scientific connection?

Jeff from WI on June 18, 2009 at 12:17 PM

OK, Komrades, why is this type a thing a shock to any one?

Does anyone here really think – really – that the MSM is going to hold Dear Leader to account? For the love of Pete, he’s got the media officed in the WH!

We’ll see more of this type of Saul Alinsky/USSR type crap in the coming months. Just remember – Rahm is just warming up, stretching his legs a bit. It’ll be interesting to see once he gets started.

God knows what it’s really going to take to wake folks up out of their slumber.

av8tr on June 18, 2009 at 12:17 PM

Actually, that’s the Oxyclean guy, Billy Mays, not the Sham Wow guy.

Daggett on June 18, 2009 at 11:59 AM

How many of those guys with beards are there?

Del Dolemonte on June 18, 2009 at 12:18 PM

Ignorance is our most expensive commodity.

Asher on June 18, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Judging from the fact that Obama sits in the oval office, it’s also our most plentiful.

jana on June 18, 2009 at 12:19 PM

NYT – Obama Ministry of Propaganda

jaime on June 18, 2009 at 12:19 PM

mjbrooks3 on June 18, 2009 at 11:46 AM

Bigger difference than just an R or D. Nixon was a rookie compared to what the “0″ has accomplished in 5 months.

chemman on June 18, 2009 at 12:25 PM

The NYT is too busy getting ready for the really big story on Sunday. Interview with the 1st Father. OOOOOhh gush, gush.

faol on June 18, 2009 at 12:26 PM

Feder: Savage Blasts “Neo-Marxist Media” for Neo-Marxist President

TheBigOldDog on June 18, 2009 at 12:13 PM

I read that too fast. Thought it said Fred Savage blasts and I coulnd’t imagine why the kid from The Wonder Years was mad at Obama.

myrenovations on June 18, 2009 at 12:29 PM

Ignorance is our most expensive commodity.
Asher on June 18, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Judging from the fact that Obama sits in the oval office, it’s also our most plentiful.

jana on June 18, 2009 at 12:19 PM

You mean he has finally suspended the laws of supply and demand. I always knew he would come out of the closet someday and prove he’s a modern day alchemist. Make that the Alchemist-in-Chief

chemman on June 18, 2009 at 12:30 PM

sufficient reason for the dismissal

ACORN
Americorps
Michelle Obama
Obama backers
Massive fraud, waste and misuse of Government funds
Destruction of evidence
There’s your real sufficient reason.

PaddyJ on June 18, 2009 at 12:31 PM

So you’re arguing that he’s just a horrifying hypocrite and not ncessarily a criminal (in this case)?

Well, if he violated an actual law, then it might be an impeachable offense, so yeah, it matters. I’m down with calling him out on being a hypocrite, but if we say he broke the law, and it’s not a law, then we lose by overreaching.

The Monster on June 18, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Thanks for the post. My parakeet had whited out that part.

Ted Torgerson on June 18, 2009 at 12:32 PM

Please, NYT, just go bankrupt and out of business already.

Daggett on June 18, 2009 at 12:33 PM

The proles don’t need no stinking facts…unless we tell them they do….and after we decide WHAT the facts are!!

ihasurnominashun on June 18, 2009 at 12:39 PM

puts this in the category of White House spin, and the Times as a mouthpiece for Barack Obama.

Nothing new here.

MarkTheGreat on June 18, 2009 at 12:42 PM

I love the NYT’s TV commercials that they run in the Phoenix market. They feature the gay guy mooning over the Arts and Entertainment section, the lefty guy and gal who just love the editorials and the beardo professor type who appreciates the no-holds-barred reporting.

DrW on June 18, 2009 at 11:48 AM

Where I live (SW Ohio), it advertises a Weekender subscription (Friday, Saturday, Sunday). One of the lines, spoken by one of the very effeminate males used for the ad, is, “Only the very best journalists write for the Times…. And there’s no debating that.”

I laugh every time I see it. What frauds. “Only the slanted reporting that they see fit to print.”

BuckeyeSam on June 18, 2009 at 12:44 PM

I love Walpin’s spunk. There will be blood.

T J Green on June 18, 2009 at 12:45 PM

Archibald Cox was not available for comment.

Alex_SF on June 18, 2009 at 12:51 PM

I love the NYT’s TV commercials that they run in the Phoenix market. They feature the gay guy mooning over the Arts and Entertainment section, the lefty guy and gal who just love the editorials and the beardo professor type who appreciates the no-holds-barred reporting.

DrW on June 18, 2009 at 11:48 AM

Where I live (SW Ohio), it advertises a Weekender subscription (Friday, Saturday, Sunday). One of the lines, spoken by one of the very effeminate males used for the ad, is, “Only the very best journalists write for the Times…. And there’s no debating that.”

I laugh every time I see it. What frauds. “Only the slanted reporting that they see fit to print.”

BuckeyeSam on June 18, 2009 at 12:44 PM

Same commercial here in NY. After gay marriage passes, the NYT subscribers will halve.

JiangxiDad on June 18, 2009 at 12:51 PM

The days of printing Nast’s cartoons and attacking the corruption of the Tammany Hall political machine are long gone of course.

If Boss Tweed were alive nowadays, he’d be an ardent Obama supporter, would be getting tons of Federal moneys for projects around NYC (and for himself and his buddies), perhaps he’d be an ACORN member and would be quite the hero in the NYT.

Dr. ZhivBlago on June 18, 2009 at 12:54 PM

I like the emotional graphic in the NYT article. I thought “Gee, this old crusty guy is taking money from these hard working kids” was the angle they were going after.

MarkABinVA on June 18, 2009 at 1:00 PM

I wrote the author a respectful email asking why there was no mention of President Obama’s co-sponsor of a bill that sets guidelines for this procedure. I’m sure he’s right on it.

MarkABinVA on June 18, 2009 at 1:06 PM

J-Dad at 12:08
That deadline was yesterday. Wonder what the White House sent him.

justincase on June 18, 2009 at 1:36 PM

Minute, by minute, day by day as the approval numbers continue to slide I expect to see even more desparate measures undertaken by the celebrity in the Whitehouse. How truly moronic can this administration be. I would also expect him to run afoul of even more of those pesky rules and regulations as well.

For the most part the bear is still asleep. God help BHO once it finally wakes.

StockOption on June 18, 2009 at 1:42 PM

I am surprised that Walpin did not find a horse’s head in his bed.

Johan Klaus on June 18, 2009 at 1:50 PM

Walpin, who has been interviewed on numerous radio and television shows, shows no signs of any type of mental impairment, as the Obama smear meisters have claimed.

Blake on June 18, 2009 at 11:53 AM

The NYT cannot rush to judgment. Only the Obama Administration’s psychiatrists can determine if IGs are mentally fit. If Obama declares that Walpin has dementia, then he has a “duty to die” to prevent excessive ObamaCare costs.

econavenger on June 18, 2009 at 1:51 PM

Bwahahahahaha.

A politician firing someone for incompetency!

Barry firing someone for incompetency!!

reaganaut on June 18, 2009 at 2:02 PM

Hey Ed, when HASN’T the Times been a mouthpiece for Team Barry?

GarandFan on June 18, 2009 at 2:10 PM

I am surprised that Walpin did not find a horse’s head in his bed.

Johan Klaus on June 18, 2009 at 1:50 PM

The Mighty Warrior Messiah left a dead fly on his pillow.

Jeff from WI on June 18, 2009 at 2:12 PM

I am surprised that Walpin did not find a horse’s head in his bed.

I thought the tradition for Dem presidents was to arrange for them to be found nursing a ventilated cranium by the DC park police…

Immolate on June 18, 2009 at 2:13 PM

The Left calls female opponents “sluts,” and elderly opponents “senile.” And they call people who work for the New York Times, “journalists.”

Loxodonta on June 18, 2009 at 2:33 PM

Where is the AARP on this? Apparently if you are old you must also be senile.

JeffVader on June 18, 2009 at 2:45 PM

It’s well past time to impeach the fascist, criminal thug.

If only millions of Americans had the cojones, or even cared as much as the Iranian revolutionaries.

Rae on June 18, 2009 at 3:04 PM

…puts this in the category of White House spin, and the Times as a mouthpiece for Barack Obama.
-Ed

Ed, are you saying you ever doubted the NYT was a mouthpiece for BHO or are you touting this as evidence of what you already knew?

SKYFOX on June 18, 2009 at 3:05 PM

Which law is this, Ed? I’ve seen some mention of this in a bill that Senator McCaskill wrote, and then-Senator Obama even co-sponsored, but it has yet to become law.

The Monster on June 18, 2009 at 11:47 AM

H.R. 928: 2007-2008 Inspector General Reform Act of 2008

Signed by President Bush on October 14, 2008

melchitt on June 18, 2009 at 4:18 PM

No doubt the Times is still stressing on whether to run that whole Acorn/Obama tie article they witheld prior to the election.

Obama is not punishing Walpin’s freedom of speech or supressing a story on Obama’s continued corruption, merely extending that right of gettting paid to others who need some cash, yah, share the wealth.

dthorny on June 18, 2009 at 4:57 PM