[Mo1]

OK .. why is the Slimes reporting this

This is ... well very out of character for them

[Keith in Iowa]

>>>OK .. why is the Slimes reporting this...This is ... well very out of character for them

Break out the industrial umbrellas! You'll need all the protection you can get from the winged swine flitting about...

[bd476]

Mo1 wrote: "OK .. why is the Slimes reporting this This is ... well very out of character for them"

There must have been a cold snap in the nether regions today.

[bluefish]

Why is the NY Slimes reporting this?

See evolved's post #12 for your answer. It is the Dem's MO.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

I thought the same thing.
Excuse me for being skeptical, but, unless I heard this from a more credible news organization, I am only taking it with a grain of salt from NYTs.
I have more confidence from the other news sources that we are getting this information from than the NYTs.
I had this thought, what if ? this does not pan out, and does not grow legs, and this is just a ( ROVE MOVE ) by the liberals/democrats/MSM ?
Maybe this is why Rush and others are not going full steam ahead with this until we get more information about it.

[YaYa123]

You asked why The New York Times printed this.
Certainly not because their reporters dug it out, that's for sure. The much maligned Judicial Watch handed the State Dept documents to The New York Times on a silver platter, and I guess they couldn't not cover it!

But did you notice, the NYT could not credit Judicial Watch without the prerequisite "conservative" adjective attached.

And the NYT did not identify the Clinton administration officials who failed to respond to calls. (I'm guessing Bill, Madeleine, Jamie Ruben, and their worker bees are still crafting the official CYA response.

I would like to know when Judicial Watch turned the State Dept documents over to the NYT, how long they've had to get Clinton administration replies.