Damn. Hugh, what on earth are you trying to accomplish here? If you are reading this, please do tell. You link to blogs all the time, with "uncorroborated" accounts, how is this any different? It wasn't some random yo-yo who signed up here today to post stuff. Geesh. I really don't get the hang-up with this story.
Don't worry. Hugh will be back to covering the Roberts nomination next week. If you are interested in the judiciary, you are in for a treat. Nobody covers matters judiciary better than Hugh.
I'm glad you asked that, because I was also wondering the same things.
His whole argument was the story was unsourced, and put on FR as gossip and rumor by a kooky person, but that simply isn't the case. He's saying his own or others anonymous sources are more credible than some anonymous source found through FR, because he says so. How arrogant, not to mention he's behind the curve by several hours.
Shesh.