Replies

Main assertions by WaPo:
- WaPo does not know the identity of MD4BUSH
- WaPo was working with "an intermediary acting on behalf of MD4BUSH"
- WaPo was given MD4BUSH's FR password (WHOA!) by the "intermediary"
- WaPo logged into FR and "verified" the FReepmails between NCPAC and MD4BUSH
- WaPo posted this article on their web site at 2:15am EST
- WaPo does not name the Democratic Party "operative"
- RAT operative was "no longer was working for the party at the time the e-mail was dated"
- RAT operative claims the e-mail message obtained by the Governor's chief counsel is a fake.

So, based on this report we are to believe:
1. WaPo had (has?) MD4BUSH's FR password but does not know who MD4BUSH is.

Yeah, right.

2. The "operative" wasn't working for the MD RATS in Fall '04

Yeah, right.

3. Using MD4BUSH's password WaPo accessed the FReepmail long before it was posted publicly

Yeah, right.

4. WaPo is staying up really really late to work out their story on MD4BUSH

Now, I believe that one.

The "operative" wasn't working for the MD RATS in Fall '04

We know from the original WBAL thread that the Democrat operative is Ryan O'Doherty. The Washington Post probably didn't name him because he denied any wrongdoing.

He may not have been working for the Maryland Democratic Party in February, the date of the purported e-mail from him that Finney's office released. I haven't found any MD Democrat Party press releases from February 2005 with his name on it. The last I found was from January 2005. That doesn't mean that he wasn't working there or his e-mail address wasn't still active, though.

Why is Fall 2004 is relevant?

Good summary.
You can add

The WaPo reporter talked to Mayor O'Malley, Governor Ehrlich, and Joe Steffen before publishing their article.

---They may have "talked" but did the conversation include reference to the relevant Freepmails? I think not.