READERS of the New York Times, as of yesterday, still hadn't been informed of Scott Ritter's sex-sting arrest. This fact is KEY to my theory of Ritter's 'conversion", in that it proves, ex post facto, that he left media is absolutely and totally INCURIOUS about the personal 'shortcomings' of someone who serves the left's political purposes -- all of this is laid out in Ann Coulter's "Slander", for example.
Scott knew that moving left would be the best way to "seal his case" forever -- and it worked for a while.
Regarding the media handling. I posted on this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/829768/posts?page=51#51
Posts 51 and 52 the following info from today's "Reliable Resources" on CNN:
#51
Howard Kurtz talking about this right now on "Reliable Resources". He has Fred Dicker from the NY Post who says by this point he can't fathom, but has his ideas, why the NY and LA Times won't touch the story, and major networks.
Newsweek guy on saying this story is not in the upcoming issue as it involves "an already marginalized voice"! Kurtz, to his credit, sounds a bit incredulous at this offering from the Newsweek twerp. Dicker says if it was a pro-Bush voice you can bet they all would be covering it.
#52
Both guests agree Ritter is damaged goods and no longer will be sought as an anti-war voice.
Dicker just threw out there's the possibility that Ritter has been blackmailed over this. Kurtz hastens to say that's just speculation on his part. Dicker says "of course, it's the speculation by a lot of people, too".