shotbanner.jpeg

January 11, 2005

Swing, Miss

I haven't yet read the entire Thornburgh/Boccardi report, although I will.

Having skimmed, and read many other reports (most notably Hugh and Michelle Malkin's day-long series, the big question seems to be why did the report seem to go to such lengths to avoid calling "Bias".

Hewitt put it well:

The Panel might have at least released all of Napes' e-mails instead of selectively quoting from them. It might have at least provided explicit details on Mapes' "mystery source" from whom "[o]n August 23, and seemingly out of the blue, Mapes learned that a never-before-seen document might be in the possession of Lieutenant Colonel Burkett and that it might shed new light on the President's Guard service." (p. 44.) (Could that source have really been Linda Starr?)

The Panel might have given us some idea of the background of free-lance journalist Michael Smith, whose back-and-forth with Mapes on August 31 and September 1 provides the best glimpse of motive the Panel ever references: "What if there was a person who might have some information that could possibly change the momentum of an election but we need to get an ASAP book deal to help us get the information? Smith e-mailed Mapes on the 31rst. "Mapes responded in an e-mail to Smith's proposal, stating 'that looks good, hypothetically speaking of course,'" the report tells us on page 86, but it does not tell us what else Mapes said in that e-mail. Smith writes back to Mapes: "Just in case Burkett asks -- let me make sure I have this right. This is our plan: If he shows us some leg, we are going to talk to him about his options in the following areas: 1) Security, 2)Publishing, 2A) (related topics of 'taking care of him' with money) and 3)forcing Kerry campaign 62 to acknowledge his wisdom and strategic abilities...If his leg is sexy and useful then we are going to do whatever it takes to help him in those areas."

The Report then notes: "The Panel has discovered no written response by Mapes to this e-mail." (p.86)

How convenient. Instead of the missing 18 minutes, we have the missing e-mail(s).

It's almost like they pushed it to the brink of getting to the "b" word, and then backed off at the last second.

Posted by Mitch at January 11, 2005 12:45 AM | TrackBack
Comments
Post a comment









Remember personal info?
hi