Harman and AIPAC: an inconvenient fact omitted
by skeptic06, Sun Nov 19, 2006 at 09:21:58 AM EST
I started on this line with a piece by Chris on Friday, which included this (referring to a Time piece from October):
There are two other major pressing reasons that Harman should not be the chair. The first is that Harman is under investigation for illegally trying to use AIPAC in order to become the chair...
As it happens, that's not true. Or, rather, is grossly misleading.
I pointed out in a comment that the Post amongst others had, a few days after the Time piece came out, confirmed from FBI sources that the Harman investigation had been inactive for months.
I then come across this blog piece which links other lefty web scribes who tell half the truth.
Yglesias, for instance, cites the Post piece I mention above without mentioning that it said that the investigation was inactive.
Greenwald links the Time piece but, again, does not say that the investigation was inactive.
I'm not suggesting any sort of conspiracy here - I tend to think that, with things looking so black for Pelosi on the Harman/Hastings front, some lefty scribes may have been subconsciously drawn away from information that doesn't help her cause.
Or may be parsing texts on the subject with an unthinking tilt toward the Lioness.
Or perhaps that's just a little naive.