Yesterday, the new York Times ran an article that demonstrated that Alberto Gonzales told Congress the truth about disputes over NSA surveillance programs and his meeting with John Ashcroft.

Today, however, the New York Times insists that Alberto Gonzales be fired or impeached for not telling the truth about such dissent.

Their argument?

As far as we can tell, there are three possible explanations for Mr. Gonzales’s talk about a dispute over other — unspecified — intelligence activities. One, he lied to Congress. Two, he used a bureaucratic dodge to mislead lawmakers and the public: the spying program was modified after Mr. Ashcroft refused to endorse it, which made it “different” from the one Mr. Bush has acknowledged. The third is that there was more wiretapping than has been disclosed, perhaps even purely domestic wiretapping, and Mr. Gonzales is helping Mr. Bush cover it up.

As far as I can tell, there are three possible explanations for the New York TimesÂ’ talk about the veracity of Mr. Gonzales comments and the need for his firing or impeachment.. One, they don't read their own newspaper. Two, the editorial page operates using a different set of facts than the newsroom does, making the reality on the editorial page different from the one that has been reported in the news pages of the New York Times . The third is that the facts don't matter to the editorial page of the New York Times, and that they therefore choose to ignore the reporting of their own reporters in an attempt to undermine the Bush administration.

Regardless, it is clear that the New York Times is no longer a reliable news source -- based upon the reporting and editorials of the New York Times.

Posted by: Greg at 01:33 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 300 words, total size 2 kb.