Yesterday I noted that the NYT continues to be guilty of misrepresenting basic facts in the Rove/Plame debacle. Now Andrew Cline, writing in the American Spectator, picks up on the NYT's failure to present those facts:
The Times also, incredibly, persists in asserting that "Mr. Wilson debunked the claim that Saddam Hussein tried to buy uranium from Niger to make nuclear weapons." Do the Times editorial writers read anything other than their own editorial page?
We know the answer to that, of course. Cline concludes:
The Post's editorial board has concluded both that Wilson did not debunk the Iraq uranium-shopping story and that his wife was not outed by an administration bent on revenge. That's because the evidence refutes Wilson's claims. And yet the Times editorial board chooses to ignore the evidence and perpetuate Wilson's delusional story.
That is an amazing dereliction of journalistic duty, particularly for America's unofficial "newspaper of record."
And that's some record.