After correcting itself on the Lewis Libby leak yesterday, the Times on Friday corrects another Bush-related intelligence story by reporter Eric Lichtblau that brought much criticism from conservative bloggers like PowerLine.
This is what Lichtblau falsely claimed March 29: “In a rare glimpse into the inner workings of the secretive court, known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, several former judges who served on the panel also voiced skepticism at a Senate hearing about the president's constitutional authority to order wiretapping on Americans without a court order.”
Today the Times admits: “An article on March 29 about congressional hearings on the Bush administration's program of domestic eavesdropping referred imprecisely to testimony about the secretive court known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which requires warrants for eavesdropping under most circumstances. While two former judges said they believed that Mr. Bush was bound by federal laws governing intelligence gathering, they did not explicitly express skepticism about whether he has the constitutional authority to order wiretapping on Americans without a court order.”
As Times Watch pointed out at the time, “Lichtblau doesn’t quote any of the judges actually voicing that skepticism about Bush’s actions -- skepticism Lichtblau certainly feels, judging by his slanted reporting in the past.”
"referred imprecisely"? That's a new way to admit a lie.
All of which might explain why the Times income fell 69% in the first quarter.
And this left wing nut job blogger has the nerve to call the Right liars.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment