So who on Martinez's staff told you the memo was a product of Senator Reid's office?

Cuase..umm... those people are liars who played you for a fool.

While the previous commenter was lacking in tact, I do believe you said ABC and the Post should burn their source if it was not proving reliable.

Hey, don't beat yourself up over this--figuring out the kerfing (when there isn't any) is hard work. Anyway, who woulda thunk it could be attributed to some dumbf... former Bush cabinet member? Cheers!

Classy post Josh. Even when you slip you demonstrate why this is one of my favorite sites.

I wouldn't say "ABC had it right." They were just less wrong than the WaPo. ABC smartly hedged a bit, but they still called it a "GOP Talking Points Memo," which it was not, and Kate Snow said on camera it came from "Senate Republicans," which it did not (it came from a staffer of one Senate Republican; to say it came from "Senate Republicans" plural implies that it was an official party document).

Josh has apologized for pointing the finger at Reid's office, which I think is the only thing he's really done wrong on this story. IIRC, Josh never had the full names of the persons who gave him the false information.

Not just "had it right" -- ABC *did it* right. Having it right wouldn't matter if all of the parties involved were more careful about stating what information they really had, from what sources.

ABC was no more certain of whether the memo was official party material or just some goofball's draft than anyone else here. But they were more careful to say they weren't certain.

What messed this whole thing up wasn't that anyone had it "right" to start out with. Nobody did -- the truth took a long time to find.

But various parties portrayed the information they had as being more reliable than it really was. People drew massive inferences on all sides, and everyone used the slivers of information we were provided to paint a story that favored their side.

At least you have the integrity to admit you made a mistake. That's why you remain one the more credible and reliable conservative bloggers.

Michelle Malkin is back-pedalling like there's no tommorow on her site right now. Claiming that she never insinuated that the infamous memo was a fake or a dirty trick by the Democrats when her OWN words over the past couple weeks prove her a LIAR and more importantly a COWARD for not being able to own up to her mistakes.

"GOP Talking Points Memo" is a fair description, if not exhaustive. GOP staffers on the Hill, especially lawyers, are a part of GOP officialdom and should be treated as such. The party got burned on this one. Move on.

This took intellectual honesty that the Powerline folks totally lack... I apprecitate that, and will visit your site more regularly.

"GOP Talking Points Memo" is a fair description, if not exhaustive.

No, it's not. It's highly misleading. There is such a thing as a party talking points memo. As I understand, it is issued by party leadership and follows a specific format. The Schiavo memo didn't have either of these properties. ABC tacitly supported the prevailing idea that the memo was evidence of an official high-level decision by the GOP to get involved in the Schiavo ordeal for partisan political purposes.

Summary: Martinez' staffer proposed using the Schiavo matter for political gain. Shame, shame on him.

Martinez himself was apparently involved in some way, at least (probably) lying that he'd never seen the memo before. Shame on him.

Some Democrats obtained the memo and of course rushed to the press in an attempt to smear the entire GOP with it, and the WaPo and ABC were all too willing to play along. Would they have been as eager if it were something embarassing to the Democrats? Can anyone think of any examples? The most recent I can think of is President Clinton's accusers. A much different kind of story but as I recall, the accusations were always reported with plenty of "alleged" and "supposedly" disclaimers.

Maybe that most of the Clinton "accusations" where exactly what the right engaged in this mess. Slinging falsehoods and lies as facts

Next time get some credible sources instead of posting lies.

http://www.intheagora.com/archives/2005/03/ita_exclusive_g.html#more

Hey dude, what of your earlier reporting, quote:

"Two of the four GOP staffers tell ITA they were eyewitnesses to the exchange."

Who are these filthy lying scumbag "eyewitnesses," and why won't they step forward and name-names?

Opps, that's a question that answers itself. Even a half-wit knows being a Repub means making stuff up, never saying sorry and never admitting a mistake. Like Martinez himself, there's always someone else to blame and a buck being passed.

Tom -

Sure, and Democrats have never engaged in anything of the sort. You're so right when you say that being a Republican is about making things up. I better switch to that pure and honest Democrat party, led by The Clintons and Sandy Burglar, Ted "Good Swimmer" Kennedy, and Robert KKK Byrd. Such a distinguished succession of people... such a powerhouse of moral authority... such a paragon of truth and honesty....

Michelle Malkin is also again asking Josh to burn his sources for that Reid report...she seems to be alleging that since 2 of the people who said it came from Reid's office, there's a good possibility that either it may have involved the guy who was fired, or even that the Senator himself must have known that they were trying to cover up the true author by blaming Reid.

I love reading conservative blog commenters whose last defense always seems to be "but the Dems do it, too!" Phil Aldridge, that means you.

Who cares what the Dems do or don't do. Berger got busted, Clinton got impeached, while you conservative apologists never hold the Republicans accountable. As a result, you have to be defensive about a GOP screw up, a series of bloggers lying about what is known, a complete lack of burning sources who provided false information, a poll driven swaying in the wind on a moral issue, hypocrisy on culture of life issues, and more.

Not exactly a day in the sunshine for all of you apologists.

The facts are simple, so stop trying to weasel your way out of them. We're talking about a talking points memo, and to say that it wasn't a GOP memo, or a Republican memo because it was, wink wink nudge nudge, "written by a staffer" is just silly. I used to live in DC, and staffers on both sides were friends of mine. They write everything. Get over it. Martinez handed it out, it therefore came from a senator, and he was the point man on this issue. Accept. Facts.

What commenters on this list and bloggers other than this one SHOULD be doing is accepting responsibility for an error. Anything less is a classic sign of being a weasel. We have enough of those on both sides of the aisle. But, for now, it's the GOP and apologist commenters on blogs like this who act to excuse blatant falsehoods.

To return to the original point: Morality doesn't depend on comparison to others. There is right, and there is wrong. Those who lied about the source of the memo were wrong. Accept that fact.

I disagree with Joshua's assessment of ABC's performance here.

In both of ABC's online stories, they reported: "talking points circulated among Senate Republicans" and "circulated among Republican senators."

If that's true, it remains to be shown.

ABC may have taken another position via email, but they didn't alert the general readership.

This all sounds somewhat like "depends on what the meaning of 'is' is."

One comment, this one pointed at Eric Seymour up above. Martinez was one of the three "point men" (along with Frist and Santorum) on this issue. By a purely literal meaning of the phrase, he was part of the Republican leadership on this issue. Thus, having passed on the memo to others, all the points you object to are literally true.

So stop scapegoating a man who fell on his sword for his less than stellar boss.

Why, exactly, is apologizing so hard for apologists?

Praises be, a conservative blogger with integrity! Rothko says more, better, than I could, you are a credit to what is otherwise a sea of fascist slime. I'm adding you to my list of blogs to lurk.

So, Martinez and his chief legal counsel aren't really GOP or aren't really Republican, and Martinez doesn't really pay any attention to his staffers or what they tell him to distribute, is that right? Are y'all that desperate to believe these nut cases? Isn't it at least plausible that our current administration is two forks short of full place setting, thanks in large part to self-imploding Dems?

ABC and the Post should have told us the author of the memo in the first place. It's a hyperlinked world now. The days of presenting a document without anchoring it so readers can drill down to the author and context are over. That's the virtue of blogging and the handicap of MSM.

Say, for instance, that the memo & the ugly political points it brought up was a duck. The GOPs actions on this Schiavo deal look like a duck. They smell like a duck. And Delay was quacking like a duck. So what's the debate? The whole thing was political, I don't understand why that's so surprising or why people choose to defend it or excuse it with such vigor. And the excuses are starting to sound like rhetorical gymnastics - "well, technically it was a staffer... he didn't mean to print it, uh, er, Martinez didn't mean to pass it along or read it, um, he thought it was his NCAA brackets. Er, um, Bill Clinton got a BJ 6 years ago.

From Rothko:

"Thus, having passed on the memo to others, all the points you object to are literally true."

Thanks for explaining that one to me, Obi-Wan...

LUKE SKYWALKER: Obi-Wan! Why didn't you tell me? You told me Vader betrayed and murdered my father.

OBI-WAN KENOBI: Your father was seduced by the dark side of the Force. He ceased to be Anakin Skywalker and became Darth Vader. When that happened, the good man who was your father was destroyed. So what I have told you was true . . . from a certain point of view.