Passport to Trouble

I doubt it. Since the aide checked out both McCain's and Obama's, there was obviously no foul play. The fact that Clinton's and McCains passport files were also breached effectively confirms what was most likely all along: some idiot with too much time on his hands and access to clasified data screwed around.

Do you have proof that this is more than a coincidence?

The fact that the employee also accessed Obama's file suggests that his actions were independent from his boss.

What an OUTRAGEOUS mistake !
The CEo of the company is an Obama advisor. But he was not the person who actually accessed the file.
How unprofessional of you not to even get that basic fact right.
Irresponsible. I am not saying you are biased because I know better but this is what happens when you rush a gotcha entry before getting your facts right.
Outrageous,

I pushed submit before I reread myself.

I am furious that you would imply that the fact the employee in questions works for that company means the CEO has anything to do with it and therefore Obama would have to denounce it.

What does that piece of information change about the fact a random employee checked the records ? Why is it suddenly not "curiosity" anymore ? Any reason to suggest otherwise ?

This is very very very very poor journalism here.

I just want to point out three things:

(1) The two employees that were immediatly fired worked for a company with ties to Sen. Clinton and the actions were deemed inappropriate to a degree that they were removed.

(2) The incident in March was disciplined and the staff member was not fired at the behest of the State Dept.; not the company according to CNN. There is no indication of the campaign or the president of this company having any ties to this individual. And investigation will take place and all parties are cooperating.

(3) How is this in any way politics as usual or comparable to Bush 41 who had members of the adminstration do his bidding? And in this case; the Obama campaign was completely unaware as were high level state department officials. I see nothing for the Sen. to distance himself from; frankly.

I think the insinuations are inappropriate. But it's a shocking story and should be furthur investigated.

I personally just think it a symptom of the fact that DC is an incestuously small place.

The CEO is former CIA. From this are we to conlude that Geore Tenet has something to answer for?

The Daily Kos, Obama Central, has had a call to arms to trash this article, so take these negative comments with a grain of salt.

It was The Daily Kos that lead the charge to blame Hillary, along with comediennes Keith Olbermann and David Shuster.

Now that it turns out Obama is the guilty party, they are in full denial and attack mode.

.

Why is noone pointing out that this entry is factually incorrect ?

Nowhere does anybody suggest that the CEO had anything to do with the breach. Newton-Small is somehow jumping from one conclusion to another without any proof or even suggestion in any of the reporting done so far.

Hell, two of the most serious breaches were done by employees of a company whose CEO was a Hillary supporter. Why is it any different and the Obama campaign supposedly is responsible here ?

This is outrageously bad journalism here.

you call this journalism?
what a piece of garbage

go work for FOX News you pathetic hack

Does Time have any editors left on staff? The post above fails any journalistic test, even for a blog.

"The fact that it was a campaign operative is hardly surprising." Are you saing the CEO told his employees to access the files? Or maybe the CEO was doing his get to know the worker day and doing data entry.

"will Obama be forced to distance himself or fire yet another advisor for lowering themselves to “politics as usual” tactics, ie doing opposition research on McCain?" Again, are you saying the CEO ordered his staff to do this? WOW - what a claim and yet no evidence.

I understand Blogs are different but this is Time Magazine's blog and should adhere to minimal journalistic standards.

"Campaign Operative," huh?

That's quite a leap of logic.

Employee works for a company that has ties to an Obama advisor, so they must be a "campaign operative?"

So I guess the employees involved in the Obama breach were Clinton campaign operatives, yes? Since Stanley has ties to the Clintons?

Pretty shoddy journalism.

There's no proof that Brennan had anything to do with any of this. It's kind of unfair of you to jump the gun and start speculating about people getting fired for sleazy tactics.

Hey Inkslayer. Trash journalism is trash journalism whether DailyKos had a "call to arms" or not.

Newton-Small makes the leap to blame the "campaign operative" for doing this with NO, ZERO, NO evidence.

Can you show me the evidence? Please?

@ InkSlayer

It was idiotic for anyone to suggest Hillary had anything to do with it based on the fact one of the companies had ties to her and it is similarly idiotic to suggest the same thing about Obama (why would he order his own file to be breached ? DUH).

Difference is I didnt see the first outrageous conspiracy theory endorsed by a journalist here. This post endorses the second theory and that's unprofessional to do without proof.
There is not even a smoking gun or a suggestion or anything. She just somehow made the whole thing up. UNACCEPTABLE

What kind of journalism is this? Is this the UK?

Unless you can link the employee to a directive from the Obama campaign advisor, this is garbage, the innuendo is irresponsible, and even then you would still have more to establish. Why don't you wait until you have some more facts?

Who on your senior editorial staff is giving you orders to premptively smear the Obama campaign? It's blatantly obvious that the msm chieftains, since March 4, have committed themselves to one narrative: Obama must be torn down. That means hit and run journalism where no journalist will be expected to backtrack and offer a correction later. A narrative built on meaningless buzz.

I find the outrage from the Obama supporters hilarious. So...Obama and his surrogates can run all over televison pointing the finger of blame at Hillary with NO PROOF, just a tenuous "link". They can run all over the blogs calling it "dirty politics" and whatnot.

But the moment someone discovers that there is also the same sort of "link" to Obama, suddenly we are crying out for strict standards of proof.

Typical hypocrisy from Mr. Hopey McChangey's hordes.

The fact that it was a campaign operative is hardly surprising.

A campaign operative. WTF do you jump from someone who worked for Mr. Brennan's company being a campaign operative.

Could you be more full of crap?

don't you ned to go back to school and take an argumentation class or two. And a logic class wouldn't hurt you even.

Jackass.

Martina. I never did anything of the sorts because it would have been reckless and idiotic.

And therefore I am absolutely entitled to be outraged now.

The Obama campaign was desperate to blame this on the Clinton campaign in order to change the subject from the Wright flap. Instead, it blew up on their face.

Wait. I just read this again. So this so-called Obama team "campaign operative" breached OBAMA"S files? What?

By the way, I would say you are opening yourself and your news agency to a libel case by printing this egregious leap of logic. There is nothing--NOTHING that points to any of these employees--including the one that breached Clinton"s files--being operatives for any campaign. Retract this immediately, it stinks of the worst kind of tabloid standards.

Given that all three main candidates had their files snooped, the most likely conclusion was that it was individuals acting alone looking for somthing

You're missing the real story here. This is yet another example of the culture of lawlessness that has been endemic in Washington throughout this administration. Federal law was violated on multiple occasions by State Department contractors and no charges have been filed.

In principle, It's just like Blackwater.

The people at Ars Technica have a pretty good analysis of the greater privacy implications of all this:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080321-analysis-obamas-privacy-lesson-and-its-real-id-implications.html

Er, looking for something to sell to the media for a quick buck, that should have said.

to the couple of Clinton supporters posting above. I did not blame Clinton and the campaign did not blame Clinton. Get your facts straight.

Please tell us who exactly blamed Clinton for this instead of making the campaign and all Obama supporters complicit in your alleged conspiracy against Clinton.

And bad journalism is bad journalism. And libel is libel.

There are two companies envolved:

http://deepbackground.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/21/794799.aspx

A)Stanley Company - According to federal campaign records, Stanley's Chairman and CEO, Philip Nolan, has made political contributions to prominent Republican candidates and also gave $1,000 to Sen. Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign on Feb. 20, 2008. (Is he a Limbaugh operation chaos fan?)

B)Analysis Corp - John Brennan, the CEO of the Analysis Corp, gave $2,300 to Sen. Obama on Jan. 28, 2008, the records show. AND HE IS AN OBAMA ADVISOR - HE WORKS FOR THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN!!!!!!!!!!

That's the difference for all my Daily Kos, can't accept reality, friends.

.

Interesting!

Suddenly Obamabots from DailyKooks are interested in standards, proof, and evidence when it is Obama's ox that is being gored!

Weren't you the ones just yesterday blaming Hillary without any proof, standards, or evidence?

You reap what you sow!

I am enjoying this one immensely.

The assumption you make is factually wrong. Obama's campaign adviser is the CEO of the company whose employees looked at the files. We don't know the names of the employees or any other details. It's quite a leap to say that a CEO is directly responsible for the actions of the employees. I think you need to retract your statements.

As I said yesterday, if there is nothing to this, we should have quickly learned that the other candidates were also peeped on by low level staffers.

They were.

There is a scandal here, but not one that involves the presidential candidates, as presidential candidates per se.

The problem with Hillary supporters in this thread is that because a few crazies made crazy accusations, we are somehow not allowed to point out the outrage a respected blog would endorse similar accusations without proof.

It is perfectly legitimate to report this CEO is an Obama advisor. It is absolutely unacceptable to suggest in a report there is any link between the campaign and the actions of a rogue employee.

And it is sad that you would be petty enough and desperate enough to attack Obama you would suggest otherwise.

What is despicable for the goose is despicable for the gander.

Ah...the sweet fresh air of Vetting comes rushing in with the Springtime!!!!

Lovin' this!

Now that’s some accusation! Juicy scoop if it were true. But you offer nothing by way of proof beyond the idea that the contract employee works for Brennan’s company, therefore this was done at Brennan’s behest.

One could easily (and perhaps more credibly) apply the same leaps in logic to suggest that your baseless accusation is proof positive that you are a shill for the Hillary camp.

Either come up with more than you have here or quite insulting journalists by calling yourself one.

I didn't recall any Obama supporter complaining about Keith Obamaman and David (pimped) Shuster insinuating on Thursday that Hillary had something to do with this.

All of a sudden Mr. M talks about libel.

The (il)logical contortions Obama supporters have gone through in a matter of 24 hours is painful to watch.

JNS...By the time you're finished being trashed by the DKos robots, you'll be longing for the regular Swamplanders.

Anyone remember when Joe was inundated with Drudge Followers...Something to look forward to!!!

Benjamin,

Did you say a few crazies? You mean the crazies on DKos. Are there only a few there?

The Obama campaign never blamed this on Clinton. They merely called for investigations into the matter.

And as others have mentioned... there is a difference between suggesting a possible link, and straight up libel. This article claims as a confirmed fact, that the employee's actions were not only approved by the CEO but directly ordered.

This isn't right, no matter which candidate you support. But I guess this is more about getting back at the more idiotic Obama fans, than caring about journalistic integrity right?

Weren't you the ones just yesterday blaming Hillary without any proof, standards, or evidence?

Not me. I was too busy noting how low level staffers poking through DHS records illustrates why the NSA can't be trusted with unfettered access to domestic telco fiber.

Since I pointedly did NOT blame Clinton, I'm quite free to chime in and note that Jay has indeed jumped to a conclusion not supported by available evidence.

She will have to retract that story by tomorrow so enjoy this while it lasts.

Hey SRK - How do you know what I said or thought about olbermann or Shuster? Do you? Do you know I was arguing against the crazy conspiacy theorists - most of whom blamed Republicans but also those looking for Clinton connections. Do you know that? No you do not.

So let me just ask you -

Do you defend this piece as quality journalism?

Answer me yes or no please.

It takes quite a leap of misplaced logic to come up with such a conclusion, or she's a political operative trying to make points. Then again, maybe she's just auditioning for Faux News, where such twisted logic is standard reporting procedure.

Jay Newton-Small: young, pretty and apparently based on this blog not the brightest bulb in the pack.

Gee, I didn't read carefully enough:

The fact that it was a campaign operative is hardly surprising does indeed rise to the level of a lie.

The fact that it was a campaign operative is not even a fact.

This is not about Dkos or even Obama vs Clinton.
This is about a journalist making outrageous accusations without proof. Hillary supporters, who had to go through that for years (remember Whitewater) should be the first ones to be outraged as well.
If you want to make fun of the crazies go to DKos and do so. Here let's focus on pointing out how wrong JNS was to word her entry the way she did.

SRK

Remember we are one party. We are fighting against the Mccain-loving media.
Whoever is the nominee, we will have to put up with that kind of stuff all year long.
Let's be united now so that it does not happen again !

To the Daily Kos guy that said the Obama campaign didn't blame Clinton -

Comediennes Keith Olbermann and David Shuster are Obama campaign mouth pieces.

They get their marching orders from the Daily Kos and the Obama campaign.

There is no denying it. And there is no denying they blamed Clinton from the start without a shred of evidence.

David Shuster and Keith Olbermann worked so hard the night this story broke trying to implicate the Clintons I thought they were going to blow a gasket. They had to go through six levels of connection to get there, but by golly, they found it - Some diplomate who once watched a Clinton speech passed through the passport building last year, I think they said.

Then the next night after it was reported that everyone's passport security was compromised, Shuster, like a bulldog holding onto an imaginary bone, went out of his way emphasizing how the Clinton's passport breech was innocuous, but the Obama passport breech was oh so much more serious and nefarious. Who could have done it but the Clintons, trying to find some scurrilous trip Obama made as a child he conjected.

LOL

.

It's a story-in-progress and this entry is wildly speculative (as many others have been so far). It's not surprising it's on the blog, since it isn't going to published on the main Time page.

Let's see what happens, then make determinations.

You know, I recall Keith Olberman trying to pin this on the Clinton campaign. Now, we know an advisor from the Obama campaign is ultimately responsible for what these contrators did. So, the Obama campaign contacts Keith Olberman to run this story to detract from all the negativity from the Wright story. Keith goes on and on about this for 15 minutes and is outraged! He hints that the Clinton campaign could be behind it. The Obama campaign doesn't think it will be discovered and Axlerod says - He Obama go on vacation, we got a good story out there that will distract from all your negative publicity - that and the Richardson endorsement... Too bad it BACKFIRED! I think Keith owes the Clinton campaign an apology! The Obama campaign isn't very good at politics.

The simple fact is, this article makes an incredible error. Nothing the HRC supporters say will change that. You want coincidence? How about the supervisor of the office (yes, the supervisor of all of these contractors) is a Clinton appointee. The very same person who did not report the breaches up the chain of command. The one who decided ON HIS OWN that no IG investigation was warranted. That said, we have no information to support any wrong doing on his part. But if you want to start conspriracy theories, start there.

No one's personal information should have been breached for any reason. But to point fingers at CEO's who have no connection to this is irresponsible at best. There is no reason for Obama to distance himself from anyone.

There was likely no "foul play." But given the Bush administration's propensity to spy on innocent citizens, I guess we could not expect them to protect the privacy of three presidential candidates.

I never saw Shuster ever suggesting Hillary did it. EVER.
And the Obama breaches were more serious - because those were the two where employees had to be FIRED.

In any case, the fact other journalists are incompetent hacks does not excuse JNS being incompetent in this case.

I'm just having fun laughing at the Kossacks' and their Magical Unity Pony that has morphed overnight into a mighty high horse for them to climb onto.

Hey, did you guys write furious emails to Keith Olbermann last night for his scurrilous lack of journalistic standards? Come on, you surely did, didn't you? No?

Still chuckling mightily at the posturing affrontedness, here. Thank you so much, Kossacks! I needed a good laugh tonight!

I didn't write to Olberman because I didnt know he made such accusations. But I certainly hope you did to defend Sen. Clinton.

Moving on, Ms. Small, it might be nice if you supported some of your fantasies with some actual fact. Such as a link to Analysis Corporation. If you look at Analysis corporation list of services they provide, no wherein there is lisetd as "campaign operative" or "campaign consultant".

You have provided no nexus whatsoever between the Federal government hiring Analysis Corporation to handle the completely inept distribution of workload at the State Department. And is it possible that the person in question wasn't fire because they were actually a member of the Diplomatic Corps and not a contractor per se, but were actin in that capacity during last summer's passport crunch.

Lady, what you don't know about this story, passport office operations, private contractors and government contracts and how Washington works, is alot.

Your big "AHA" moment is total horsecrap. Yo'll be lucky ifyou dn't face libel action if you keep up at this pace of "idiot meets keyboard and jusms to lame shallow conclusions"

All you have is the equivalent of this type of scenario"thousands of people were standing in the area where someone's pocket got picked. The guy who owns the street where the pocket got picked happens to know the guy who's pocket got picked. Therefore, there must be some connection between the thousands, and thousands of people who are pickpockets and travel that street, and these two folks.

No matter how much breathless drama you bring in your report of this non-story, it doesn't actually make it a story.

Facts are going to prove to be stubborn things here. For example: You should actually take Clinton out of the story, since her breach was actually witnessed and supervised by a superior, and she was notified of the event and how it happened.

Now you are down to McCain and Obama. And since you have no evidence, and the thinnest and most asinise of all possible fragile conclusions to base this blurb on, couldn't you show a little less "i need to tell someone before I wet my pants" sort of five year old behavior and do some, I dunno, actual journamalismy type digging to find if if there's any there, actually there.

This isn't news blogging. It's gossip. And it's incompetent gossip at that. Here's a tip, if you want to know why this one person didn't get fired, maybe he had a contract, you nitwit. Maybe he worked for the Foreign Service. Maybe he was the child of someone higher up in power who thought they had a right to this information, or at least to snoop. There was clearly some type of view f privilege by the perpetrator of this crime going on, since they had to pass through several prompts reminding them of the secrecy level of this information in order to access the files.

Until you actually have a story that has say some, REAL type facts, and not wish fulfillment innuendo in it, then seriously, S*T*F*U.

You are embarassing yourself terribly.

Try going after Pat Buchanan's racist wingnut this morning on how black slaves should be on their knees thanking us for rescuing them and introducing them to Chritianity and the good life.

Journamalism. I guess nobody becomes a journalist because the nuclear physics classes are too full...

Ha ha ha ha! This is rich -- bet Obama doesn't want a full congressional investigation now. The CEO of the company is his adviser on Security and this is how he runs his company? Heckava job picking that adviser, Obama -- almost as good as Samantha "Iraq withdrawal is just campaign talk" Power, Goolsbee "NAFTA rhetoric" and Rice "Obama isn't ready to answer the WH phone at 3:00 a.m." Is this the kind of competency we can expect picking his cabinet if he becomes President? And to the DailyKooks -- this would NOT be an issue if your guy hadn't screamed bloody murder about it, so stop tripping over yourselves saying it doesn't matter. Sure, Brennen didn't do the snooping personally, but Obama HAD to know he owned the company before he started crying about it -- or maybe he will take the "I didn't know" defense that worked so well with Wright. HA!

The Obama campaign was desperate to blame this on the Clinton campaign in order to change the subject from the Wright flap. Instead, it blew up on their face.
Posted by Joe | March 22, 2008 9:56 PM

Idiot.Bill Richardson called the campaign over a week to tell them that they had his endorsement. had he wished to deflect attention, all he had to do was bring Richardson out on Tuesday or Wednesday.

Try to pay attention to ALL of the news, not just the news that suits your point of view.

Hmmmm... I wonder who Dick Parsons, Jeffery Bewkes, Ann Moore and other Time Warner executives gave money to this year. I wonder if that somehow makes every Time magazine reporter and editor a shill for the candidate of their choice... Of course not.

For another take on the same information, see:

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/03/john_brennan_a_conspiracy_of_n.php

Seems like there's a lot more to be determined.

OGolden one - will we see any of this info about a Clinton appointee in the MSM? I haven't heard this but I do believe that this Advisor to the Obama campaign is ultimately ACCOUNTABLE for his people in this company. I also believe a further investigation is warranted to see what the Obama campaign had to do with this - if this was a setup to distract from negative press and make Obama look somehow more important than he really is (i.e. having Condi Rice apologize to him) Turns out, it kinda backfired when Condi had to apologize to the other candidates too. So, Obama didn't get all the "good" press to himself like he wanted (and Keith Olberman wanted) Again - Keith should apologize - his rantings are really embarrassing to himself and the station he works for.

Jay, you seem to be big Hillary supporter. I have yet to see even one article of yours critical of Hillary.

Its ok to support to Hillary. But please dont being your politics to your job. please be a reporter and write with your mind, not feelings

why are your trying to create a false impression that Obama is behind the breaching of the passport files, by using guilt by association. So what if one of his advisors is the CEO of the firm...the CEO himself probably had no idea that this was being done.

please be fair.

Casey Morris-- so are you saying that Bill Richardson lied about Obama's speech on Wednesday being the reason that made him decide to endorse Obama? AND Obama stood there and LET Bill Richardson lie about it? WOW -- I really feel that trust for Obama now.

It seems that Obama has a lot of "guilt by associations" these days.

I also believe a further investigation is warranted to see what the Obama campaign had to do with this - if this was a setup to distract from negative press and make Obama look somehow more important than he really is

At this point I'm ready to promote this as Dirks' addendum to Occam's razor.

"If there are two competing explanations for an event and one calls for someone being surprisingly brilliant and the other calls for them to be incredibly stupid - stupidity wins every time."

These theories concerning the campaigns orchestrating events rather than simply getting news and responding to it strikes me as incredibly naive.

Jay has already provided an example of what happens when you assert speculation as fact. I suggest everyone shut up until there's some ACTUAL information to comment on.

(that goes for KO too I suppose...)

Actually Jackson25, it has hit MSM. Both MSNBC and CNN reported it the night the story broke. The man in question is a veteran of the consulate system and was appointed by Bill Clinton to lead that division. He is still in place today and is widely regarded as the consummate professional.

As for the story, the only issue here is whether the Bush administration does enough to protect data. I doubt the campaigns were involved but if they were it will be found out.

Olberman doesn't owe anybody an apology. He never once accused any campaign of wrong doing. The closest anyone got was Andrea Mitchell, a veteran of the State Department press corps-- and even she is skeptical.

The Olbermann/Shuster implicated guilty party is - - hold for it - -

Maura Harty, A State Department official in charge of the Bureau Of Consular Affairs who served as an ambassador under Bill Clinton.

That's a hell of a lot different than being the, "OFFICE MANAGER at the time of the passbook breeches" OGoldenOne.

Was she even in the same state at the time? LOL

You Kosacks crack me up.

.

OGoldenOne - I don't agree with you. I actually think there is a lot to this story and some good investigative reporting will uncover some additional questionable behavior in the Obama campaign. It's not like they haven't done something like this before - his campaign contacted the Canadian govt w/regard to NAFTA. And, I disagree about Olberman - he's clearly wrong about what he has been saying about the Clinton campaign and has taken it to a personal level with Hillary Clinton. Has Olberman mentioned anything about John Kerry's remarks about Obama being qualified because he's "black." Could he do a report comparing Geraldine Ferraro's statement with Kerry's? Is that what a good reporter would do? Could Olberman talk about some of the missing pages of the First Lady documents and compare that with the 8 years of Obama's missing Illinois Senate documents? I could go on but you seem intelligent enough to get my point. Keith Olberman demands an apology from Clinton; the Obama campaign demands apologies from Clinton; yet do us "typical white people" receive an apology from Obama?

This type of lazy hype and the comments that follow reminds me of that telephone game we used to play at camp or worse the slime rumors of high school girls. Did you go to the same J-school as Nedra Pickler? Did you fail the logic course if there even was one? I assume editors aren't involved in blog posts.

The mountains that are being made out of this molehill are the real scandal. A low level employee of a contractor snooped in high profile files thinking that he/she wouldn't get caught. Those types work in every organization.

The management at State is repsonsible for the daily work of its employees even the contractors. If someone there finds a violation of work rules, the information is referred to the third party contract liaison. The employee has some rights of defense before negative action is taken against him/her.

There is no evidence that the CEO of the company or Sen Obama or Sen Clinton or Sen McCain had anything to do with these breaches. When there is let us know but until then do some research.

As for Obama folks charging Sen Clinton with whatever is referred to in the comment section, if that is the flap over 'patriotism' (which started with Joe Scarborough) or the flap over this flap, there is also no evidence that Sen Obama has said anything about who may have been involved with the employees who breached the files. When there is a connection to Sen Clinton, please let us know.

Yeah, this doesn't make any sense. If it was actually an Obama Aide, they wouldn't have demanded an investigation. It sounds like it was just a bored cube-dweller looking up information for their own curiosity.

This is ridiculous. How on earth do you go from the reported fact that Brennan is involved in the company to calling him "a campaign operative" and strongly implying that this was some kind of "dirty trick"?

You call this journalism? I call it crap.

Jay Newton-Small has yet to learn the fine art of insinuation.

Instead of:

The idea that it may have a campaign operative is hardly surprising.

She should have said

Was this the work of an Obama campaign operative? Is it irresponsible to speculate? It is irresponsible not to.

(She's also apparently unaware the netiquette dictates that when you edit a post after it's been quoted in comments, its polite to acknowlege the fact. We'll have to get AMC to teach her about overstrike tags)

Converse -

Brennan - the guy in charge of the company whose employees snooped into the passbook files is an Obama foreign policy advisor. He works for Obama. That is as close a tie as you're going to find.

.

Thank you for investigating and reporting on this breach. We needed to know the source and now we do. Excellent journalism!

You proved my point InkSlayer. I didn't say Maura was an "office manager." I said Maura she was the consummate professional, a veteran of consular affairs and ran the department. And yes, Maura is a Clinton appointee. Want to pass blame? Lay it there. Want a conspiracy theory? Start there.

I, for one, welcome and investigation. But the buck stops with Maura-- a Clinton appointee-- and the Bush administration.

And yes, Jackson25, I heard Olberman's special comment on HRC. TIVO'd it for my viewing and re-viewing pleasure. And I agreed with every word of it. We could spend all night listing the ways Clinton and her surrogates pushed the race issue in negative ways: Cuomo, Johnson, Rangel, Ferraro, Penn, Kerrey, Bill and Hillary herself. Suddenly black votes aren't important. If she "wins" the nomination, it will be interesting to see how they pay her back this fall.

And speaking of NAFTA, Jackson25. It seems the White House calendars shows HRC lied about her support of NAFTA. But then again, what's new about that? After all, she endured sniper fire in Bosnia along with Chelsea, Sinbad and Sheryl Crowe. Amazing... Is still means is. I could go on, but it seems you are intelligence enough to get my point.

Amateur hour is right. This is what BO does when people catch on to what an inexperienced, incompetent and racist man he is -- he plays the victim. So he has someone investigating his passport files, and turns Bill and Hillary Clinton into racists, and now he's trying to make them un-american. People may have been fooled the first time with the Bill and Hillary are racists thing, even though they aren't, but even typical white people know that they aren't unamerican and that they weren't trying to break into BO's passport file.

In fact the funniest thing about this whole "violation of my civil rights" fiasco -- is that BO hasn't been anywhere -- not to visit European nations as the chair of the foreign relations committee overseeing NATO -- not anywhere except Kenya. Oh yea, that was another "Hillary is releasing pictures of me" debacle. It wasn't Hillary and why the hell are you yelling about people posting pictures of you that are in the public domain, anyway?

Amateur hour.

Benjamin and Mr. M,

I will remember we are one party when you Obama supporters stop accusing Clintons and their supporters as racists and stop accusing Bill Clinton as a McCarthyite. Show us that courtesy, stop distorting innocuous remarks and I will fight with you on the front line against media inaccuracies.

Until the faux-outrage from Obama and his supporters stops, I will stay where I am. I want to support the Democratic party because I have been a Democrat all my life. But, if the Democratic party wants to leave me I can't do much about it.

Meanwhile, I will stay in the peanut gallery enjoying you battling Time.

Now how would HRC know where he's been or not been in the world? She hasn't seen his passport file. Or has she?

First off, I must preface my comments by saying I'm a Canadian Citizen and a consumer of Time Magazine. As a consumer I feel duty bound to address this piece of tripe/fiction.
You should be fired! Here are the definitions for Slander and Libel from Merriam Webster:

Slander: the utterance of false charges or misrepresentations which defame and damage another's reputation

Libel: a statement or representation published without just cause and tending to expose another to public contempt

YOU are clearly guilty of both and have set up not only yourself but the company you work for to be sued.

Case in point, you say the employee of Analysis corp was the only one not fired. Perhaps if you had bothered to do your research, you would know that this was at the behest of the State Department, who asked that this action not be taken until the investigation was finished. Furthermore, you neglect to mention that Mr. Brennan has instructed his employee to FULLY cooperate with the investigation. (Yeah that sounds like a guy with something to hide...NOT)

Second point: You mention Senator Clinton's file had been breached, but as someone mentioned above, you neglect to say that this was last year and during a training exercise.

Third Point: You also neglect to mention that the employees who committed the first two breaches against Senator Obama, worked for Stanley Inc. and that the CEO of Stanley Inc. donated $1000 to Senator Clinton's campaign. It would be as egregious to suggest the CEO of Stanley Inc. was acting as a "political operative" for Senator Clinton, as you flat out say about Mr. Brennan and the Obama Campaign. Here again is the definition of operative from Merriam Webster:

operative: a person who works toward achieving the objectives of a larger interest

By using the word operative you are clearly implying something that has no basis in FACT and for which there is no evidence.

Fourth Point: This portion "The question throughout this mini-scandal has been: what, if anything, of interest was learned. But with today’s revelation a new question arises: will Obama be forced to distance himself or fire yet another advisor for lowering themselves to “politics as usual” tactics, ie doing opposition research on McCain?"
of your final paragraph states outright an accusation for which you have produced NO evidence, making this published piece actionable in a court of law. And since you seem to play fast and loose with your words, here is the meaning of actionable from Merriam Webster:

actionable: subject to or affording ground for an action or suit at law

By the way, I've forwarded this to the editor of Time Magazine. I would strongly reccomend that you remove this post AND print an apology to both Mr. Brennan and the Obama Campaign.

GoldenOne - Keith's commentary makes for a good laugh, I would agree. He really should be a comedic actor on SNL! It's funny they haven't had him on yet. Really, how can you take him seriously? Now, how exactly did Hillary Clinton play the race card? What specifically did she say that was racist? Did she call Obama a typical black candidate? Did she shun the black caucus in New Orleans? Did she not represent the Children's Defense fund? Did the Clinton's appoint AA's to cabinet positions for the first time? Even Rev Manning acknowledges the Clinton's support of the AA community and all the funds he sent to the AA's. Manning is pretty controversial, you know. Obama created the racism perception against the Clintons in SC. In fact it was Rev Wright on Obama's campaign that made sure Clinton's words were twisted around w/the media's help in SC. Haven't you been reading? Reporters are acknowledging what actually happened in SC when Obama himself played the race card to help him take the AA vote away from the Clintons.

Oh yes, NAFTA. Where do I begin with that. That NAFTA gaffe cost Obama the OHIO primary big time. Haven't you read the fact yet about Hillary and her lack of support for NAFTA in the white house and beyond? Let's focus on the lie that Obama told about NAFTA to the OH voters and no one will forget - PA won't forget either.

Bosnia - again read the facts - she was instrumental in helping the refugees - that's the POINT. Obama can never compare to Clinton's foreign policy experience. He couldn't even do his job w/the committee he was responsible for. If he had, we might be in a better position in Afghanistan - actually, maybe we wouldn't. He has not a clue!

OGoldenOne,

I wish you were also an accurate one. Maura is a career bureaucrat who rose through the ranks in both Democratic and Republican administrations. You are perfectly happy to stick the 'Clinton appointee' label on her to insinuate that the Clintons' had something to do with this.

And you are also perfectly willing to slander Ms. Maura for partisan political reasons and you take umbrage at Jay-Newton Small's post? You are being intellectually dishonest when you protest Jay-Newton-Small's post.

See this link for a post by Andrea Mitchell on Ms. Maura:

From NBC's Andrea Mitchell
In the story about passport breach, here's a word of caution before leaping to conclusions about the official in charge of management and consular affairs -- Maura Harty -- who had been appointed by Bill Clinton as ambassador to Paraguay.

Harty actually started out in the Reagan Administration and rose to become a special assistant to former Secretary of State George Shultz.

In addition, Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy started in 1973 during the Nixon Adminstration - when Henry Kissinger was Secretary of State.

They both rose through the ranks under both Republican and Democratic presidents.

I'd caution against assuming any particular connection to the Clintons unless we can establish that. They are not known to be particularly political. They will surely have to answer questions about management and competence, however.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/21/793232.aspx

You all rushed to judgment just 24 hours ago. Do you understand why we are enjoying this turn of events?

You reap what you sow!

OGoldenOne - Only a full blooded Obama kool-aid drinker could look at a simple schedule and make a conclusion whether the people attending that meeting were pro or con the subject discussed.

Just another baseless jump to judgement from team Obama/KOS.

Are you intelligence(LOL) enough to get the point of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Le_vPpj7lg

.

Obama is not responsible for everything an advisor's company employees do. Come on. What does John McCain have to hide in his passport? I'm guessing nothing. Obama has no reason to go after where McCain has visited. I don't see it as anything Obama will even touch, since McCain has obviously lived longer and traveled more to places.

On top of that, they also views Obama's? This guy who looked might not have even known his "boss" had ties to Obama. Isn't it also true the CEO of another one of the companies is a HRC donor? These giant leaps of logic are just silly, on both sides.

Now how would HRC know where he's been or not been in the world? She hasn't seen his passport file. Or has she?

Posted by OGoldenOne | March 22, 2008 11:21 PM

See this is what I am talking about.

Obama looks at McCain's passport files through his campaign adviser, and the OGoldenOne wants to turn the attention to Hillary.

This is called projection, my friend (Lord, I am sounding like McCain).

The use of the word "my" in Obama's speeches and comments when referring to the passport information breach was especially annoying, considering that he was well aware that all three candidates had their passport files looked at. The man is a desperate amateur trying hard to deflect the increasing scrutiny of his record and his actions. This is typical of the blame someone else first (almost always Senator Clinton) to change the subject or the focus. If this is a vetting process, Obama has already succeeded in demonstrating that he is as truthful and as much of a unifier as our current Commander in Chief.

The ongoing efforts of his campaign and supporters to claim the possibility of riots or even refusal of African Americans to support Senator Clinton if she wins the nomination is race based thuggery. Obama would indeed be the first Arab American person to be nominated for President, but I think that both the Arab American community and the African American community might be a little prouder with a less mendacious person. The fact that Obama is not a muslim has nothing to do with his offensive race based baiting of the American electorate.

Yes, let's thoroughly investigate the passport breach, and especially the fact that the CEO of the company that employed one of the breachers yet did not fire the person after the breach was known is actually a foreign affairs and intelligence advisor for the Obama campaign. He has already maxxed out with his primary contribution to the Obama campaign. Perhaps it would not be too outlandish to question whether Senator Obama or his campaign actually did have direct knowledge of this breach.

I'm really looking forward to Monday night when Keith names himself "worst person in the world".

It might be worth pointing out that only one, the reprimand, was by an employee of Analysis, Inc.

The other two, both firings, were Stanley.

Oh, well...

Passport scandal leads to Virginia contractor
Posted on Friday, March 21, 2008 4:07 PM PT
According to federal campaign records, Stanley's CEO, Philip Nolan, has made political contributions to prominent Republican candidates and also gave $1,000 to Sen. Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign on Feb. 20, 2008.
msnbc.com
http://deepbackground.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/21/794799.aspx
NBC News contacted a Stanley, Inc., spokeswoman this afternoon, and informed her that two sources had confirmed that employees at her firm were involved with the scandal. The spokeswoman would only comment: "We've been directed by the State Department to direct all media calls to them."

One Stanley, Inc., contractor allegedly looked at Obama's passport records on January 9, and then a second Stanley employee allegedly took a peek at similar Obama records on February 21, the officials said. Stanley, Inc., fired both workers after the alleged security breaches were discovered, the officials added.

Most curiously, CNN has been screwing up facts all over the place. In this case, it's the fact that the FIRED employees are from Stanley. The TAC employee who looked was not fired. Suggests the bigger problem is the Stanley pair, does it not.

CNN’s Kyra Phillips Pushes The ‘Iran Is Supporting al Qaeda’ Lie
By: Bill W. on Saturday, March 22nd, 2008 at 11:29 AM - PDT
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/03/22/cnns-kyra-phillips-pushes-the-iran-is-supporting-al-qaeda-lie/

CNN has lost its credibility and legitimacy. Now it's just caprine needless natriuretics. Time should be ashamed to be associated with it.

BenjaminOMeara: Hell, two of the most serious breaches were done by employees of a company whose CEO was a Hillary supporter. Why is it any different and the Obama campaign supposedly is responsible here? I've said from the beginning that this was an innocent breach by curious employees, but you CAN argue there's a difference here. The dif is that hte alleged "Obama supporter" wasn't fired.

Snorkle: "Campaign Operative," huh? That's quite a leap of logic. Employee works for a company that has ties to an Obama advisor, so they must be a "campaign operative?" Concur.

jack As I said yesterday, if there is nothing to this, we should have quickly learned that the other candidates were also peeped on by low level staffers. They were. There is a scandal here, but not one that involves the presidential candidates, as presidential candidates per se. Again, you're right.

Wuck: It's a story-in-progress and this entry is wildly speculative (as many others have been so far). A fact that I find exceptionally annoying. Certainly the media has been excessively speculative with conspiracy theories, and the campaigns have done their best to feed the flames. Neither Clinton nor Obama has shown the sort of leadership and reserved judgment that you expect from a President. They both need to take a step back from the 24 hour media cycle, and refocus on what they're fighting for.

OGoldenOne: I, for one, welcome and investigation. But the buck stops with Maura-- a Clinton appointee-- and the Bush administration. For there to be some giant buck stopping somewhere, this has to have been a serious breach. As of yet, I've still to hear what exactly is in this passport file. If the information is innocuous, then perhaps the benefit of significant additional controls on access may be outweighed by the excessive drop in productivity. Again, not that I support our information being available to every gov't employee, but I don't see anyone complaining about having their number in the phone book.

This is the most irresponsible post I've read for a while.

What evidence do you have that the CEO had anything to do with the breaches or knew anything about them?

I suggest that you shut off your fax machine and/or stop reading emails from RNC.com until you can tell the difference between fact and supposition.

This may be a blog, but that doesn't mean it's not completely irresponsible for you to post speculation. And if I were the CEO, I'd sue.

Dear Swampland:

It appears that a contractor has hacked Jay Newton-Small's account, taking advantage of the Easter holiday lull.

I'd urge you to find out who is publishing unsourced slander under her name. Who knows what the motives of this scurrilous hacker might be.

Peter. I appreciate your rational take on it but you are once again repeating the falsehood that I have an issue with in this entry.
There is no "Obama supporter" involved as far as we know. We have an employee of a company whose CEO is a supporter of Obama. Quite different.
And the fact he has not been fired could go both ways (less serious offense or more lenient company ? And even if the company was more lenient, once again, it is a serious logical leap to assume that mean the company condoned it for political reasons.). We don't know on what criteria they based their decision.

I completely agree on your 24 hour news cycle comment although I think this is a very small part of the problem in this particular case

based on the fact one of the companies had ties to her

Huh? The guy donated to her campaign. He has no ties to her. It's not like, ya know, he's Clinton's foreign policy advisor or anything...

Still want that Congressional inquiry Senator?

JNS,

I understand you're just an intern here, but really - you might consider running your ideas by someone a little higher up the foodchain before posting them. It might save you some embarrassment later on.

For those blaming the objections here on DKos, there was one diary by a user that mentioned it. It did not make the list of recommended diaries. It was not on the front page.

I'm sorry, but there is nothing to blame this on other than the fact that a whole lot of people are really pissed off.

Oh, and JNS, I have infections dating back to the DeLay era. Claiming you have covered anything since "the DeLay era" makes you sound qualified to post nothing other than lolcats on 4chan.

You did not mention that a supporter of HRC leads the 2nd company involved. Please don't tell half of the story.

Oh, and JNS, I have infections dating back to the DeLay era. Claiming you have covered anything since "the DeLay era" makes you sound qualified to post nothing other than lolcats on 4chan.

Posted by VelvetElvis | March 23, 2008 3:31 AM

Oh, ewwww. You might want to think twice before saying something like that about yourself in the future. It says more of about you than the writer. Just sayin'.

Changing the subject slightly, this is why RealID is so dangerous. How long before all of that data is hacked? I remember back when I had an AOL account, and one of their techs sold all their account info to a spammer. Soon I was getting email like "glenn, your home at qualifies for a home loan!" It was easy enough to cancel my AOL account, where do I go to cancel my RealID?

BenjaminOMeara: My intent was not to repeat the speculative "Obama operative" claim from JNS' original post. My point was that IF you think that the person who wasn't fired was a Obama supporter, then it appears the Obama campaign received favorable treatment and may have been deeper involved. I'm really just playing Devil's Advocate here, because as I've said from the beginning I don't believe ANY of these people are campaign operatives -- I think that ALL of them are simply stupidly curious gov't contracted employees. In that respect you're absolutely correct to criticize JNS for this enormous leap of faith she's attempted to lead us on.

The debate here should be 1) Why is this information so easily accessible to the gov't, and 2) why are gov't contractors vice civli service given access to this information (and why are there so many gov't contractors)?

Dear SRK

You wrote, "I will remember we are one party when you Obama supporters stop accusing Clintons and their supporters as racists and stop accusing Bill Clinton as a McCarthyite. Show us that courtesy, stop distorting innocuous remarks and I will fight with you on the front line against media inaccuracies."

Please show me where I have ever said that. Please do. It is because you cannot show that and because you - and I mean YOU personally and not all Hillary supporters - are so narrow-minded and pathetic that you must make all Obama supporters out to be like ones you may see on-line.

And you haven't answered my question on whether this is quality journalism. Can you please answer that?

Great reporting Jay!! It is about time someone is holding Obama's feet to the fire on here.

"Well, be careful what you wish for. Turns out, one of the three people who accessed the candidate's files works for... wait for it... Obama foreign policy advisor, John O. Brennan, president and CEO of the Analysis Corp".

NEWSFLASH: Hillary is now up over 30% points in Pennsylvania. This is going to the convention boys and girls hold on to your hats for the big ride!!

I've ignored this because it's such a silly post, that it turned that what the state department said--that it was stupid snooping by workers how should have known better--was right, and that there was nothing nefarious going on.

Sure, the Obama campaign made a mistake by airing suspicions in front of the investigation, but that's not much of a mistake. And I'm sure they had the appropriate caveats about waiting for the results of said investigation in the releases.

It's unfortunate that Swampland gets a shout-out from Josh Marshall

Time's Swampland is one of the better MSM blogs out there. So what to make of this post on the Obama passport issue. The CEO of one of the companies with the contract to oversee the passport files is an Obama foreign policy advisor, John O. Brennan. The employee of the company is the one who snooped Obama's file and McCain's. Ergo, Brennan is doing dirty tricks work against McCain. Will Obama have to fire him?

That's the kind of reasoning I'm accustomed to seeing at your loopier denizens of the online world. But there it is at Time.com. And it all follows, right?

Why don't you send some local stringers to McCain's and Clinton's home church, have them listen to a few weeks of sermons,find out how often they attend, and report back in? Even that would be of more substance than this.

Jay:

This is an absurd post, as noted on TPM (Josh Marshall).

Time Magazine: Where are you??? How could you let this crap hit the light of day??

So: Obama is spying on McCain, is this what I am to take from this?

Incredibly irresponsible blogging. I am so weary of this, and expected so much more from Swampland/Time.

Are we all FOX news now??

Now that it is public I think we should see where all three candidates have been traveling. Maybe Libya??? Maybe "Uncle Wrong" took Barak on a spiritual advisement trip to see such a great and respected Muslim leader that we all know Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi is known to be. Well at least Rev Wrong and Louis Farrakhan believe it to be true. Now wouldn't THAT bring out a big stink!!

Created an account just to say this is incredibly shoddy reporting. Nutwing jobs on radio would seem to have higher standards. Obama's file was accessed on three separate occasions, Hillary's during a training session. Pointing out the owner is newsworthy and interesting, but making the silly and illogical inference should be beneath Time. That's what Rush Limbaugh is for.

Wow. You must be embarrassed. This post is so wrong it isn't even funny. Either you credulously listened to Clinton campaign spin without checking it out, or you just believed the erroneous report from CNN (the Clinton News Network).

Here are the facts, courtesy of Vanadium at Daily Kos.

"Recall, in this emerging story, there were AT LEAST THREE BREACHES of Obama's passport file. These were done by employees of Stanley, Inc., who were FIRED. This was euphemistically referred to as "imprudent curiosity". Philip Nolan, CEO of this company, is a Clinton donor. Evidently this fact did not merit mention anywhere in the first 2/3 of the article.

In contrast, an employee of Analysis corp. breached Clinton's file ONCE, evidently during a training session. This employee was "disciplined" by the Dept of State."

If you have any journalistic integrity, run a correction.

Almost Parody

By Josh Marshall

Time's Swampland is one of the better MSM blogs out there. So what to make of this post on the Obama passport issue. The CEO of one of the companies with the contract to oversee the passport files is an Obama foreign policy advisor, John O. Brennan. The employee of the company is the one who snooped Obama's file and McCain's. Ergo, Brennan is doing dirty tricks work against McCain. Will Obama have to fire him?

That's the kind of reasoning I'm accustomed to seeing at your loopier denizens of the online world. But there it is at Time.com. And it all follows, right?

To quick a draw after the oppo call?

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/185056.php

For those who are arriving late, Jay's original post read:

The fact that it was a campaign operative is hardly surprising.

In response to the outrage this generated she edited it to read:

The idea that it may have a campaign operative is hardly surprising.

While the new sentence is clearly an improvement, the fact that the edit took place without any indication or acknowlegement speaks rather poorly on our intreped reporter's integrity. Be forwarned that other posts of hers might also be agenda driven and certainly not to be trusted.

Again Time:

Why don't the editors remove this post?? Even with the "edit," this is nothing but gossip (as someone else said).

Please Time Magazine: We (maybe 65% of the commenters here) are asking for some responsibility and journalistic integrity.

Where is the evidence of a campaign (maybe) "operative?" Is there evidence?? If so, why don't you (Jay) wait until you can write a full-fledged article about ALL of the "breaches?" Maybe do a little research, maybe?? Maybe wait until you have a story instead of innuendo?? Do you really believe that all of this stuff can be traced to Obama?? What the hell are you doing????

Maybe there is a story about what is problematic (or not) about outsourcing all gov't functions.

I don't know if you grasp how outrageous this post is...

Again Time Magazine: Where are you????

P.S.: This is the first time I have written 2 comments on one site about one posting. I just don't understand how self-editing/monitoring stuff is allowed to stand.

By the way: Did you note that Bremer (sp) and Obama split over telecom immunity??

Geez: Time Magazine: Where are you??? Come on...

I do wish campaigns (maybe company CEOs) could sue reporters/bloggers...maybe that's the only way to stop this madness.

First of all, how unethical to edit a blog post without making it clear

And second of all, "may have been" is still an unacceptable jump to conclusion and innuendo. She is still asking the Obama to distance himself from an imaginary hit job.

Repulsive.

Jay Newton-Small is the Time.com reporter on the Congressional beat. This post is shoddy, speculative, and now we find, dishonest. I'm sorry for her since she is obviously young and inexperienced, and hasn't been trained under a watchful, ethical editor who would have mentored her and helped her attain excellence in her reporting. She is obviously a person of good will. But I have to wonder about how truthful her reporting of Congressional affairs has been. It is only because the readers on this blog and elsewhere are so much more knowledgeable about the campaign that her errors are so obvious. There is less transparency when someone is reporting on Congressional affairs.

Jay, maybe it would help if you asked someone you trust for a final read before you post. This has to be very painful for you.

@ Peter

I would argue that the fact he was not fired could also mean that somehow the fact of his breach are not as damaging as the others but that's besides the point.

You are absolutely right on what this whole brouhaha should really be about and that's another reason for which this kind of tabloid journalist has no room on here and on any respectable blog.

Hi Jay,

I'd stick to what you know in the future. You know, things like stealing congressional committee documents and stuff like that.

"I'm sorry for her since she is obviously young and inexperienced,"

I take exception to that James, JNS has been covering congress since the DeLay era.
And of course her ethical barometer is well established.

JNS,

If you're going to cover up your false claim with an edit and not a strikethrough ("It was a campaign operative" --> "It may have [sic] a campaign operative"), you may as well actually proofread so as to get the full verb tense...

Also, IMO the passive formulation "a question arises" should be banned from serious journalism. It's only a vehicle for innuendo; if you want to raise a question, you should have to show _why_ the question makes sense. Which, of course, in this case it doesn't.

The fresh new face on the campaign spells Hillary with two "l"s.

All you had to do in your update was admit you'd edited the post, and that you got a little ahead of yourself with the baseless speculation.

Instead, you update with an apologia for baseless speculation under all circumstances. At least that's what you might have meant, because as ALL points out, you don't actually explain what your innuendo is supposed to mean.

Ugh.

What is this update supposed to accomplish? Because it sounds like:

"Ok guys... like, I guess I was wrong about completely fabricating accusations that the Obama campaign was spying on people? But, like, you know WHAT IF something had happened, you know? Wouldn't that be, like, crazy?"

Good thing that you still have a few more years of journalism class to attend until you graduate and become a real reporter. Keep working hard, JNS, I'm sure you'll move up from being an intern one day!

I'm sorry, Paul NNTO, I really think that she would benefit from having a trusted journo help her out with her ethics and her writing. I have to assume good intentions here. It hasn't been *that* long since we've been liberated from the DeLay era. He's not even in jail yet.

I don't know how Time.com has just thrown her to the wolves like this without a little mentoring by an ethical journo. I really feel bad for her.

Sadly, Ms. Newton-Small is even dumber than her high-school obsessed colleague Michael Scherer. I foresee a bright future for her in the world of pseudojournalism.

Sorry James I was just funnin'. I agree with you and just think it's pretty amusing that Time uses that in her bio as if it is impressive.
"Three whole years!"
Google JNS if you are unaware of her other ethical lapses like the one Florida alludes to.

The correct way to issue a correction:

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/03/morning_mashup_from_the_intrig.html

...ugh. What a mess of an article. That's all I can say that hasn't been flogged hours before already.

I know, Paul NNTO, but it just has to be painful for someone this young. I'm just trying to say that there is room for improvement and to suggest a way to improve. When one is just starting out in a career, sometimes you don't know that stuff, and you don't know that there are people who can help you out. An ethical responsible journo or editor who is not consumed by his own ambition or jaded beyond caring about his profession could be a great mentor. And it would be good for the mentor too. There is nothing so satisfying as taking someone under one's wing and mentoring them into excellence.

Also, IMO the passive formulation "a question arises" should be banned from serious journalism.

There's also a lot to said for banning adjectives and adverbs, which I first read in an Economist obit for a radio newsman who wrote his own copy. He said that they should all be viewed with suspicion. Take, at random, these piece on the front page of the NYT:

In Congress, Democrats are drafting bills that would create a powerful new regulator — or simply confer new powers on the Federal Reserve — to oversee practices across the entire array of commercial banks, Wall Street firms, hedge funds and nonbank financial companies.

The Treasury Department is rushing to complete its own blueprint for overhauling what is now an alphabet soup of federal and state regulators that often compete against each other and protect their particular slices of the industry as if they were constituents.

But the two sides strongly disagree about whether, after decades of a freewheeling encouragement of exotic new services and new players like hedge funds, the pendulum should swing back to tighter control.

These are essentially editorial comments, unless they are sourced.