Associated Press Uses Leaked Katrina Records To Blast Bush
To be honest with you, I'm not quite sure what to make of it all. A big problem I have is that while the AP article is that it is long on accusation and pretty short on supporting details. The reporter responsible for it takes the liberty of summarizing the information that has been revealed, yet none of the source documentation has been made public.
John Hinderaker has written a thorough review of the article and concludes with this:
The AP article is fatally compromised by its factual errors, and adds nothing to our understanding of the issues surrounding Hurricane Katrina. It also raises an important point about the leaks that form the basis for many news stories these days. The AP took what appears to have been a substantial quantity of leaked material, and turned it into a brief against the Bush administration. Whether the documents themselves contain anything noteworthy, and whether, on balance, they support the AP's tendentious interpretation, is impossible to tell. In view of the fact that no one trusts the AP, the New York Times and other news outlets who make use of leaked documents and other materials to report on them objectively, here is a modest proposal: let us see them. If the AP will release the leaked materials, the rest of us will quickly figure out what significance, if any, they have.
I agree. Be sure to read the whole thing.
The media is not in a position to ask the public to trust them. If we are going to castigate the Bush administration for its response to Katrina we should do so based on evidence that is public, not hidden away in some reporter's office.
Update:
Here's an AP video report with excerpts of the video in question:
Still not much to go on, just excerpts from the video.
One misrepresentation I did notice from the AP reporting is where they try to call Bush on a lie for saying that no one anticipated the levees breaking. Bush did say that, but the evidence used by the AP to brand that statement as a lie is a statement from an expert in the briefing saying that there was a good chance the levees would be "topped."
I don't think I need to tell you all that there's a difference between water "topping" a levee and a levee collapsing altogether. One is much more serious than the other. Some may have wanred that the water would flow over the top of the levees, but there is no evidence here to suggest that anyone predicted the levee actually falling apart.
This sort of misrepresenatation on the part of the Associated Press doesn't bode well for the rest of their reporting on this story.
Update:
If this stuff from Bush is news, maybe the media should have jumped on this video of Kathleen Blanco making campaign promises about disaster response she obviously didn't keep.















