When a story might take too much work or cause too much discomfort for the established powers, but has gained a certain amount of attention, the best way to address it - while at the same time dismissing it - is by invoking the internet and aliens. Here's a demonstration from 2004 which couldn't have been more rehearsed. The comment in parenthesis after Russert asks the question is mine, from memory, not from the transcripts.

http://perf2.msnbc.msn.com/id/6267835/

MR. RUSSERT: Before we go, Mr. Mehlman, clear up this mystery that has been raging on the Internet. This was the first debate, George Bush at the podium, the bulge in the back of the suit. All right. Come clean. What is it?

(At this point Russert, using a picture of Bush from the debate, actually circles the very obvious visible box-like bulge.)

MR. MEHLMAN: The president, in fact, was receiving secret signals from aliens in outer space. You heard it here on MEET THE PRESS.

MR. SHRUM: You mean you sent Rove into orbit.

MR. RUSSERT: It was not a bulletproof vest or magnets for his back or anything?

MR. MEHLMAN: I'm not sure what it was, but the gentleman responsible for the tailoring of that suit is no longer working for this administration.

MR. SHRUM: Well, wait a minute. Now, the president only wears Oxford clothes. I'll bet that tailor is still there.

MR. RUSSERT: May we all be smiling this way on November 2.

See, the MSM gets a chance to good-naturedly mock something that was causing speculation, thereby fulfilling their obligation to present it, while also insinuating that the topic is closed except to the marginal and loony.

Quote, Glenn: "To the contrary, in touting the FBI's brand new theory, Johnson wrote that "government sources offered more detail about Ivins's movements on a critical day in the case" -- as though the FBI's abandonment of its prior claim in favor of a new one comprised "more detail." The FBI didn't offer "more detail"; it offered completely "new detail" because the last "detail" they leaked to Johnson was almost instantaneously disproven -- a fact Johnson doesn't even bother to mention. Instead, she just allows the FBI's story to change radically and then serves as a vessel for that new story as though it's further incriminating proof, rather than a reflection of the fact that the FBI still has no idea whether it was Ivins who went to New Jersey to mail those letters."

You should address this Ms. Johnson or you'll remain looking like a first class Stooge.

Stooge, get it, a golden knee padded Stooge.

Forgive me if someone has brought this up before, but wouldn't the existence of an accomplice in this crime explain the mailing schedule inconsistencies? Ivins must have handed the letters off to another guy to do the actual mailing.

Obviously the FBI would not want to broach this subject because it implies that Ivins was just the supplier, not the mailer, and therefore the real bad guy is still on the loose. Also, it means the mailer might still have a supply of anthrax to use in the future.

Or maybe I've just been watching too many episodes of Monk lately. Nevermind.

Both with the administration appearing to lie about the truth, and the media uncritically and credulously passing along these apparent lies as truth, under the implied guise of "Why would the government lie to us--they're the government!".

On a related note, this weekend I read an AP article about how "government sources" (who requested anonymity for national security reasons, cough cough) claimed that Iran and Hezbollah were training Shiite assasin squads who will target and assassinate Iraqi leaders whom Iran wants to take out. Well, maybe they are, and maybe they aren't, but the sole source of information for this story was these "anonymous government sources".

It's like the proverbial offender going before the judge for the 47th time and promising that THIS TIME, he really really really won't ever do it again. What's also disappointing about this story is that it was by Pamela Hess, whom I'd long thought of as one of the better journalists out there. Perhaps she, like others, are forced by management to churn out these poorly sourced stories. But if she had any self-respect, and cared about her profession, she'd sooner quit and get a real job than pretend to be a journalist under such circumstances.

It's surreal how nearly 8 years into the Bush era, this continues to happen on a regular basis and in such egregious manner, despite an endless series of examples that proved beyond any doubt that the administration was lying, and the media was helping it to lie. It's impossible that this is due to negligence, laziness and stupidity on the media's part. This is collusion, taking place deliberately and at the highest levels. No other explanation could possibly account for this. And we're left with a handful of serious and honest investigative journalists and bloggers trying their best to call out this bullshit and report on what's actually been going on, beyond the spin, lies and talking points, in a media environment in which this is extremely hard to do.

It's August, and we all remember what Andy Card said about rolling out new products in August. One wonders what they're laying the ground for rolling out in the fall. That long anticipated attack on Iran? Smearing high-level Obama supporters and surrogates--or Obama himself with some blockbuster revelation--in order to take him down? The capture or killing of public enemy #1? They still have agenda items to fulfill and DO NOT want to lose the White House. And the media is absolutely on their side, and will do nothing to stand in their way. And the public, for all its disgust with the administration, is still all too willing to believe what it's told.

USA = United States of Stoopid.

I hope you had a restful vacation. I missed reading the best blog on the web for a few days:)

Does anyone have any information on how hard Ivins and his family were hounded by the FBI? I'm wondering about the suicide; I do believe that a person can be so stressed by a prosecution as to take their own life. I've heard very little; just something about his son being bribed with the offer of a car. Does anyone have more? I also think it doesn't add up that so many of his colleagues showed support at his funeral.