Questions for Newsweek

William Kristol has a couple of questions for Newsweek in the wake of its weak news:

In its May 9 "Periscope" item, Newsweek claimed that "sources tell Newsweek" that "interrogators, in an attempt to rattle suspects, flushed a Qu'ran down a toilet. . . ." In its May 23 "The Editor's Desk" note, editor Mark Whitaker explains that Michael Isikoff's and John Barry's "information came from a knowledgeable U.S. government source. . . ." If there was only one source for the "information," why did Newsweek originally claim there was more than one source?

Kristol mentions some facts that have surfaced about the one source Newsweek admits to using. Two items: He is now demanding compensation from the US Government. In previous interviews, he never saw fit to mention the incident he now claims gives him nightmares. Indeed, he told the AP he was interrogated "150 times" and never abused. (Maybe this is a case of Recovered Memory Syndrome?)

Is Bader's claim credible? Did Newsweek even attempt to check it out before publishing it? Or does Newsweek believe that inserting the phrase, "credible or not," at the beginning of the relevant paragraph, absolves them of this journalistic duty?

Face it. The mainstream press is biased. Stories that cast Republicans in a bad light are "too good to check". Stories that cast Democrats in a bad light will be thoroughly vetted before publishing – if they're still "timely" by the time the vetting process is completed.