I’ll give the media credit; when Congress and the White House were at odds over anti-torture language, the coverage was thorough and largely accurate. Considering the seriousness of the issue, it was encouraging to see reporters handle the story well.
It’s why I’m confused there’s been so little coverage of the more recent developments. The past week has seen the torture story reach new levels of political conflict.
* Last Friday, Bush issued a signing statement suggesting that he believes he can ignore Congress’ anti-torture provisions whenever he believes he should.
* On Tuesday, the administration dropped any pretense and said, explicitly, that the president reserves the right to ignore the anti-torture measure.
* On Wednesday, three leading GOP senators (John Warner, John McCain, and Lindsey Graham) publicly criticized the White House, in writing and in interviews, in no uncertain terms. ”I do not believe that any political figure in the country has the ability to set aside any … law of armed conflict that we have adopted or treaties that we have ratified,” Graham said.
It’s a pretty big deal, setting the stage for a serious political showdown. So where’s the coverage? The Boston Globe has been all over this story all week, to its credit, but where’s the New York Times? Indeed, the combined number of stories in the NYT, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, and Chicago Tribune this week on the fight is zero.
ABC News’ The Note said yesterday that it “is amazed at the lack of follow up on this one.” So am I. Anyone have an explanation?