The Washington Independent - U.S. news and politics - washingtonindependent.com: Stories by Jefferson Morley

Blending the Best of Old and New Media

Jefferson Morley — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 22:41:44 GMT

Welcome to The Washington Independent. We're an online news organization dedicated to covering politics and policy in the nation's capital. Washington Independent will launch in January 2008.

We hope to combine the best of traditional and new journalism. We embrace the imperatives of reporting, accuracy and fairness. At the same time, we aspire to incorporate the most attractive features of online news—voice, speed, diversity and interactivity.

My name is Jefferson Morley. I have been a journalist in Washington for the past 27 years, the last 15 as an editor and reporter at The Washington Post and washingtonpost.com. As the editorial director of this enterprise, I am excited about the founding of The Washington Independent because I think this hybrid model offers practical hope to a profession now wracked with doubt about its economic viability and social relevance.

I will be introducing the team behind The Washington Independent in this blog in coming days and weeks.

But first I want to say something about our name. Independence means freedom from corporate and partisan agendas. We do not have a for-profit business model. We're funded by philanthropic organizations such as the Sunlight Foundation, the Park Foundation, the Surdna Foundation, the Arca Foundation, the Rockefeller Family Foundation, the Better World Fund, the Quixote Foundation and the Open Society Institute. As we establish ourselves, we will pursue self-sustainability and guard our editorial independence. For more information on our financial supporters, visit newjournalist.org/donate.

We are not alone. Other not-for-profit online news organizations are emerging and we are glad to be part of the trend. The Washington Independent belongs to the Independent News Network, a two-year-old group of state news sites, set up by the non-profit, Center for Independent Media.

Our network puts a premium on training. We mentor bloggers in adopting sound journalistic practices. We train print journalists in adapting to the new online world.

Now I want to introduce David Bennahum, the founder of the Center, and ask him to explain the purpose and mission of the Washington Independent and the Independent News Network.

David, some will say a new Web site devoted to Washington politics is a bit like a second marriage: a triumph of hope over experience. What do you say?

Is Having Principles Partisan?

Jefferson Morley — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:41:10 GMT

Does The Washington Independent mark "The Return of the Partisan Press?" asked K. Danny Glover in the National Journal's Beltway Blogroll.

No, but the question usefully illustrates one reason why we think there is a need for independent Washington journalism. Having a point of view is not partisanship. For too long, journalists have been chastised for having a perspective on the great (and small) issues of our time, twisting themselves in knots trying to disprove their purported subjectivity, an impossible task since the very act of choosing what to report on, and why, is a subjective editorial decision. The purpose of good journalism is to arrive at the truth. Conclusions backed by the facts--such as "Global warming is happening" -- are necessary, even when controversial.

The explosion of the blogosphere revealed the pent-up demand for more diverse perspectives among news consumers. At the same time that technological changes have deprived traditional news organizations of their accustomed profits. We believe that the way to serve readers in this new era is to meet reader demand with quality journalism. That means the reporter who covers the story, interviews the experts and weighs the evidence, offers his or her conclusions. Yet what newspaper readers all too often receive is "balance" in the form of "he said-she said" journalism that leaves the pursuit of truth a secondary goal. In our work, truth telling is the primary goal. That means being candid about our reporters' beliefs, and up front about editorial perspectives. It also means rigorous adherence to the highest standards of journalism. You can have both. You need both—a moral perspective is essential to great journalism. It's why journalists have long been called on to "comfort the afflicted, and afflict the comfortable." This isn't partisanship, it's ethics.

It's no coincidence that quality publications like The Economist, The Nation, The Guardian and the Financial Times—all with very different perspectives on the issues of our time--have seen their circulation grow in recent years. They have points of view, are candid with their readers about them, and then go on to do great journalism. This is what readers want. At the same time, we will remain strictly non-partisan—meaning we won't endorse any particular candidate for office or party. But we will have beliefs, transparently held, and a commitment to journalism that informs the public on the issues that matter.

Update: I took out a line in the original post in which I said Glover held both political principles and partisanship in "chaste disdain" because it was unnecessarily personal and detracted from my broader point.

Florida All Over Again

Jefferson Morley — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 03:16:21 GMT

Michigan Messenger’s Liveblog from diverse Michigan precincts captured widespread voter confusion and consternation about the absence of Barack Obama and John Edwards from the ballot.

One poll worker in the St. Clair Shores said, "A lot of people asked, ‘Where’s Obama?’ They didn’t know the national Democrats had been upset when state Democrats moved the primary up and asked the candidates not to campaign in Michigan."

"It’s like Florida all over again,with people’s votes not counting," said a Democrat in Greenville, northwest of Grand Rapids. "I think it’s wrong."

Surviving MLK Day

Jefferson Morley — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 20:41:52 GMT

Photo credit: Library of Congress

For me, the only way to enjoy Martin Luther King Day is to ruthlessly avoid the parades, the sing-alongs, the school assemblies, the TV commercials, and the White House statements—especially the White House statements.

"By simply living a life of kindness and compassion, you can make America a better place and fulfill the dream of Martin Luther King," said President Bush this morning, thus consigning King to the one place he does not belong: the sainthood of ineffectual wimps.
The best antidote to the lethal banalities of Martin Luther King Day is to actually listen to King’s speeches. Our local Pacifica station, WPFW, always celebrates the holiday with thrilling broadcasts of King’s speeches.

One of my favorites is King’s April 4, 1967 speech "Beyond Vietnam" delivered a year to the date before his assassination. In the face of fierce criticism from allies and enemies alike, King made a political and religious case against a colonialist war. His linkage of war and economic power, makes obvious a fact that some of the people embracing King’s memory today would prefer to ignore. King, who would have been 79 last week, would likely have opposed the current occupation of Iraq with the same passion he opposed the war in Vietnam.

I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energy in the rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money like some demonic suction tube. So I was increasingly compelled to the see the war as an enemy of the poor and attack is as such.

Naturally, the editors of the Washington Post and the New York Times denounced King’s argument. What did a mere preacher know compared to the foreign policy savants of Georgetown, cried these scribes. Who can doubt that if King were alive today an army of bloggers and TV talk show hosts would just as reflexively question his credentials and patriotism?
But King’s ideas about America’s role in the world endure in public opinion because they are firmly grounded in the tradition of Jefferson, Paine, Thoreau, Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Niebuhr. That’s why we have a holiday, even if the president doesn’t know it.

Did Rove Influence the 9/11 Report?

Jefferson Morley — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:51:43 GMT

Philip Zelikow, the executive director of the 9/11 Commission, communicated secretly with White House political strategist Karl Rove and other Bush administration officials, reports independent scholar Max Holland, citing an audio version of a forthcoming book by a New York Times reporter.

On his Web site, Washington Decoded, Holland reports that Philip Shenon, who led the Times coverage of the Commission, has written a “blistering account” of Zelikow’s role overseeing the 20-month investigation.

He depicts Zelikow as exploiting his central position to negate or neutralize criticism of the Bush administration so that the White House would not bear, in November 2004, the political burden of failing to prevent the attacks.

Holland, known for his spirited defense of the Warren Commission whose conclusions about the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy are widely disputed, says the 9/11 Commission’s veracity is now open to question.

Shenon’s radically different account of the commission’s inner workings promises to achieve what none of the crackpot conspiracy theorists have managed to do so far: put the 9/11 Commission in disrepute.

Shenon’s book, The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation, will be published on Feb. 5 by Twelve Books.

Rush the Scoop to Howie

Jefferson Morley — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 05:03:01 GMT

One interesting aspect of the emerging right-wing rebellion against conservative maverick John McCain is how it gets spun in the pages of the Washington Post.

The panic in the ranks of the right is evident. On the eve of what amounts to America's first national presidential primary, Christian right leader Reverend James Dobson repudiated McCain for the heretical observation that two people of the same sex might have a loving commitment ceremony, according to Colorado Confidential. Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh denounced McCain for perpetrating the dirty trick of eliciting an endorsement from Bob Dole, the World War II vet turned Viagra flak who once carried the Republican standard in battle against the Clintons.

The notion that Dobson and Limbaugh have sway over, or insight into, the behavior of any significant sector of the American electorate is, of course, factually dubious. Over the past six months, Dobson proudly took every opportunity to snub Mike Huckabee, the overwhelming favorite of average Christian conservative. Limbaugh, the portly recovering pill addict and millionaire who favors the upward redistribution of wealth, has drifted uneasily into the camp of the wealthiest (and possibly the wierdest) candidate in the race, George Romney.

So how did Limbaugh sell the story of his mugging of Dole? He rushed it to my former colleague at the Washington Post, that post-modern presidential power broker, Howard Kurtz. Here’s how Howie broke the news.

“By the way, Rushclarified a comment he made to me that has gotten a lot of pickup.”

What matter more than the tedious details of Limbaugh’s unpersuasive smear are the eroding standards of the Washington Post newsroom.

Note Howie’s first-name chumminess with “Rush,” the subject of his ostensibly “objective” news coverage. And who can miss his self-referential (some would say reverential) nod to his own Internet popularity? The chances that a Washington Post editor will chastise Howie for these deviations are basically minimal.

This is not hypocrisy nor conspiracy. Howie Kurtz is an indisputably nice guy and a hard-working reporter. This is how the conventional wisdom gets constructed: in bipartisan backscratching. Kurtz spreads Limbaugh’s blarney. Limbaugh ratifies Kurtz’s importance as an interlocutor. Rush absurdly denounces the Post for being “liberal.” Kurtz, almost as absurdly, denies that reporters are liberal. And so the dead trees of 15th Street prop up the dead wood of talk radio.

Whether either of these gentlemen has any insight as to what is actually happening among Americans who live outside the infotainment bubble is an open question.

Around the Post newsroom, Kurtz is legendary for his staggering productivity and his banal insights. I recall editing a piece by Howie in January 1998. It was a breathless tale, told by right-wing amateurs on this thing called the Internet, about an older man, a younger woman and a cigar. If true, Howie announced breathlessly, President Clinton was sure to be quickly forced from office.

“I doubt it, “ I said. “Do you think most people will care?” Howie eyed me warily. I edited out the line. He complained but complied.

The ability to embody the conventional wisdom right up until the moment it has been refuted is what makes Howie so valuable to his friend Rush.

The Superdelegate Primary

Jefferson Morley — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 19:20:00 GMT

As the Clinton-Obama duel grinds on, Democratic eyes are turning to those previously underappreciated people known as "superdelegates."

Superdelegates are the elected officials and party leaders who are guaranteed a vote at the Democratic convention. They constitute about 20 percent of the delegates who will gather in Denver in August. They differ from delegates chosen by a primary or caucus in that they are "unpledged"--they don't have to vote for any particular candidate. If Clinton and Obama continued to split primary votes (and therefore "pledged" delegates) fairly evenly, each will have to win votes from superdelegates to achieve the majority needed to capture the nomination

In other words, the preferences of the superdelegates is emerging as a kind of elite primary-the results of which could decide who wins the nomination.

Clinton is ahead in this contest, according to the various counts compiled by Democratic Convention Watch, CNN, CBS and AP. But everyone has different numbers that are constantly changing as superdelegates proclaim their choices.

Earlier this week, Minnesota Monitor reported that Rep. Tim Walz, a superdelegate, had endorsed Obama. On Wednesday, another superdelegate Sen. Tom Harkin hinted broadly to Iowa Independent that he is skeptical about Clinton. "There are some real dark clouds" around her campaign, Harkin said while professing neutrality. Meanwhile, Associated Press reports that two Michigan congressmen have endorsed Clinton.

The polls in the superdelegate primary will remain open for the next six months.

Don't Tase Me, Bro

Jefferson Morley — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:45:34 GMT

MinnMon's Andy Birkey reports that those dissidents who object too strenuously at the Republican convention in St. Paul this summer can expect to get stung.

The bully boys of the Minutemen and other armed anti-illegal immigrant movements who might be thinking of crashing McCain's coronation will probably be deterred by this modest show of force. Leftists and anarchists relishing a confrontation with a Vietnam-era war hero will probably not.

Trudeau Draws (and Quarters) Bush

Jefferson Morley — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:49:24 GMT

"The dismal truth of my profession is that what's bad for the country is great for satirists -- and vice versa," the "Doonesbury" cartoonist tells Tom Lindsey of Iowa Independent. "It will be extraordinarily difficulty for any succeeding administration to fail as spectacularly as the Bushies have. All of us are sad to see them go,"

Conservatives Demand Activist Judges

Jefferson Morley — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:54:26 GMT

The Colorado Supreme Court yesterday tossed out a court injunction barring enforcement of Colorado's strong ethics in government law, Colorado Confidential reports.

The ethics law, known as Amendment 41 or the gift ban, was approved in a statewide ballot initiative in 2006. The state Supreme Court refused to block implementation of the law, saying judges needed a case of real harm, not nightmare scenarios. Opponents predict the children of state employees will lose their college scholarships and other tragedies.

The editors of the conservative Rocky Mountain News condemned the decision as a "punt." They denounced the judges for refusing to overturn Amendment 41, which they describe eloquently as "an open assault on liberty,"

This is the familiar phenomenon in which those usually sober and high-minded advocates of the strict construction of the law, respect for the intentions of the Founding Fathers, and the deification of Clarence Thomas, suddenly demand judicial activism on behalf of an embattled an unpopular minority group.

In this case the Rocky editors boldly defend the inalienable human rights of the political professional class of lawyers and lobbyists (most of them decent folk, by the way) who are truly threatened by a popular majority that basically wants to take away their livelihood.

Well, minority rights are essential--but so is the majority's right to afflict the too-comfortable. In this case, judicial restraint seems appropriate. The court said it awaits a case of real harm. Until then the law stands as a warning that a majority believes the Colorado political process has been corrupted and needs correction.

CIA Lawyers to Face JFK Questions

Jefferson Morley — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:41:39 GMT

The Central Intelligence Agency will quietly defend its refusal to release a batch of top-secret files related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in a Washington courtroom tomorrow.

Amid all the headlines about the discovery of a cache of previously unknown JFK material in Dallas, agency lawyers will make their first response to a court order to explain the secrecy surrounding a career CIA undercover officer allegedly involved in the events that led that to the murder of the president on Nov. 22, 1963.

For four years, the agency has been battling in federal court to block my Freedom of Information Act request seeking disclosure of the secret operations of a deceased CIA officer named George Joannides. He is a shadowy figure in the complex story of JFK's assassination. At the time of the Dallas tragedy, Joannides was serving as chief of the CIA's Miami-based "psychological warfare" operations against Cuban leader Fidel Castro. In December, a three-judge panel in the D.C. Court of Appeals threw out the many of the agency's decades-old claims of secrecy around Joannides.

Circuit Judge Judith Rogers and two colleagues ordered the CIA to search its operational files for more material on Joannides. They also ordered the agency to explain why 17 reports on Joannides' secret operations in 1962, 1963 and 1964, are missing from CIA archives. In legal briefs, agency officials have claimed that more than 30 documents about Joannides's actions in the 1960s and 1970s cannot be made public in any form--for reasons of "national security."

Joannides' curious connection to the JFK assassination story was unknown until 2001. Declassified CIA records revealed that Joannides had guided and monitored a Cuban exile student group that publicly denounced the pro-Castro activities of Lee Harvey Oswald in August 1963. Three months later, Oswald shot Kennedy dead from an office buildings. Joannides' agents in Cuban Miami shaped the first day press coverage of JFK's assassination by generating evidence of Oswald's support for Cuban leader Fidel Castro.

The Joannides files could shed light on the question of whether CIA officers overlooked, underestimated or manipulated Oswald as he made his way to Dallas.

The disputed files could prove more significant to the JFK case than the much-publicized files of Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade, made public last week. Those files mostly concern Wade's case against Jack Ruby, the Dallas nightclub owner who murdered Oswald in police custody before he could be brought to trial. Thanks to the Dallas Morning News, the Wade files can now be viewed online.

By contrast, the complete Joannides file has never been public. What remains unknown is the extent of Joannides' control over his agents in the Cuban exile community who sought to link Oswald to Fidel Castro. The day after JFK was killed the Cuban communist leader scorned the reports that Oswald was a supporter of his revolution and suggested that the CIA was behind the charge. The available records show that Castro was right: CIA funds did help publicize the allegation.

Joannides, who received a CIA medal in 1981, was never questioned by JFK assassination investigators. A resident of Potomac, Md,, he died in 1990. His Washington Post obituary described him as a "Defense Department Lawyer."

To date, all efforts to pierce the veil of secrecy around Joannides' actions in 1963 have been thwarted. The agency has ignored an open letter from two dozen leading JFK scholars calling on the CIA to release the records.Last year, the National Archives requested access to the records without success. And the agency's public affairs officers agency refuse to answer any questions about Joannides.

"Joannides' service as case officer of the Cuban exile group which dealt with Oswald make his files highly relevant and in need of public release," said Rex Bradford, senior analyst at MaryFerrell.org, the largest online archive of declasssified JFK assassination records. "The files are clearly within the scope of the JFK Records Act which remains in effect despite the CIA's failure to recognize the fact."

The JFK Records Act, passed in 1992 after Oliver Stone's controversial movie, mandates the "immediate" public release of all JFK-related records.

Judge Richard Leon will preside over the hearing in the DC Federal Courthouse on Wednesday morning.

(The Fund for Investigative Journalism provided support for the reporting in this article. A fuller account of Joannides' role in the events of 1963 is found in my forthcoming book "Our Man in Mexico: Winston Scott and the Hidden History of the CIA," now available on Amazon.com. I have also written about Joannides for Playboy.com. See "The Man Who Didn't Talk.")

Is HIV/AIDS a Gay Disease?

Jefferson Morley — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 13:47:46 GMT

Yes, said Matt Foreman, outgoing executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force in a controversial speech made in Detroit on Feb. 7. With its rate of infection remaining high, Foreman said the gay community should "own up to it." Anti-homosexual groups applauded the remarks. Gay activists are split over Foreman's candor, according to Michigan Messenger.

Uncle Sam's Top-Secret Gambling Losses

Jefferson Morley — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:34:05 GMT

The U.S. government's ban on some forms of online gambling is costing American taxpayers a bundle of money, but the Bush administration won't say how much, Michigan Messenger reports.
The World Trade Organization ruled in December that the United States must compensate other countries for barring U.S. gamblers from off-shore gaming sites while allowing them to throw away money on U.S.-based sites. The payments, which may cost U.S. taxpayers millions (some say billions) of dollars, is classified, for reasons of "national security."
If I lost millions gambling, I wouldn't want to talk about it either.

Death to Superdelegates

Jefferson Morley — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 13:45:55 GMT

Iowa Independent reports Sen. Tom Harkin wants to do something about superdelegates: dump them.

JFK Secrets in 60 Days

Jefferson Morley — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:54:31 GMT

At a Washington federal court hearing on Wednesday CIA lawyers promised Judge Richard Leon they would comply with an (pdf) appellate court order to produce more information about JFK assassination mystery man George Joannides, a.k.a. "The Man Who Didn't Talk," within 60 days. The information must be produced in another court hearing, scheduled for April 30.

Pro-Sex Rebellion Spreads to Des Moines

Jefferson Morley — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 14:50:57 GMT

Iowa is the 17th state to turn down federal funding for abstinence-only sex education, reports the Iowa Independent.

Termite Tuesday Fallout

Jefferson Morley — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 15:59:08 GMT

With Tuesday's voting ensuring no end to the Democratic presidential race and John McCain traipsing around the West Wing, our correspondents see a party devouring itself. Minnesota Monitor's Steve Perry highlights Clinton's "breathtaking" suggestion that McCain is more qualified to be president than Barack Obama. Michigan Messenger's Ed Brayton says primary results are "the worst possible outcome."

Iowa Caucuses RIP?

Jefferson Morley — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 21:56:18 GMT

Another possible casualty of the Democratic presidential marathon: the Iowa caucuses. John Deeth of Iowa Independent explains.

Obama Smear of the Day

Jefferson Morley — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:33:50 GMT

Minnesota Monitor notes the ongoing Republican strategy of trying to tar Barack Obama as a closet Muslim.

"Following the high-profile examples of the Tennessee Republican Party and right-wing Cincinnati radio host Willie Cunningham, U.S. Rep. Steve King (R-IA) took to the airwaves on Saturday to warn that the election of Barack Obama would cause wild rejoicing by terrorists the world over," reports Steve Perry. The Iowa Independent's King file documents his history of fact-free oratory.

Risky Michigan Mail In

Jefferson Morley — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 16:41:01 GMT

Michigan mail-in primary seen as 'risky', according to Alexa Stanard of Michigan Messenger. She talked to Michael Traugott, professor of communication studies at the University of Michigan.

"In Oregon, the state developed a series of public service announcements by the secretary of state and the head of the postal service in the state explaining the system. I don't think there's time for that [in Michigan]."