Another reason to ignore the NYT: Fidell who?

Andy McCarthy shows how "fluid" is the NYT's definition of a disqualifying conflict of interest:

"Over at Bench Memos, Ed Whelan notes that while, with her usual spin on things, the NYTimes' Supreme Court reporter Linda Greenhouse is covering the high court's national security docket, including last week's enemy combatant case, Boumediene, Greenhouse's husband, Eugene Fidell, has been busy filing amicus briefs in the case on behalf of the combatants. Fidell, as Ed recounts, is a prominent Bush critic. You would not know that from Greenhouse's reporting -- she plainly doesn't think it's worthy of mention."




Andy McCarthy shows how "fluid" is the NYT's definition of a disqualifying conflict of interest:

"Over at Bench Memos, Ed Whelan notes that while, with her usual spin on things, the NYTimes' Supreme Court reporter Linda Greenhouse is covering the high court's national security docket, including last week's enemy combatant case, Boumediene, Greenhouse's husband, Eugene Fidell, has been busy filing amicus briefs in the case on behalf of the combatants. Fidell, as Ed recounts, is a prominent Bush critic. You would not know that from Greenhouse's reporting -- she plainly doesn't think it's worthy of mention."