You use that term as if you have some actual proof that his article was deliberate. Man, you have such a double standard. From what I recall, nearly every time someone caught an administration official in a lie or misstatement you jumped in with some lame excuse of bad intelligence. It would just be refreshing if you'd apply the same watchdog standard to Republican politicians that you do to the "liberal" media.

Just what is it Tom that gives you such faith in the good intentions and credibility of these men? Does Hersch need to start talking with a drawal or shooting people on hunting trips for him to be elevated to the status of plausible deniability?

What's funny is that your tactic actually worked. Here we are talking about honesty of the source and not the claim. You know as well as anyone that, even if Hersch misrepresents stuff from time to time, that he wouldn't be held in journalistic esteem by anyone if he got it wrong most of the time. In all likelihood Cheney does want to invade Iran regardless of whether they're producing nukes. It fits his personality and past actions. It's not the source that makes it believable. It's the fact that Cheney is an unapologetic war hawk.

Deny that Tom and present us with some statistics where Cheney has pushed to avoid a fight in the past. I think you'll find it's a difficult task.

Art