The New York Times has become almost a parody of itself in its blatantly partisan coverage of the story that former Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger removed highly classified documents from the National Archives, some of which Berger still can't account for.
On Tuesday, July 20, the day after the Associated Press broke its blockbuster story on the case, the Times ran a 241-word piece on page A17 titled, "Clinton Aide Took Classified Material." The information in that headline alone merited front-page treatment. But in the following days, the Times took care, even as it moved the story to page 1, to use less inflammatory headlines. On July 21, its headline read: "A Kerry Adviser Leaves the Race Over Documents." By July 22, the Times had turned the story into a Republican scandal. Its headline: "White House Knew of Inquiry on Aide; Kerry Camp Irked."
