IT'S YOU, CHUCKIE!

John Wagner of the Washington Post is incompetent as a journalist, or maybe he's just having a bad day.
Today, he writes about the charges Lauren B. Weiner will face because she allegedly "fraudulently [obtained] a credit report on Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele," Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate.

Wagner writes:

The episode, which happened last July, came as both parties started digging into the backgrounds of opposing candidates for one of Maryland's marquee races this year, the contest to replace retiring Sen. Paul S. Sarbanes (D). Opposition research is typical in contested statewide races, but it is illegal under federal law to obtain a credit report under false pretenses.

Notice that he says, "both parties started digging into the backgrounds of opposing candidates."

Hey, Wagner! That may be the case, but it was the Dem operatives that acted illegally. Weiner was not engaged in "typical" opposition research, unless such research is typically illegal.
Whitney C. Ellerman, an attorney for Weiner, said his client plans to plead guilty to a misdemeanor under an agreement with prosecutors that could result in the charge being dismissed in a year.

"She basically made a mistake, and she is accepting responsibility for that mistake," Ellerman said. "She wants to get on with her life."

Ellerman said Steele's credit report was destroyed and not disseminated to anyone.

Republicans seized on the incident when it came to light in the fall as evidence of how seriously Democrats are taking Steele's candidacy, an idea they sought to further yesterday.

"This sort of dumpster diving shows Marylanders that Democrats are willing to engage in this campaign from the gutter," said Dan Ronayne, a spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee in Washington, which was heavily involved in recruiting Steele to run. "It's unfortunate that the lieutenant governor and his family have had to endure it."

Oh, poor baby Lauren. She made a mistake and violated the privacy of Lt. Gov. Steele. Oops!

The big, bad Republicans, on the other hand, "seized on the incident" and continue to exploit it.

This is a textbook example of blaming the victim.

Do you detect any bias in Wagner's account?
Personal finances were considered fertile territory for researchers looking into Steele, who acknowledged financial difficulties when he ran for statewide office in 2002. Sources familiar with the episode said Steele's credit report was obtained with the use of his Social Security number, which was found on a public court document.

Weiner and Katie Barge, then the DSCC's director of research, resigned after their superiors learned of the incident, which drew the FBI's attention. The DSCC is the arm of the national Democratic Party that works to elect U.S. senators.

William Lawler, an attorney for Barge, said it is his understanding from prosecutors that neither his client nor the DSCC will be charged.

"We're pleased to see this matter come to a conclusion," DSCC spokesman Phil Singer said last night. "Our thoughts are with Lauren. She is a fine person who made a mistake."

Channing Phillips, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office, would not comment on the case or why the office is apparently not charging Barge, who was Weiner's boss at the DSCC.

The letter to Steele says Weiner "will be charged with accessing a computer without authorization and thereby obtaining information contained in a file from a consumer reporting agency on a consumer." The act is a violation of a section of the U.S. Code titled "Fraud in Connection With Computers." The penalty could range from probation to six months in prison.

I have a question for Wagner:

How can you possibly write about this incident and the DSCC without mentioning the chairman of that committee when the illegal activity took place?

It's Senator Chuck Schumer!
When this matter finally came to light, it was downplayed by lib media outlets. That's understandable, especially given that the Dems and their mouthpieces in the media had just launched their orchestrated "Culture of Corruption" campaign against Republicans.

In September 2005, Edward Morrissey wrote a great piece for the Weekly Standard. He revealed the hypocrisy of Chuck Schumer and the failure of the mainstream media to hold him accountable for the illegal activites of the DSCC.

Morrissey noted the irony in the fact that this corruption and illegal violation of Steele's privacy occurred under the watch of the co-author and sponsor of the "Schumer-Nelson ID Theft Prevention Bill, introduced in April of [2005] to discourage the kind of actions that Barge and Weiner took on Schumer's behalf."

He wrote what Schumer said then about possible privacy abuses:
O]ur comprehensive measure focuses on making sure that your personal information isn't surfing the Internet without your permission and that companies handling your Social Security number and other sensitive information should come under the watchful eye of the Federal Trade Commission immediately.

Morrissey went on to ask, "Who knew that within weeks of uttering this statement, his staff at the DSCC would have provided such a compelling example of the problem?"

Morrissey concluded:
Keeping two staffers on paid leave of absence after breaking federal laws on privacy--especially when data privacy happens to be a specialty of Senator Schumer--does indicate a casual approach to practicing what Schumer preaches.

It certainly does.

The hypocrisy of Schumer should have been pounced on by the press. It wasn't.

The fact is the mainstream media fails to inform the public in a fair and balanced fashion. Again and again, we see examples of the lib media pushing the lib agenda rather than accurately and adequately reporting the news.

Wagner's March 16 article about Weiner's violation of Steele's privacy and the Schumer connection is a glaring case in point.