Damn congressional staffers leak like a sieve

[bluestateguy]

Who do you think it is leaking all of these anonymously sourced tips to mousey Capitol Hill reporters? I'll tell you who: it's these pissant congressional staffers. A bunch of 20-30 something Washington climbers trying to feel important. "Oh, oh! I get to feel like a big shot! Jake Tapper wanted to interview me, and I don't even have to be a man and go on the record!" They leak, leak, leak, with little regard for whether or not the material is true.

[ret5hd]

1. sieve

[PassingFair]

2. Sieve.

:eyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sieve

[Winterblues]

3. Wow a new development I suspect...

I am fairly certain this has never occurred in the past...:crazy:

[Democrat 4 Ever]

4. Spell check is your friend. Message loses a little when it doesn't make sense.

I'm not the grammar police but this one is just a little too obvious to ignore.

[bluestateguy]

5. Fixed. Satisfied?

I don't do spelling.

[damntexdem]

6. Well, when one takes a leak, it's generally waste.

[gratuitous]

7. Thus has it ever been

Don't think for a moment that these staff people are leaking without the full knowledge and blessing of their bosses in the Big Chair. My problem comes when someone like Jake Tapper substitutes an anonymous leak for actual news, protecting his source while not providing any information, and in fact often misleading or outright lying in his report, and knowing damn well that's what he's doing. It's a major circle jerk, with the Senator getting his story out, without having to answer for it. The staffer gets to see his or her leak make the news, protected from above and below by the Boss and the reporter. The reporter gets to put a juicy tidbit for everyone to pore over and dissect, and he gets to go on teevee and pontificate about his sterling reportage and insider information.

And the public is decidedly not served by these shenanigans.

[Freddie Stubbs]

8. Sometimes leakers leak when their bosses ask them to do so