Angry in the Great White North

Drudge is reporting that the New York Times is investigating the circumstances of the adoption of Judge John G Robert's two children, Josie and Jack. Judge Roberts, of course, is the nominee for the Supreme Court:

The TIMES has investigative reporter Glen Justice hot on the case to investigate the status of adoption records of Judge Roberts' two young children, Josie age 5 and Jack age 4, a top source reveals.

Judge Roberts and his wife Jane adopted the children when they each were infants.

Both children were adopted from Latin America.

Does anyone seriously belive that Judge Roberts or his wife kidnapped these children, tearing them from the arms of their biological parents? What other horror stories are being dreamed up in the feverish imagination of Glen Justice?

Let's say all the adoption papers aren't available. Paperwork being what it is, especially in places like Latin America, I would be surprised if every single document relevant to the adoption could be traced. Are we going to be treated to another George Bush Air National Guard soap opera, in which all sorts of allegations of shirked duty were tossed around simply because not all the paperwork could be found from thirty years ago?

That sort of nonsense cost Dan Rather his job, and CBS its credibility.

As an adoptee, I'm especially horrified. What if they can't find the fifth of eight documents? Are they going to start splashing headlines about how Josie and Jack are not the legitimate children of Judge and Mrs. Roberts? Don't think for a minute that at ages 4 and 5, they are too young to understand what is being said. Kids at that age understand too much and too little, if you know what I mean. Comments like that would terrify them.

First the demand that the Bush twins be thrown at the front lines, and now an investigation of the adoption of Judge Roberts' children. What is it about going after people's kids? Is there no means the left can't justify to reach their desired ends?

It gets worse though.

Remember, Glen Justice is the same reporter who, in an attempt to make John Kerry look fair and patriotic, alleged that the Swift Boat Veterans commercial that claimed that Kerry had "secretly met with the enemy in Paris" in th 1970s was wrong. Justice "corrected" the Swifties by claiming that Kerry had met with "both sides". That claim of fairness was repeated in three articles in September of 2004. Afterwards, the New York Times printed a correction, identifying the two parties Kerry had met with as the North Vietnam Communist delegation and the Vietcong's Provisional Revolutionary Government. Indeed Kerry had met with the enemy, and only the enemy, just as the Swifties had stated.

Who knows what Justice is going to dig up? Who knows if he'll even get it right?

[Captain Ed thinks that the very fact that Drudge is reporting on investigation works against any story about the adoption ever being published, since the outrage over the investigation would drown out all but the most scandalous (and thus most unlikely) of charges. More at Michelle Malkin and Jason Smith. Professor Bainbridge is especially upset: "It's just another example of how the MSM's overweening belief that they are the untouchable masters of the universe blinds them to the privacy-invading low-life scum that they in fact are." ]

Update: Michelle Malkin has an email from a reader who received a response from the New York Times. Apparently this is much ado about nothing:

In the case of Judge Roberts's family, our reporters made initial inquiries about the adoptions, as they did about many other aspects of his background. They did so with great care, understanding the sensitivity of the issue. We did not order up an investigation of the adoptions. We have not pursued the issue after the initial inquiries, which detected nothing irregular about the adoptions.

Right.

Two questions:

1. Was Glen Justice on the case? If so, why, given a serious incident in his past for misreporting on critically important political story?


2. What the hell did you think you were going to find in the first place? Indeed, what did you hope to find?