This is journalism: Video - "Living with the Ayatollah." The democratian? Isn't.

.
This video, dated April 11, is about the horrific lives of some people in Iran.  It is horrific on many levels.  But that's not the point of this post.  Locally, we'vre in our 22nd day of the democratian's cover up of the Jim Jacks episode.

And the point of all this is, once again, the ongoing failure of the democratian to report on the circumstances surrounding the sudden departure of Jim Jacks from his 49th District legislative seat.

The rag reported his departure, but refused to either "speculate" about that which most everyone involved already know (That the sudden resignation was related to Jacks' misconduct) or to allow others to "speculate," a restriction that only seems to apply to democrats in trouble, but to no other people, groups, parties or events.

The excuse?

Conservative commenters on our website and bloggers immediately began flinging around rumors as to why he quit. And for good measure — because The Columbian could not confirm why he had quit — they figured we were part of some conspiracy.

It’s silly talk, of course, but that’s what you sometimes get on the Web.

Actually, it's 1000% accurate.  But that's what you get from one of Lou's self-serving columns.  Fiction.

Conservative blogger Lew Waters was determined to show some sort of double standard by The Columbian when it comes to politicians doing stupid stuff.

So Waters drags up a name from the past: former Republican state Rep. Richard Curtis.

...

One small problem. There was a huge paper trail to support our stories on Curtis. There is no paper trail — not yet, at least — on anything untoward about Jacks’ sudden resignation.

Of course, this disgrace of a newspaper has made no effort to find any, or to interview any of the people involved... a certain legislative assistant and a certain staffer from the Legislative Office of Program Research.

In short... once again... if the rag doesn't know... it's because they don't want to know.

Which brings us to this video.

It's hard to watch.  But most of what it reports has nothing to do with paper trails.

In fact, the woman doing the report says this at about 27:15 in the tape:

"We can't verify the stories that we've heard."

We can't verify the stories that we've heard.

I guess a lot of torture can't be documented.

Odd that an outfit at least as podunk as the Columbian seems to be able to do 30 minutes on a subject they can't document... while the local rag can't.

Of course, the difference is, clearly, that while the democratian doesn't want to know... the BBC actually, with equal clarity, DID want to know.

So the BBC reports a chilling and painful saga of the people under the jackboot of islamic thugs.  The BBC actually engages in this bizarre and unheard of concept that we so rarely see here locally: Journalism.

The democratian, on the other hand does not... because, hey... this is "different."

Yeah.  It's ALWAYS "different."

You see... they can't find a paper trail.

End of story.
.