The Washington Post’s David Weigel has resigned in the wake of a series of leaked emails, in which the blogger disparaged various figures in the conservative movement he was “covering” in his official capacity as the Post’s point man on the right. His resignation came less than a day after he posted this apology on the Post’s website:

I’m a member of an off-the-record list-serv called “Journolist,” founded by my colleague Ezra Klein. Last Monday, I was deluged with angry e-mail after posting a story about Rep. Bob Etheridge (D-N.C.) that was linked by the Drudge Report with a headline intimating that I defended his roughing-up of a young man with a camera; after this, the Washington Examiner posted a gossip item about my dancing at a friend’s wedding. Unwisely, I lashed out to Journolist, which I’ve come to view as a place to talk bluntly to friends.

Below the fold are quotes from me e-mailing the list that day — quotes that I’m told a gossip Web site will post today. I apologize for much of what I wrote, and apologize to readers.

There follows some choice Weigelisms:

• “This would be a vastly better world to live in if Matt Drudge decided to handle his emotional problems more responsibly, and set himself on fire.”
• “Follow-up to one hell of a day: Apparently, the Washington Examiner thought it would be fun to write up an item about my dancing at the wedding of Megan McArdle and Peter Suderman. Said item included the name and job of my girlfriend, who was not even there — nor in DC at all.”
• “I’d politely encourage everyone to think twice about rewarding the Examiner with any traffic or links for a while. I know the temptation is high to follow up hot hot Byron York scoops, but please resist it.” (more…)

“To Fisk,” means to refute, point by point, a published story; the verb comes from the left-wing British journalist Robert Fisk, whose slanted dispatches are often ruthlessly “fisked” in the blogosphere. Big Journalism’s comments on the text of the Washington Post’s “Cops Say There Was No ‘Escort’ For Bank Protesters” are in green:

A tempest developed in the conservative blogosphere over the weekend, with the D.C. police at the center of the storm.  the language art of belittling: “a tempest (as in a teapot) developed in the conservative blogosphere.” A bit condescending.

The controversy surrounds a May 16 protest organized by liberal group National People’s Action a group that merits some investigating and the Service Employees International Union. Hundreds of protesters targeted two homes in Chevy Chase, Md. — one belonging to a Bank of America attorney, the other to a J.P. Morgan Chase lobbyist — for raucous rallies decrying Wall Street’s efforts to influence bank-reform legislation.  That’s not what the video clips feature. They feature a wider, anti-capitalist agenda in play.

The protests had already garnered much attention from conservative activists upset that liberal activists would target bank employees at their homes. Then Big Journalism, a Web site started by digital media mogul Andrew Breitbart, published an item on Friday claiming that D.C. police officers had “escorted” the protesters to the residences. The word “escorted” came as Cpl. Dan Friz of the Montgomery County PD and I discussed the right word to describe the MPD’s role. I suggested a couple of options, like “accompanied” and then “how about escorted?” to which he readily agreed and repeated the word.  If they had a vehicle at the front of the caravan, it’s an escort. The item was picked up by influential bloggers, and yesterday, the Washington Examiner published an editorial titled “No more police escorts for union thugs.”  “Thugs” was the Examiner’s characterization. (more…)

Still trying to sort out the implications of the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission Supreme Court decision this week?

Puzzled by President Obama’s threat of a “forceful response”?  Wondering what sort of legislative remedies against the First Amendment are being cooked up even now by Sen. “Schemer” Schumer?

Tempted to believe the moonbat ravings of New York Times readers or the unhinged, Howard-Beale-like broadcasts of MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann that the 5-4 opinion presages a wholesale corporate takeover of the electoral process?

To get a sense of what really was at stake — nothing less than freedom of speech – have a look at this video, produced by the libertarian Cato Institute.  As Mark Tapscott noted yesterday in the Washington Examiner: (more…)