The family of Steven Sotloff, the latest American journalist beheaded by ISIS, is reportedly "outraged" at the Obama administration for "deliberate leaks" they interpret as "an attempt to absolve the administration of inaction." This reporting comes Wednesday from no less a source than the New York Times, which chose to bury the news under more than two dozen paragraphs: Last Thursday, Mr. Sotloff’s mother, Shirley, appealed to the leader of ISIS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the self-proclaimed caliph of the Muslim world, to grant amnesty to her son. “I ask you to use your authority to spare his life,” she said in videotaped remarks seen around the world.
A person close to the Sotloff family expressed outrage at what he viewed as a pattern of deliberate leaks in Washington suggesting that Mr. Sotloff was killed the same day as Mr. Foley — a strategy he said the family sees as an attempt to absolve the administration of inaction.
“It was incredibly frustrating for us, because it was as if basically they were saying, ‘Don’t hope for any positive outcome,' ” said this person, who requested anonymity because he did not have the family’s permission to speak publicly.
This news is also not referenced in the Times' headline: "ISIS Says It Killed Steven Sotloff After U.S. Strikes in Northern Iraq."
As far as I know, using her Twitter account, English author Louise Mensch was the first to catch the burying of this notable news.
It wasn't so long ago when major stars at The New York Times argued that anguished and angry mothers enjoyed an absolute moral authority over a sitting president -- and answers.
Today the Times refuses to give these mothers a headline and then goes so far as to bury their outrage at the sitting president.
Democrats sure got it good.
John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC
