You probably won't find someone more suspicious of MSM than me. Nonetheless, this shocked me. This isn't just a new low, this should be scandalous. But of course I doubt it will be. A few right-leaning outlets and blogs will stir up their readers/viewers, but no non-Fox outlet in the MSM and only a few left-leaning blogs will speak out. The march will go on, and the descent of journalistic standards will continue to plunge to disgraceful depths. When an entire section of the population has no shame, there will never be common decency.

Meanwhile, the phones of all his old girlfriends and anyone who's ever worked for him are suddenly ringing off the hook, i bet.

You could start a contest. Name the next low of the left, and win a fabulous prize. Will they question his son's sexuality? Will they connect him to an organization bent on ruling the world known only by it's front the Federalist Society?

I can see the MSM cameras documenting the authorities tearing the children away from Robert's outstretched arms.

And everyone on the left in fits with a maniacal laugh. I am ashamed that I live in the same country as filth like the NYT.

I'm not surprised. Gotta outdo the Washington Post, which criticized what the kids wore at the White House photo-op.

Next up: Critics ask why the kids aint more "ethnic".

I watched the Fri night Fox "Round Table" w/Britt Hume. Hume said NYT sought advice of lawyers re: how to unseal and look @ adoption records. This is a definitive step beyond the NYT claim: "We were just asking questions, checking background info, nothing to see here..."

I think its unethical for NYT even to ask questions which are designed to uncover adoption irregularities. Even if Roberts used "powerful person influence" to push through the adoption of his children - its not a story. First, b/c children are involved - which makes it a disgusting exercise. Second, b/c its dog bites man. Using whatever power and influence you have in life is not a story.

aaah, gcotharn, but they can make it a story. That's the idea.

No, you're right, it is unethical. look what the LAT did to schwarzenegger. Bawdy behavior on a movie set? That's dog bites man too. The LA Times went around and interviewed all these women who worked on his movies until they found one who was willing to lie about being groped. When she was proven to be a liar, they didn't report it. Then they totally ignored the women who worked for Gray Davis who said that he threw stuff at them and was verbally abusive.

If the NYT gets into the adoption paperwork, odds are even that they will find something they can spin into an irregularity. It doesn't matter what the truth is, the accusation is enough.