Today’s New York Times carries a story in its "politics" section that raised red flags in my mind, but apparently not in reporter Christopher Maag’s... The title alone, "Inquiry in Ohio Could Hurt Obama Vote," might seem to suggest a political motivation for the inquiry, and the details of the story only heighten the question of whether the inquiry might be politically motivated–the investigation targets the top Democratic Party members in Cuyahoga County, which, as the reporter notes, is the most populous and Democratic-leaning county in Ohio.
To be sure, Maag dances around the issue:
"Kerry won big in Cuyahoga County, but it wasn’t enough," said David B. Cohen, a political science professor at the University of Akron. "Which means Obama needs to win even bigger."
That may prove difficult with top leaders of the local Democratic Party under investigation. Over three decades in public office, Mr. Dimora has built a broad political coalition, with many allies working as ward leaders, City Council members and mayors across the county.
[...]
Meanwhile, Republicans see the investigation as an opportunity to narrow the Democratic Party’s traditionally large majorities in the area.
"The backbone of their operation is being taken out because so many of their volunteers are public officials and public employees," said Jim Trakas, the former chairman of the Cuyahoga County Republican Party, who is running against Representative Dennis J. Kucinich, a Democrat. "That will make it very difficult for them to campaign."
But the reporter not only doesn’t ask the question "Is this political?", he doesn’t even note the implications suggested by the history of politicized prosections we’ve been hearing about for more than two years. Granted, those stories involved the U.S. Attorneys appointed by Bush, and this involves the F.B.I. and I.R.S., but still, that history would seem relevant to a story about investigtation of top Democratic Party members in a county important to–some would say crucial to–the Democratic nominee’s chances in that state, and perhaps the Presidency.
Perhaps the NYT’s reporters need a little help in dot-connecting? They seem unable to do so on their own. What do you think?
(Cross posted (with minor changes) at TPM and my own sad, mostly abandoned little blog)