Stephen_m, commenting on Terrye's "oil conspiracy" post previous, said something I like so much I wanted it up front:
Three things that can be brought from Psychoanalysis to the situation:
1) When there is a denied, unconscious motivation for behavior, the hidden impulse will continue to press for expression. If the AP (or any MSM outlet) has a need to facilitate enemy propaganda, this will be more and more apparent as time goes on and as attention is paid to those occasions when the impulse breaks through in unmistakable ways. Rathergate and Pallywood are the rules, not the exceptions.
2) When patients use such transparent maneuvers, it is because more effective defenses are no longer working. In the case of my patient, our work together had brought him close to the point where he would be unable to continue to deny and minimize his barely unconscious rage against me. Once brought into the open, it becomes available for therapeutic work and is a precondition for him changing his behavior. The AP's transparent and ineffective defense suggests they are having difficulty maintaining their denial and minimization.
3) If Michelle, et al, can avoid polemics, and avoid engaging in arguments over the minor error, it will allow the facts to speak for themselves. This will deny the AP the opportunity to use an argument over minutia to deflect attention away from the most important questions. In this specific case, maintaining the focus on Bilal Hussein and the AP's overt behavior is the best approach to getting at the facts.
Defensive Denial: The Focus on the Minor Error --- ShrinkWrapped
They didn't reason their way into that paper bag so they aren't gonna reason their way out of it.