Speaking of CYA: Is Peter Jennings Trying to Cover his Ass?

You'll remember Peter Jennings strong statement denouncing Michael Moore before the New Hampshire Primary for the purpose of trying to stump Wesley Clark. Jennings statement was pretty strong and clear cut at the time.

At one point, Mr. Moore said, in front of you, that President Bush -- he's saying he'd like to see you, the general, and President Bush, who he called a "deserter."

Now, that's a reckless charge not supported by the facts. And I was curious to know why you didn't contradict him, and whether or not you think it would've been a better example of ethical behavior to have done so.

Now the press is working on this story more thoroughly. But it also appears that while "deserter" is still pretty strong, is hardly over-the-top hyperbole. And this new evidence makes Jennings look a lot worse than Michael Moore (who Attaturk admits is a polemicists, though a talented one). Under the circumstances, it would behoove Jennings to say, my statements back in January may also have been reckless. Of course, he will not.

So is the ABC News report where Terry Moran trots out John (again, Not "C.", but should be) Calhoun, a completely discredited witness, an effort to actually save Peter Jennings sorry ass? Is Jennings so wedded not to his far too strong criticism such that his interest is less in reporting facts, than in justifying his behavior in January?