Be sure not to miss the juicy tidbit in Adam's cover story this week about BlindTrust-gate, which I also talk about in my editor's note about Barbour. That is, Barbour's attorney Ed Brunini actually used the original Clarion-Ledger editorial defending Barbour back in January 2004, saying he had cut all ties to his lobbying firm, as an excuse—an exhibit even!—in his response to Attorney General Jim Hood look year, when Hood told Barbour he legally had to disclose his financial holdings and the companies he had interest in. Really breathe this in now: The Clarion-Ledger wrote an editorial defending Barbour and pooh-poohing concerns about his ties to major clients (that he has worked to benefit as governor), and then Brunini uses that editorial as so-called proof that there is "universal" approval of the way he's handled his "blind trust" among the state's media. Wacky circular logic there.
Read the letters between Barbour/Brunini and Jim Hood.
But it does go to illustrate how Barbour has used the state's media as cover all along. Remember the tort-reform scheme he hatched? He played the Ledger et al like a fiddle over that one—Jerry Mitchell, no less.
Note that we've posted a PDF of the correspondence between Hood and Barbour, including Brunini's letter referring to The Clarion-Ledger editorial as an excuse for non-disclosure.
Now, that's a proud media moment.