The Post buries any notion of rude, harassing questioning of Rice in the middle of A10 and A11, hoping the front-page scanners will miss that part. The “analysis” by David von Drehle hits the notion in paragraph 11, the news story by Dan Eggen and Walter Pincus at paragraph 13. (They spent several paragraphs on Democrat Jamie Gorelick’s less badgering questioning before that.)
But Eggen and Pincus also suggest that “one section of the room erupted into applause for Rice several times, only to be answered a bit later by applause for her interrogators from another quarter of the room.” Did the pro-Rice applause go first? I thought it was the other way around.