Mark Levin and Tom Maguire have already noted critical errors in Walter Pincus’s coverage of the Mary McCarthy firing. But Media Blog reader Tom L. wrote in to add an interesting footnote. After summarizing the points made by Levin and Maguire, Tom writes:

To summarize the Post’s strategy:
1) Make sure the reader has no knowledge of the damage done to the war on terror by this leak.
2) Make sure the reader has only the vague and incomplete knowledge of [McCarthy’s] ties to the Democratic party.
3) If any facts have to be included, inaccurately report them so as to put Mary McCarthy in the best light.
4) Remember, the real story is LEWIS LIBBY, LEWIS LIBBY, LEWIS LIBBY.
If you don’t believe me, I’ve saved the best for last. In what I can only describe as a blatant attempt at brainwashing their readers, the Washington Post website surrounds this article with NO LESS THAN 15 LINKS TO THE PLAME/LIBBY INVESTIGATION. Bordering the top of the article in bright red are the words “The Plame Investigation” with 6 links to stories on the Libby investigation. Just in case you don’t get the message, bordering the article on the right is a box with the bright red headline, “Understanding The Plame Affair”. Below this headline are 8 more links to stories on the Libby investigation. While you might think that this is overkill, if you’re doing the math you know we aren’t done yet. Below this box, and also bordering on the right is a photograph of Lewis Libby and another link to a story on him.

The Post uses the arrangement of links Tom describes for all of its coverage of the Valerie Plame story. But the Mary McCarthy firing has nothing to do with that story. The Democrats — and the Washington Post — just want you to think it does.