Byron York has a must-read article in the most recent issue, which the editors have seen fit to make available for free here. It’s about how Larry Johnson has become the media’s go-to guy for Bush-bashing from a “former intelligence official”:

In recent years, Johnson, who says he is a registered Republican, has made a new career of using his CIA credentials to bash the Bush administration. He has become a favorite not only of the left-wing blogosphere — on his website, called No Quarter, he writes entries like “Frog-March the Bastard,” which was a call for the indictment of Karl Rove — but also of the nation’s biggest newspapers and cable news networks. If you’re a reporter looking for a quote criticizing the president about warrantless surveillance, or about the CIA’s “secret prisons,” or about the troubled efforts to reform the spy agency, Johnson is your man. In just the last few months, his observations about intelligence matters have appeared in or on the New York Times, the Washington Post, the New York Daily News, the Sunday Times of London, the Guardian, the Associated Press, Knight-Ridder, National Public Radio, CNN, MSNBC, and more.
Why does Johnson receive such attention? Compared with some of the CIA’s other critics, like Bob Baer, who spent 21 years as a case officer, or Milt Bearden, who spent 30 years at the agency and left as a high-ranking official, Johnson’s credentials are a little thin. He worked there as an analyst, not as a top manager or a covert agent, for all of four years, 1985 to 1989, which means it has been 17 years since he was employed by the CIA. And his specialty wasn’t the Middle East or terrorism; instead, he dealt with issues related to Central America, a subject he’s rarely called on to comment about today. What experience he had with terrorism came not at the CIA but at the State Department, where he worked mostly on transportation-security issues from 1989 to 1993.
So why the demand for Johnson’s opinions? “He’s willing to say very bold things,” says a former intelligence official. “If you say things that are balanced and reasoned and calm, they’re less likely to ask you back than if you throw some bombs.”

This brings us to Seixon’s analysis of some of the baseless reporting that’s appeared in places like truthout.org and other left-wing media sites. We know the press is fond of quoting Johnson on the record. But how often are they giving him (or his fellow VIPS) the anonymous cover of “former intelligence official” or even, in matters pertaining to the CIA leak case, as “a source familiar with the case” because of his friendship with the Wilsons? These descriptions — as opposed to, ”A vocal Bush administration critic who worked for the CIA for four years 17 years ago” – lend credibility to whatever information follows. If this is occurring at major news organizations, it’s a serious misuse of anonymous sourcing.