UPDATED: The WSJ's deafening silence over the Mark Sanford scandal continues

I previously mocked the WSJ's editorial page for completely ignoring the Sanford infidelity and abuse-of-power story even though the same WSJ editorial page spent the decade of the 1990's evangelizing about Bill Clinton's infidelity and alleged abuse of power.

Screaming double standard, right?

Well, TPMuckraker reports that right before the Sanford scandal broke, back when there were general news stories about the governorship MIA status, a writer from the Journal's editorial page emailed a Sanford aide to complain about how awful and mean the news coverage of Sanford was.

In fact, the WSJ editorial page staffer mocked his own paper's Sanford coverage:

"Someone at WSJ should be fired for today's story. Ridiculous."

When people thought Sanford had simply disappeared and left the state of South Carolina without anybody in charge, the Journal editorial page thought the news coverage was "ridiculous."

And then when Sanford admitted he'd traveled overseas to meet with his girlfriend and had previously spent taxpayer money to meet her, the Journal's editorial page lost complete interest in the story and, as far as I know, has never once addressed the story in print.

Quite embarrassing, even for the Journal crew.