In mid-October, The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the Associated Press all reported on the dispute surrounding Larry Hanauer, the Democratic House intelligence committee staffer suspended by Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) for allegedly leaking portions of a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE). These outlets all noted Hoekstra's explanation of the action: that he had denied Hanauer access to classified materials after learning that Hanauer had requested a copy of the NIE two days before portions of it appeared in a news report. The print outlets also reported that Democrats on the panel had protested Hoekstra's allegations as baseless and politically motivated. On November 17, Hoekstra reinstated Hanauer's security clearance after finding no evidence of wrongdoing on his part. But of the print outlets that highlighted the dispute in October, only the Post has reported its resolution.

In a September 24 New York Times article, national security correspondent Mark Mazzetti reported that, according to unnamed officials, a classified NIE completed in April assigned “a more direct role to the Iraq war in fueling radicalism than that presented either in recent White House documents or in a report released Wednesday by the House Intelligence Committee.” When asked about the report during a September 26 press conference, President Bush asserted that the contents of the NIE had been leaked for "political purposes."

On October 17, Hoekstra, the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, suspended Hanauer's access to classified materials, citing suspicions that Hanauer may have been responsible for the leak of the NIE. Soon after, House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO) released statements praising Hoekstra's decision. In an October 21 Washington Post article, staff writer Walter Pincus explained the sequence of events leading up to Hanauer's suspension:

The initial accusation against Hanauer was made to Hoekstra more than three weeks ago in a letter from Rep. Ray LaHood (R-Ill.), a committee member. The charge was based on a “coincidence” that the Democratic staffer obtained the document, at the request of a member, two days before stories about its contents were published. “I have no credible information to say any classified information was leaked from the committee's minority staff. ... This may in fact be only coincidence and simply 'look bad,' ” LaHood said in his letter, but he requested a formal inquiry.

LaHood defended his letter in a telephone interview yesterday. “Why was there this coincidence? ... That's what the investigation should be about,” he said.

LaHood also linked Hoekstra's decision to suspend the staff member on Tuesday to [Rep. Jane] Harman's [D-CA] unilateral release that day of the summary of a special counsel's report about how former representative Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-Calif.) manipulated the committee to benefit contractors who had bribed him.

“We are in the political season. ... If the ranking member wants to play politics,” LaHood told Fox News yesterday, referring to Harman, “there are some of us on the other side that can play politics, and I'm not afraid to do it.”

Yesterday, Hoekstra sent a letter to Harman saying he thought the suspension was necessary “given the current 'zero tolerance' atmosphere for any indication ... that suggests the potential for wrongdoing.” He also referred to the coincidence of timing as a “red flag” suggesting a leak of classified information. The special counsel's report criticized the committee for failing to act on “red flags” about Cunningham.

Three days earlier, on the day of the suspension, Hoekstra wrote Harman that he had “thought carefully about this and have come to the conclusion that I cannot assume that this was mere coincidence.” Hoekstra added that the staffer “could have been involved in, or confirmed the leak of, the classified NIE information.”

Pincus went on to note that Mazzetti wrote in his September 24 article on the NIE that he had, over the course of several weeks, interviewed numerous government officials and experts that “had either seen the final version of the document or participated in the creation of earlier drafts.” Pincus further reported that Hanauer obtained the NIE because Rep. John Tierney (D-MA), a member of the intelligence committee who had received media inquiries about the document, had requested it.

Several other major print outlets also published articles on the controversy:

• The New York Times: “Limits on Aide in Leak Case Are Protested by Democrat,” Scott Shane; 10/21/06

• Los Angeles Times: “Democratic Aide's Access to Intelligence Is Cut Off,” Greg Miller, 10/21/06

• Associated Press: “House Intel Chair Suspends Staff Member,” Katherine Shrader, 10/20/06

On November 17, Hoekstra notified Harman, the ranking member on the committee, that his inquiry into the leak had established no wrongdoing on Hanauer's part. In a November 20 statement, Harman announced that Hanauer's security clearance had been reinstated and that he had resumed work on the committee:

Last Friday, I received a letter from Chairman Pete Hoekstra indicating that the Committee has concluded its inquiry into the alleged leak of the NIE on Global Terrorism. The Chairman's inquiry found no evidence of any wrongdoing by the Professional Staff Member whose access to classified information was temporarily suspended. The Professional Staff Member has returned to work at the Intelligence Committee and has full access to classified information.

All of us are pleased that our valued staff member is back at work, and that this meritless inquiry is over.

But of the four print outlets that originally highlighted Hoekstra's suspension of Hanauer, The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and the AP have yet to report on his reinstatement. By contrast, the Post published a November 21 article on the story, headlined "Intelligence Panel Staffer Reinstated":

A Democratic staff member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has had his security clearances reinstated and yesterday resumed work for the panel, ending a pre-election drama during which senior House Republicans alleged he may have leaked an intelligence report that was politically embarrassing to the Bush administration.