One thing’s for sure. There are all kinds of future doctoral dissertations falling all over themselves here. In Political Science, in Journalistic Ethics. (Are both of those terms oxymorons?)

My crystal ball sees topics like “Spin, Rumor, Truth, Fiction and Mystery: The Role of the Media in Reporting the Goss Resignation”. Or “Why did Porter Goss Resign? A Contrast in Reporting Styles”. And how about “Porter Goss’s Resignation and the Elephant in the Room”?

Actually, it’s not quite an elephant, just a rumor of an elephant.

Mainstream media stories about Porter Goss’s resignation have scrupulously refrained from mentioning the gossip swirling in liberal blogs that Goss is possibly involved in the prostitution ring of the Duke Cunningham three-ring corruption circus. As Peter Daou put it in The Huffington Post:

…the first blush of coverage distinctly ignored the blog buzz about Goss’s possible — and I stress possible — involvement in the Duke Cunningham prostitute scandal.

Originating apparently with an April 27 post on TPM Muckraker, the rumors have swirled far and wide on liberal blogs, achieving the currency of truth in some of the re-tellings. While a lot of people on the liberal blogs are convinced they know why Goss resigned, the mainstream media was filled with stories saying that why Porter Goss resigned is a mystery. Goss himself did a little conducting from the wings, making a statement that it will remain a mystery why he resigned.

It’s unclear to me whether these “mystery” stories tend to whitewash Goss’s resignation, or make it sound even more suspicious. What is clear is that the stories make very little sense on the face of it. Because previous reports have spelled out in detail the official version of Goss’s resignation—Goss resigned because Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte suggested to him that he should. Said suggestion being made to his old friend of almost 50 years with Bush’s concurrence, even though Bush has absolutely not lost confidence in Goss. (This presumably means he has not lost confidence in Goss’s ability to do his ex-job. Unless, of course, Bush has buried a secret signing statement somewhere announcing that he no longer feels bound to use certain words and phrases according to Generally Accepted Linguistic Principles, because those meanings disagree with his delicate constitution.)

Just because Goss himself has refused to state a reason for his resignation does not make it any kind of mystery. But the docile, servile just-tell-us-what-to-say media have had a field day and a whale of a time playing up the mystery angle. Apparently what they’re teaching in journalism school these days is that it’s a mystery unless you say “I was fired, okay?” or unless you go “I’m resigning to spend more time with my family/kids/dog”. And apparently it’s now an interactive mystery. C”N”N invited viewers on Sunday night to opine on why Goss had resigned. I can only assume that they had a phalanx of censors on hand to censor out all the really interesting speculation.

And let’s remember that the resignation was turned into a mystery despite the White House stating on the record that a “collective agreement” was reached that it was time for Goss to go (even though Bush has absolutely not lost confidence in Goss, etc.) The U.S. government’s makeover to a Soviet style of functioning thereby reaches Stage Two. First, we started to act like them. (Stage directions here: swish the world “gulag” around in your mouth, then spit. On a Bush administration official if one is handy. But only if you have no family, friends and pressing engagements for the next few years.) Now, we’re starting to talk like them. What’s next? Large scale purges and pogroms?

But to undigress, after the TPM Muckraker post appeared, rumors swirled on the internet. TPM Muckraker persevered with the CIA till they got an official response to the rumors. Sounds to me like as lame and unconvincing a full denial as an official spokesman ever cobbled together.

As of now, no mainstream media story has come out and said in so many words that it is being rumored and gossiped that Goss had to resign because of interactions with indiscriminately friendly ladies in the Brent Wilkes hospitality suites. But some brave and intrepid media outlets have started to tiptoe around the story, easing into it, as it were.

For example, on Saturday the Associated Press inserted two paragraphs into the standard Goss versus Negroponte story:

CIA officials dismissed suggestions that Goss’ resignation was tied to controversy surrounding the CIA’s executive director, Kyle “Dusty” Foggo. The FBI is investigating whether Foggo’s longtime friend, defense contractor Brent Wilkes, provided prostitutes, limousines and hotel suites to a California congressman who pleaded guilty to taking bribes from Wilkes and others in exchange for government contracts.

CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano said Goss’ resignation also was not related to the recent firing of a CIA officer that Goss said had unauthorized contacts with the press; the firing that found support within the agency and the White House.

Foggo was tied to Wilkes, but only through longtime friendship. Goss was not tied to Foggo at all. Howeever, the words “prostitutes, limousines and hotel suites” were used in the paragraph as Goss’s name, even if not in the same sentence.

On Sunday, The San Diego Union-Tribune went a little further in this dance of the seven veils:

Yesterday’s resignation of CIA Director Porter Goss came just a day after the head of the House Intelligence Committee said an independent investigator may review Poway defense contractor Brent Wilkes’ relationship with CIA officials.

Sources close to the intelligence community strongly deny that the work of the independent investigator – or recent news coverage of Wilkes’ parties with CIA officials – caused Goss to quit.

They say the resignation had more to do with a turf war between Goss and his immediate supervisor, John Negroponte, director of national intelligence.

But some sources said Goss’ position as head of the CIA was weakened by the latest bout of negative publicity surrounding Wilkes, whom federal prosecutors have identified as a co-conspirator in the bribery case of former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham.

Reports in The San Diego Union-Tribune and The Wall Street Journal last week revealed that the FBI is probing whether Wilkes hired prostitutes on behalf of legislators who visited his hotel suites in Washington, D.C.
[…]
Through his attorney, Wilkes denied hiring prostitutes. Wilkes’ suites at the Watergate and Westin Grand hotels were used for several purposes, including weekly poker games with high-ranking CIA officers such as his longtime friend Kyle “Dusty” Foggo, the third-highest officer in the CIA.

On Thursday, Rep. Pete Hoekstra, the Michigan Republican who heads the House Intelligence Committee, said he raised the issue of Wilkes’ parties with the committee’s independent investigator.

“One of the things he would want to find out is if these things actually existed, who was there,” Hoekstra told The Associated Press. “We would want to know. I would want to know.”

Foggo and Wilkes have been friends since they attended junior high school together in Chula Vista in the 1960s.
[…]
In October 2004, Goss appointed Foggo executive director of the CIA, overseeing the agency’s day-to-day operations.

According to an article in The Nation at the time, some CIA officials felt Foggo was unqualified for the job. CIA sources told the liberal magazine they believed Foggo was chosen because he had close relationships with staffers on the House Intelligence Committee.

At the time, Cunningham sat on the committee.

Most of the dots are there. Just not fully connected.