Bo Did It.

Boy oh boy, murder cases sure are more complicated in China than in America.

This is still a murder case, right?

Last night at 7:11 pm the New York Times led its newspaper-of-record coverage of humanity with a story that Bo Xilai had been wiretapping in Chongqing and even bugged Hu Jintao's phone calls.  That sounds like something an arrogant, ambitious, up-and-coming Chinese politician might do. It’s paranoid and Chinese are paranoid, it’s power-hungry and ditto. It sounds more plausible than murder.

The Times report was based on interviews with “nearly a dozen people with party ties, speaking anonymously…”  Uh-oh.

 “According to senior party members, including editors, academics and people with ties to the military…”  Is that the same as “nearly a dozen people with party ties speaking anonymously?”  I don’t know.  “According to”... them, Bo had been wiretapping for years. 

Then why didn’t the Center can Bo years ago? Here’s where the Times reporting, and it’s sourcing, becomes fishy. The Times says “for years” Bo had been trying to tap the phone calls of almost every high-ranking official who came to Chongqing.  Says who?  Says “one political analyst with senior-level ties, citing information obtained from a colonel he recently dined with." I did not make that up. One political analyst who had dinner with some colonel.  

Who says Bo tapped Hu?  (What’s on second?)  There are two incidents of Hu-bugging according to the Times, one between Hu and Liu Guanglei. When that happened is not revealed in the article beyond “last year.”  The sources for that incident are “two journalists.”  Okay, I can believe journalists; I do believe journalists most of the time. How did the two journalists find out?  The Times doesn’t say.  So two carpal-tunnel afflicted wretches tell two NYT carpal-tunnel afflicted wretches, that’s all we have.  Is it carpal-tunnel afflicted wretches all the way down?  I can’t believe that incident without better corroboration. The second incident of Hu-bugging is not clearly sourced but it is better dated, August, 2011, and also names the person on the other line with Hu, Ma Wen.  Well, I believe the New York Times, two Times reporters believe their sources, I believe Times editors vetted this story before publishing it…The wire-tapping angle is more plausible than murder…

So what happened to the murder case?  Has anyone heard one God…blessed detail of how Gu Kailai murdered Neil Heywood?  Actually, there has been one detail: BoGu’s housekeeper did it, on Gu’s orders. The murder case, according to the Times, remains “the official narrative” (God, I hate that phrase, “the narrative.”  Reporters started using that phrase “the narrative” during “Arab Spring.” (God, I hate that phrase, “Arab Spring.")) because it is “more easily grasped.” 

We can grasp wiretapping, what’s so hard to grasp about that? Who amongst us cannot grasp wiretapping?

“Party officials, however, say it would be far too damaging to make the wiretapping public.”  It just has. “Party officials,” made the wiretapping public as of 7:11 last night as the lead article in the New York Times.  That is a nonsensical justification that is being fed two carpal-tunnel afflicted wretches of the New York Times by party officials.  Does the New York Times believe that Chinese party officials think the Great Firewall is going to prevent this from getting into China?  No.  The Times was told this by party officials because the party wanted the wiretapping to become public.