Journalism Pro-Tip: If the best-case scenario is you're being lied to then you are in serious trouble.\n\n\n\tThis is usually the case when someone in authority\u2013 usually an elected official or Jamie Dimon \u2013 is trying to blow Beijing-smog levels of smoke up your posterior.\n\n\n\tIn Mr. Dimon's case it was saying he had no idea that his bank was risking $6 billion on a series of investments. But today let us examine a statement made by President Obama when explaining that drones would continue to only be used against "specific senior operational leaders of al Qaida and associated forces." In a CNN interview last September he said:\n\n\n\tThere are two ways to assess this statement.\n\n\n\tWell, to mix up two different Democratic campaign slogans: The hope stops here.\n\n Yesterday Jonathan S. Landay of the McClatchy Newspapers\u2019 Washington D.C. bureau reported:\n\n\n\t(You may remember the McClatchy -- then Knight-Ridder -- news service from about 11 years ago when they were the only news organization to question the Bush administration\u2019s excuses for invading Iraq.* They may be the last group in D.C. who can honestly be accused of conducting journalism.)\n\n\n\tNow if you have been reading the news out of the greater Afghanistan area then you would know that reports of drones being used to settle political and tribal feuds have been circulating for years. So that part is not news. Mr. Landay's coup was in getting the documents which prove that this was standard government operating procedure.\n\n\n\tWhen asked about this, the White House said it was sticking to its earlier lie.\n\n\n\tI paraphrase only slightly.\n\n *Last night at the University of Massachusetts Amherst the following exchange took place during a talk given by Karl Rove:\n\n\n\t"Mr. Rove, knowing what we know now, would you have advised the president to invade Iraq?" one young man asked.\n\n\n\tRove, after pausing for a moment, said "yes."