I think we should have a contest to predict how the Times will cover this story if and when they’re forced to do so.

I predict a variation on the Sandy Berger pattern. First the Times waited an extra day or two. Then a story appeared about Justice Dept. “leaks” impugning Berger, with plenty of quotes from Democrats shocked – absolutely shocked – at the administration’s unethical behavior. There was an editorial the next day suggesting that both sides have explaining to do. No further coverage since then.

Here’s how the SwiftBoats story will play out: The Times will eventually run with a story questioning the credibility of the SwiftBoats veterans and quoting Democrats outraged that Bush hasn’t disassociated himself from them. The actual charges won’t be disclosed until after the jump and won’t get more than a paragraph or two before being implicitly dismissed as not credible and not the real story.

Living in New York and reading the Times, you get good at this. Since most educated New Yorkers don’t read anything else, they see the world like that famous New Yorker cover, with stories like SwiftBoat just momentary specks on the horizon.

Any other ideas on how the Times will respond?