Good leaks, bad leaks

For all the demonization of the NYT for leaking "damaging" information about White House malfaesance, Justin Rood at TPM points out all leaks are not equal. Noting an AP story on the liquid bomb plot, he discovers a huge leak buried at the end.

Two. . . U.S. counterterrorism officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation, said the British suspects placed calls to several cities in the United States before their arrests. At least some of the calls were placed to people in New York, Washington, Chicago and Detroit, one official said. The suspects are all British citizens, mostly men in the 20s and 30s of Pakistani descent.

Now, that appears to be remarkably specific intelligence leaked from within an ongoing terror investigation -- classified information that could not only reveal sources and methods, but also tip off possible suspects before the Feds got to them.

This "liquid terror" plot has been alleged to have been a serious and immediate threat. Yet almost a week has passed without any comment from the administration about this published account. No one's called the AP a bunch of traitors. No investigations have been launched. The White House has not condemned the leak or blamed it for possibly costing American lives.

So, why not?

Why not indeed? Could it be because this leak advances the White House agenda rather than exposing it's illegal activities? Just asking.