At the beginning of the presentation, Mr. Nagourney discussed the recent endorsement of Rudy Giuliani by Pat Robertson as "freaky," "weird" and "a stunt." He also echoed a widespread criticism of Republican candidate Fred Thomspon, saying "I really think he's just not that into it."

At one point, Times assistant managing editor Rick Berke asked reporter Patrick Healy, who covers Hillary Clinton, whether the New York senator has forgiven him for the notorious A1 exegesis of the Clinton marriage he wrote last year. "No," Mr. Healy replied.

"She's never quite sure what questions are going to come out of my mouth," Mr. Healy continued. "We have these moments where her people have to assess beforehand, well is there anything you're going to spring on her?" For instance, will there be a "question on marriage for her in a health care interview."

"It's really complicated," he continued. "She thinks of The Times as her hometown newspaper and she also sees its readers as her people, by and large -- not only as New Yorkers, but also as Democrats around the country. So she cares a lot about everything -- what's on the blogs, what's on page 1. She can be very critical."

Referring to the crowds in Iowa, Mr. Nagourney noted: "The average age was about 64." You could say the same about last night's event. The discussion was endlessly promoted on WQXR, a favorite of the over-50 crowd, and the audience grew visibly irritated when it hit the two-hour mark. When Mr. Berke asked how many people in the audience read The Caucus, The Times' most popular blog, four people raised their hands.

Afterwards, salted peanuts and Blackstone wine was served for the few stragglers willing to stick around. Eventually, Mr. Berke and Mr. Healy, in separate groups, were the last Times staffers standing.

"I'm just glad to be back," Phillips said by phone March 2. Washington bureau chief Phil Taubman sent Phillips flowers welcoming her back to the bureau, according to two sources. In December, Phillips departed the Washington editorship after only 11 months. In January, the Times disolved the position of Washington editor and split the duties among three deputies.

--Gabriel Sherman

Taubman's memo follows:

I'm pleased to announce ­or knowing the reporting standards you set for yourselves, to confirm ­ the appointment of three deputy bureau chiefs: Rebecca Corbett for enterprise, Doug Jehl for national security coverage and Dick Stevenson for domestic and economic affairs and politics.

They need little introduction.

Rebecca is an exceptionally talented editor, great at unconventional thinking, working with reporters, refining complex stories and developing cooperative relationships with colleagues here and in New York. Those who have worked with her know that, and several of you have told me that you think Rebecca is the best editor you've ever worked with. More of you will have the chance to discover that in the months ahead. The Baltimore Sun won two Pulitzer Prizes for reporting projects she directed. In recent months, she has worked closely with Jim Risen and Eric Lichtblau on their groundbreaking coverage of the National Security Agency's warrantless eavesdropping program.

Doug has set the standard for intelligence coverage in Washington since taking over the beat two years ago. I know that not only as one of his editors and readers, but because his competitors at The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, The Wall Street Journal and other news organizations have told me so. With his background as a White House correspondent and Cairo bureau chief, and stints at the Pentagon, Doug is fully conversant with the full array of national security issues. He has
been a prolific generator of ideas across that arena, has a knack for identifying and framing stories and has worked in productive partnerships with many reporters in the bureau.

Dick is a polymath on domestic, economic and political affairs. And he's no slouch on other issues. The breadth and depth of Dick's knowledge, combined with his precise reporting and lucid writing, have long given his stories a sense of authority and won him the respect of the Washington press corps. He can now put his keen intellect and package of journalism skills, and his gift for collaboration, to work across the bureau and the paper. Before moving over to the White House, Dick was the chief economic correspondent and earlier in his career he was a correspondent in London and Los Angeles. Dick, among his other duties, will direct coverage of the mid-term elections this year.

Working in concert with me and the bureau's band of accomplished editors, Rebecca, Doug and Dick will give the Washington report a lift and a new look.

The objectives of the management realignment are simple to describe but will require the collective effort of the bureau to achieve. We want to sustain the strong daily coverage and world-class exclusives that the bureau has long provided while increasing the number of high-impact enterprise/investigative stories and illuminating explanatory pieces. We aim to bear down on critical domestic and national security issues with aggressive, searching reporting that breaks news and explores government policies and actions that have escaped close scrutiny. And we hope to expand our coverage of the culture, mores and personalities of Washington.

The appointments come with an expectation by Bill, Jill, John and me that the bureau will raise its game to a new level and with a commitment by the masthead to provide the bureau with additional resources to help make that happen. There will soon be good news to report on that front. The bureau has lost a lot of reporting power
through retirements and departures, and we are picking our own pocket by shifting Doug and Dick to editing jobs. To enhance the bureau's work, Susan Chira, Suzanne Daley, Matt Purdy and I have agreed to marshal the resources of our departments in a more coordinated way and to make the bureau the pivot point for coverage of cross-departmental issues like Federal health care programs and post 9/11 national security policies. Matt will visit the bureau frequently to ensure that we are all on the same page on enterprise and investigative projects and I plan to get together with Matt, Susan and Suzanne in New York at least once a month. We will confer as a group by phone every week.

Bill and Jill will be here on Tuesday to discuss all this at lunch. I'm sure you will have questions, suggestions and observations about the changes. Feel free to raise them with me and other editors.

This week will be a transition period, as Dick and Doug disengage from reporting and take up their new responsibilities. Everyone should be in place by next Monday, just in time for the State of the Union and the return of Congress.

Phil

Ms. Chalabi, fresh off a Harvard Ph.D. in history, has a book due out next month, The Shi’is of Jabal ‘Amil and the New Lebanon, from Palgrave Macmillan. On Dec. 12, Slate began publishing a daily diary of her reports on her father’s campaign for prime minister.

Besides her family ties, Ms. Chalabi has some powerful help on the launching pad. Washington über-hostess Juleanna Glover Weiss, a registered lobbyist at the Ashcroft Group and a former spokeswoman for Vice President Dick Cheney, has set out to introduce Ms. Chalabi to editors.

Ms. Glover Weiss—whose soirées draw media and political figures from Campbell Brown to Paul Wolfowitz—met with Ms. Chalabi two weeks ago at a Caribou Coffee in downtown D.C. The get-together was the suggestion of mutual friends at Black, Kelly, Scruggs & Healey, the lobbying firm that employs Jeffrey Weiss, Ms. Glover Weiss’ husband.

Mr. Weiss currently represents Mr. Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress.

Since the meeting, staffers at The New York Times, The Atlantic and The Hotline have received entreaties from Ms. Glover Weiss on her new protégée’s behalf.

Ms. Glover Weiss said the advisory arrangement is informal, and that Ms. Chalabi isn’t paying for her networking services.

“She clearly has a strong academic background and has interesting things to say about the role of religion in Middle Eastern society,” Ms. Glover Weiss said by phone on Dec. 13. “I was happy to help her get to know folks.”

On Nov. 15, Ms. Chalabi’s father attended a party that the couple hosted for Entifadh Qanbar, the deputy military attaché to the Iraqi Embassy, at their $1.5 million Washington home; other guests included Richard Perle, former C.I.A. director James Woolsey and Christopher Hitchens.

Ms. Glover Weiss said she had not read the Slate diary and had not contacted editors at the online magazine.

“There is clearly a dearth of female commentators on the Middle East,” said Ms. Glover Weiss. “That, combined with her intellect and access—I thought someone would find that very useful.”

At lunchtime on Dec. 8, New York Times Washington bureau chief Phil Taubman assembled his staff in the bureau’s conference room and informed them that Washington editor Kate Phillips, his No. 2, would be leaving.

“We were told he made the decision on his own and that was it,” a staffer who attended the meeting said. “We weren’t given any reasons.”

Mr. Taubman had asked Ms. Phillips to vacate her post two days before. The move was unaccompanied by the usual fulsome senior-staff-change Times memo. No one declared that Ms. Phillips, who had been in the post only 14 months, was jumping at an exciting new professional opportunity.

“I would love to have stayed,” Ms. Phillips said by phone Dec. 12. “The staff is extremely talented. And Washington is a great place to work.” She declined to discuss the terms of her departure.

Mr. Taubman declined to discuss his decision. “When I’m ready to talk about it publicly, I will,” he said.

The ouster came four days after Mr. Taubman traveled to New York to meet with executive editor Bill Keller and managing editor Jill Abramson to address a growing concern at The Times that the bureau is slipping.

Earlier this month, chief Washington correspondent Todd Purdum announced that he was leaving to become national editor for Vanity Fair. Reporters Jeff Gerth and David Rosenbaum have both applied for The Times’ buyout package.

The Washington outpost, perennially tense toward New York, scored a victory in the whole Judith Miller affair—seeing its alumna turned nemesis Ms. Miller reduced from martyr to pariah and eventually cast off, carrying away the bulk of the blame for the paper’s blown coverage of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.

But the bureau has fared less well against its competition outside The Times. In recent weeks, some inside the paper have seen the Washington office as falling behind on major stories, including The Washington Post’s report on secret C.I.A. detention sites in Eastern Europe and the Los Angeles Times’ report on the United States’ propaganda campaign to plant stories in the Iraqi media.

According to Times sources, the Washington bureau had had reporting underway on the propaganda effort, but the L.A. Times beat it to the scoop.

So the editors were meeting to discuss bolstering D.C. coverage, especially investigative work about national security.

“Bill and Jill are concerned internally that if they don’t address areas of the paper that have been lagging, that will end up being part of their legacy,” a senior New York staffer said. “They were too slow to take action on Judy, and they don’t want to be slow anymore.”

Mr. Keller and Mr. Taubman have a long history together. Sixteen years ago, Mr. Taubman was Moscow bureau chief when Mr. Keller, then a foreign correspondent, won a Pulitzer for coverage of the Soviet Union. Mr. Taubman was deputy editorial page editor when Mr. Keller wrote a column for the page.

Mr. Keller declined to comment.

According to multiple Times sources, Mr. Taubman maintains that Ms. Phillips’ departure is not connected to the larger changes being planned for the bureau. As Washington editor, Ms. Philips was known for working 14-hour days and being closely involved in day-to-day operations—more aggressive and abrasive, bureau sources said, than the reflective and cerebral Mr. Taubman. Her relationship with the bureau chief was collegial, bureau sources said, and the two didn’t visibly spar.

Mr. Keller and Ms. Abramson have offered Ms. Phillips a position back in New York, someone involved in the proceedings said.

Staffers see the editors as looking for a Washington deputy who can direct investigative reporting. At the lunchtime meeting announcing Ms. Phillips’ departure, Mr. Taubman spent the bulk of the time outlining the bureau’s future. According to people present, the bureau chief said that the paper would seek to beef up enterprise reporting conducted out of Washington.

Mr. Taubman didn’t announce a replacement for Ms. Phillips, but he has told staffers that he would consider splitting her duties among multiple positions.

According to a source who has spoken to people involved in the proceedings, veteran investigative reporter Don Van Natta has been offered the Washington editor slot. Mr. Van Natta declined to comment, but multiple Times sources said he is semi-publicly mulling whether to take it. Mr. Van Natta is also currently discussing possible book projects with Mr. Gerth.

“I’m exploring various options,” Mr. Gerth said, “and the details of those options are personal, private matters as long as they are in the discussion phase.”

Despite the setbacks, the bureau has been breaking stories. Most recently, Douglas Jehl reported on Dec. 9 that U.S. coercion of Al Qaeda suspects may have led them to fabricate claims of Iraq–Al Qaeda links to escape harsh interrogation tactics.

“The Washington bureau is always in the position of being the neurotic child,” a bureau staffer said. “He keeps getting told he’s doing fine, but at the same time feels he’s not doing fine.”

—G.S.

Bureau chief Phil Taubman is scheduled to hold a brown-bag lunch meeting today to address the staff about Phillips' departure.

"There's a lot of confusion about what happened," a bureau member said. "People are upset."

Phillips was appointed to the position in October 2004, replacing Rick Berke, who moved to New York to become an associate managing editor. Bureau sources said that Phillips had clashed with Taubman in recent months.

According to bureau sources, the Times is seeking to reorganize the bureau, which has taken heat from New York in recent months for falling behind on stories such as the Washington Post's expose of "black sites" where the United States keeps detainees abroad.

--Gabriel Sherman

Mr. Hersh, the garrulous investigative reporter who broke the news of My Lai and Abu Ghraib, was telling an audience in Berkeley on Oct. 8 about a phone conversation he’d had with an American soldier in Iraq. The soldier, Mr. Hersh said, had called to tell him about a massacre of friendly Iraqis by another platoon of Americans. "He was hysterical, totally hysterical," Mr. Hersh told the crowd, in remarks captured on digital video and archived on the Web.

Was another My Lai–grade exposé on its way? Not from Mr. Hersh. "Complete your tour," he said he’d told his would-be source. "Just shut up. You’re going to get a bullet in the back."

Why not tell the man to keep talking and grab a notepad? "You’re asking me why I didn’t write a story that might get somebody killed?" Mr. Hersh asked in a phone conversation last week. "I mean, how can I write that?"

The tell-all crusader, it turns out, has a discreet streak. "The standard is—I’ll give you the standard," said Mr. Hersh. "To do the story right means the guy would get in real trouble …. If I had a million years to report this story, I wouldn’t do it. When he comes back, that’s another story. He’s over in Iraq, for Chrissakes—he’s in combat."

Still, it’s a Seymour Hersh–style discretion. Mr. Hersh may not be printing all his material, but he’s not keeping it to himself, either. Through the summer and fall, on the lecture circuit and in promoting his new book, Chain of Command: The Road From 9/11 to Abu Ghraib, the reporter has been peppering his appearances with unpublished allegations about how bad things have gotten on the shapeless global battlefield.

Mr. Hersh’s principal argument is that an out-of-control and incompetent Bush administration has hideously botched its war on terror, a message familiar to readers of his published work. But it’s the additional, oral scandal reporting he throws in—unburdened by cross-checking and multiple-sourcing requirements—that has been providing oxygen for the blogosphere. That’s the Stuff the Regular Media Doesn’t Want You to Hear: indiscriminate bombing, padded body counts, vanishing funds, war crimes approved by the highest levels of government.

"What we had was a series of massive crimes, criminal activity by the President and the Vice President—by this administration, anyway," Mr. Hersh told an ACLU convention in July. "I can say that, I can’t state who did it."

Other highlights from transcripts, recordings and reports of Mr. Hersh’s speeches and interviews:

* "[T]hey can’t find something like $1 billion in cash that was known to be in Iraq."

* "When we learn about Guantánamo, we’re going to be shamed. It’s as bad as Andersonville."

* "[I]f I had to bet, the plan was to go right into Syria. That’s why the Fourth Division was hanging for so long in the desert out there, right on the border with Syria."

* "The women [at Abu Ghraib] were passing messages out saying, ‘Please come and kill me because of what’s happened.’ And basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys, children … the boys were sodomized, with the cameras rolling, and the worst above all of them is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking. That your government has, and they’re in total terror it’s going to come out."

And then there was that massacre the soldier had told him about: Out in the countryside, roughly 30 Iraqis had been hired to guard a granary. American troops stationed out there, including Mr. Hersh’s source, had befriended them.

Mr. Hersh continued the story in his Oct. 8 speech:

So orders came down from the generals in Baghdad: We want to clear the village, like in Samarra. And, as [the soldier] told the story, another platoon from his company came and executed all the guards, as his people were screaming, "Stop!" And he said they just shot them one by one. He went nuts, and his soldiers went nuts …. And the company captain said, "No, you don’t understand. That’s a kill. We got 36 insurgents."

It was a loaded anecdote—so loaded, in Mr. Hersh’s own estimation, that telling it could have gotten his source fragged. Yet Mr. Hersh, unwilling to write it, put it out in public by other means.

"I know I wasn’t specific," Mr. Hersh said. "I don’t think I mentioned rank or place. That’s all—I’m sure I didn’t mention rank and place."

Actually, Mr. Hersh had mentioned both: His caller, he’d said, was "a platoon commander, first lieutenant, ROTC guy"; his unit had been "halfway between Baghdad and the Syrian border," in "an area that the insurgency had some control, but it was very quiet … a town that was off the mainstream." And he’d said that the call had come "last week," which would have apparently placed the incident somewhere at the end of September or the beginning of October.

Mr. Hersh also said that he’d "fudged a lot of stuff of what I said," in order to protect his source.

First Sgt. Steve Valley, a military spokesperson in Baghdad, said on the phone that his office had no record of any reported massacre—or ground-combat operation—that fit the rough particulars given by Mr. Hersh. "We have not had reports of 30 insurgents or civilians killed by multinational forces," Sergeant Valley said. Most of the casualty reports for that area and time frame, he continued, dealt with air strikes, not ground combat.

If anyone succeeds in clearing up the events behind Mr. Hersh’s story, the results likely won’t be in The New Yorker. The magazine doesn’t have any reporters in Iraq at present, a spokesperson said, and Mr. Hersh is working on other projects.

In his remarks, Mr. Hersh tends to include caveats noting when revelations aren’t quite baked to print journalism’s standards of doneness: "Don’t hold me to this, because, you know, The New Yorker has this great fact-checking system," he told the ACLU before bringing up the vanished $1 billion. "This is just something I’ve heard." In telling a Salon reporter about the secret plan to invade Syria, he began with the warning, "I don’t have any empirical basis for it."

A spokesperson for The New Yorker declined to comment on how Mr. Hersh’s unchecked speeches are perceived by the magazine.

"I get going," Mr. Hersh explained of his lecture style. "This is all—I wouldn’t say stream-of-consciousness, but I don’t write all my speeches."

And then, thanks to the Internet, his off-the-cuff revelations propagate. "I know, I know," Mr. Hersh said, "It’s all over the Web …. Look, it happened. There’s a luxury in writing, which is I can really look at what I say, and I haven’t looked at what I’ve said because I really just haven’t had time."

When Mr. Hersh didn’t have an empirical basis for rumors of a massacre at My Lai, he legendarily went door-knocking till he found Lt. William Calley. Now he appears to be running some sort of impromptu combination of a notebook dump and an assignment meeting, challenging other reporters to pick up his loose ends and surplus tips: I got Abu Ghraib—let’s see somebody else get something.

But on the subject of abuse at Guantánamo Bay, Mr. Hersh said, his remarks are designed in part to draw more sources to him. "At some point, Army Reservists were sent down to Gitmo," he said. "And they didn’t like what they saw. And that’s where I’m trying to go—I’m trying to find these guys. So I’m taking it beyond just statements made by, you know, ‘awful Arabs,’ right?"

On Sunday, two days after Mr. Hersh spoke to Off the Record, The New York Times ran a front-page story alleging prisoner mistreatment at Guantánamo Bay. Reporter Neil Lewis described shackled prisoners subjected to strobe lights, blaring music and frigid temperatures for hours at a time, treatment that left prisoners "fried."

It wasn’t quite dog attacks or sexual humiliation, but the account contradicted the administration message that Guantánamo interrogations had avoided harsh tactics. And it was sourced to anonymous "military guards, intelligence agents and others"—the very non-awful non-Arabs that Mr. Hersh had been hoping to find.

Mr. Lewis said that he admired Mr. Hersh’s work, and that "disclosures about Abu Ghraib certainly bolstered my determination to keep looking at Guantánamo." But Mr. Hersh’s lecture-tour remarks didn’t affect Mr. Lewis’ own reporting, which the Times reporter said he’d pursued since his earliest, heavily restricted, official tours of the base.

"I didn’t hear footsteps, as we say in the cliché business," Mr. Lewis said.

Become your own boss! In January, New York Times deputy Op-Ed page editor Kate Phillips will be moving down the megalopolis to assume the job of Washington editor—a position held, five brief years ago, by current Times managing editor Jill Abramson.

The Times Washington editor is outranked by the paper’s Washington bureau chief, in this case Philip Taubman. But it’s a No. 2 spot with a bullet—occupants can later end up with a "managing" or "executive" in their titles. Besides Ms. Abramson, other Washington editors have included now-deposed executive editor Howell Raines and the current officeholder, Richard Berke, who will be rocketing back to New York to take on the newly created job of assistant managing editor for news.

Reached on the phone, Ms. Phillips said it was too soon for her to be crafting plans for what to do with her newly acquired authority. "I sort of haven’t even come to terms with the responsibilities—the daunting responsibilities," she said.

For one thing, she said, she will have to see what happens in the election before she knows who the bureau will have to be covering come January. For another?

"The restaurants in Washington aren’t nearly as cool as the ones in New York," said Ms. Phillips, who served a previous shift at the bureau from 1997 to 1999. "Maybe that’s the most daunting challenge."

Ms. Phillips said she will also be surrendering a beloved apartment in north Battery Park—"a great little place that overlooks the harbor" with a view of the Statue of Liberty. How can the nation’s capital compete? "Bike paths are phenomenal in and out of Washington," Ms. Phillips said. "I’m a fan of bicycling for exercising."