Hugh leap of faith

I've not read a lot on the whole Michael Steele credit history story that's winding its way through the blogs, but I've read enough to know a specious argument when I see one (emphasis in original):

Don't be fooled into thinking that The Washington Post is being tough with the scandal by running this editorial. The editorial treats the data theft as a stand alone, one-time event --and there is zero reason to believe that it is, or that a senior Schumer staffer acted on her own in deciding to break the law.

There is also zero reason to believe right now that this isn't a "stand alone, one-time event," or that Schumer had any idea that staffers had broken the law.

But partisan Republicans have little care for facts like that. Just as long as they can advance their agenda.

*UPDATE* For example of the other side, look at the warning language of this Captian Ed post (my emphasis):

If the documents prove to be authentic -- and we all know how important it is to verify that -- then Frist has landed himself into a world of trouble.

Clearly if an issue negatively impacts the right, then all steps of verification must take place.

But if it's something that screws the left, well, ample research be damned! Wild speculation full steam ahead!