NAACP, via crying out an exculpatory claim, actually incriminates itself even more

James Taranto in WSJ:

When [NAACP leader] Jealous defends himself [and the NAACP] by claiming to have been "snookered" by Breitbart, it calls to mind the politician caught in a sex scandal who says: "Yeah, I slept with the girl. But you can't believe her, she's a prostitute!" Far from being exculpatory, the accusation against the accuser makes the admission even more incriminating, especially if the accusation is true.

On the surface, Breitbart's attempt to expose the NAACP as corrupt was a spectacular failure. His charge against Shirley Sherrod turned out to be false. The corollary charge against the NAACP was false in this instance.

Yet the NAACP's leaders rushed to the conclusion that it was true. To the extent that they did so because they had faith in Breitbart's credibility, they merely acted stupidly. To the extent that they did so because the charge rang true to them, their behavior suggests that there is truth to the broader accusation of corruption.

The NAACP's actions in this matter have not been what one would expect from an organization that is confident in its own integrity. We surmise that Jealous and his colleagues don't want you to think about that, and that this is why they are so eager to shift the blame to those who "snookered" them.