I first commented on the story here, almost exactly a year ago, when it was being reported that the Bush administration had used federal tax dollars to pay for “informational” video “reports” which were nothing more than thinly veiled vote-for-Bush commercials. The segments used fake reporters, really PR hacks pretending to be news correspondents, hailing Bush’s policies; these segments were then distributed to local news shows nationwide, suggesting that they use them as if they were real stories (complete with scripts showing how to do so). Often they were used to exactly that end.

At first, we thought it was just the commercials made for Bush’s Medicare plan. Then came to light the fact that the administration had been paying off a stable of reporters to push their agendas. And now we come back to the videos, finding out that they were far more pervasive than at first thought.

It turns out that it was not just the few spots for Medicare. It was not just a few agencies, though Bush & Co. have long been suggesting that this was an independent act by somehow over-reaching bureaucrats in just one agency.

No, it was actually a practice carried out in at least twenty different agencies of the federal government, producing hundreds of fake video segments with “reporters” using false names, over the span of four years. They include showers of praise for Bush, including an Iraqi-American crying out, “Thank you, Bush. Thank you, U.S.A.”; reports of administration “successes” and gave accolades for a variety of Bush policies.

As I said a year ago, it is illegal for the administration to use federal money for “publicity or propaganda purposes,” and these video segments clearly violate that law. And since the practice is so widespread throughout the administration, it could not be more crystal clear that it was the administration itself, and not simply some eager-beaver underling that was behind it all.

But, like so many other scandals that would have made Republicans go nuclear and demand a dozen different investigations, it looks like this one will continue to be ignored. More on that in an upcoming post.