If I read this Editor & Publisher story correctly, it suggests that the NY Times might have tabled the NSA story for a much longer period of time if it wasn't for the fact that that information would soon be revealed in a book coming out in January, 2006. 

What the hell is going on here?  Editors at the Times knew about this before the 2004 elections but were afraid of being run out of town like Dan Rather, then hold off afterwards because of some sort of "good faith" concern about national security but then a book is coming out so finally they release it???  Could we have found out about this ten years from now at some sort of Congressional hearing because Bill Keller was too chickenshit to publish it when it was most relevant?  No wonder the Times (especially under the leadership of Bill Keller) gets so much crap for its incompetence.