So who's telling the truth about Charles Pickering's involvement in that cross-burning case, National Review or People for the American Way?

Was Daniel Swan the ringleader of the three cross-burners, or was the unnamed seventeen-year-old? Did the law mandate a seven-and-a-half-year sentence for Swan or didn't it? Were Pickering's attempts to change Swan's sentence legitimate or illegitimate? Was Pickering acting out of frutration with an unresponsive bureaucracy, or was he trying to cut a cross-burner a break? Were the sentencing disparities typical for a case like this or inappropriate?

And will someone get to the bottom of this? Or will the press merely sit this one out and let the side with the better message discipline -- which will almost certainly be the GOP -- win?