This is the latest in the saga of the Amazing Disappearing Blog Posts and Comments at the L.A. Times. Background here, here, and here.

This morning, I showed you a screencap of a parenthetical remark Andrew Malcolm made at the bottom of a comment posted on October 12, 2007 at 5:03 a.m. Mr. Malcolm’s parenthetical remark read as follows:

(Ans: Rielle Hunter is identifying herself as the woman. This item doesn’t.)

Here is the parenthetical in context:

As I noted this morning, this remark was amusing, because the post initially did mention Rielle Hunter — and strongly implied that she was the alleged Other Woman. As I also noted this morning, the passage implicating Hunter was later dropped without acknowledgment.

Meaning the parenthetical remark circled in the above screencap is a wee bit deceptive.

Judging from the history of this saga, what do you suppose has happened to that parenthetical remark?

If you said: “it was removed without any indication that it was ever there,” you win the grand prize! Here’s how it looks now:

This is why I’m screencapping everything. You never know what’s going to disappear from this blog from one moment to the next.

P.S. Mr. Malcolm still hasn’t replied to my e-mails asking what in the hell is going on here.

Raise your hand if you are surprised.

I see no hands.

UPDATE: I found even more! Stay tuned . . .