Rhetorically Speaking

I know it's technically meant to serve as a rhetorical device, but this question from the San Francisco Chronicle editorial, Who is Jeff Gannon?, is actually worth pondering:

It's hard to say which is worse: That the White House had no idea who it was allowing to be within shouting distance of the president -- or that it knew exactly who Jeff Gannon was and why he was there.

It's an interesting question, because I think people's assumptions of what the answer is drives their level of interest in the story, and the angle they tend to focus (or not focus) on. I think the latter is worse, but that’s probably only because I don’t remotely believe the former is possible. I suppose in empirical terms, the former would be worse, though.

Thoughts?