NY Times Publishes Op-Ed Supporting The Justice Dept. Going After Reporters

Most in the press are taking a position similar to Brit Hume’s

(Mediaite) “That places this administration in the position of saying normal news gathering activities are criminal. That is chilling.”

Juan Williams, who likes to tick off both sides, said something earlier on Fox News about 20 minutes ago. Others are saying similar things. Former Obama press secretary Robert Gibbs says Team Obama needs to explain this (they won’t. Expect them to engage in their typical behavior, circling the wagons, obfuscation, denial, deflection, and casting blame. Oh, and their newest one “we don’t know”). Even Chris Matthew, Mr. Thrilling Up My Leg, has lost patience.

But not the NY Times, which publishes an op-ed by William P. Barr, Jamie “wall between law and intelligence” Gorelick, and Kenneth L. Wainstein

Stop The Leaks

FOLLOWING the disclosure that the Justice Department obtained the telephone records of Associated Press journalists, The A.P. and other news organizations have sharply criticized the action as investigative overreaching and unwarranted interference with the ability of journalists to report on government operations.

As former Justice Department officials who served in the three administrations preceding President Obama’s, we are worried that the criticism of the decision to subpoena telephone toll records of A.P. journalists in an important leak investigation sends the wrong message to the government officials who are responsible for our national security.

Oh, noes, those poor gubmint officials!!!! How are they going to do their jobs with that pesky 1st Amendment in their way. Hitler, Staling, Chavez, and many other dictators would be proud of these three nincompoops.

While we cannot know all of the facts and considerations that went into the department’s decision, we do know that prosecutors were right to try to find out who gave this damaging information to The A.P. They were right to pursue the investigation with “alternative investigative steps” for eight months first. And ultimately, they were right to take it to the next stage when they still needed more to make a case against the leaker. If the Justice Department had not done so, it would have defaulted on its obligation to protect the American people.

So, these three do not have any facts, but, hey, let’s investigate the Press, which was doing its job. Which is funny, considering that the NY Times was all for publishing serious national security information and programs when Bush was president and protecting reporters. Remember what they called “domestic wiretapping” (which wasn’t)? How about the monitoring of Islamist bank data? The White House begged the Times not to publish this program, as it would cause serious problems and endanger people. And leaking the name of a CIA interrogator. Running the stolen Wikileaks information. And many, many others. The Times loved the Abu Ghraib story, which wasn’t really secret, the DoD just hadn’t released information on what happened because they were engaged in an on-going criminal investigation. The Times found out through a leak.

It was just May 9 that another op-ed contributor, Margaret Sullivan, wrote about the danger of suppressing the leaks. Now, Gorelick et all say something different. They do have a point, that government should protect against leaks. True. But the Government should not attack the 1st Amendment and the Press because the government is incompetent. This op-ed essentially calls for trashing the 1st Amendment because government has “acted stupidly”.

More: Even Eugene Robinson, a hugely huge ObamaZombie, is upset, writing that the “Obama admin mistakes journalism for espionage”.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

6 Responses to “NY Times Publishes Op-Ed Supporting The Justice Dept. Going After Reporters”

  1. john says:

    Americans have a right to know what their government is doing. Since 9/11 that right has been strained by NATIONAL SECURITY !! We were told that we must give up some rights because of the WAR ON TERROR. Now the GOP seems to have found new courage to fight back. Probably 90% of what is classified could/should be released. we still have tons of stuff from WWII and Nam that is classified, mostly out of embarrassment. Should Americans know the full extent that the US helped Nazis after WWII because they were anti communist ? Should americans know just how corrupt the Karzai Afghan government is ? The GOP was screaming about leaks when it helped Obama, like “leaks” about the bin Laden raid. And of course WikiLeaks was bad because most of that was ……. secret, and ummmmm they were not “real”reporters.

  2. john says:

    eand of course on this blog Bush was “proactive” in going after people who might leak classified info to our enemies. Ahhh yes but that ws way back in 2006

  3. First part is good, second comment, can you prove that?

    Journalists should think long and hard about what they are publishing, when it comes to leaks and/or national security. But, that is not the point, John: the point is targeting journalists who do publish reports. The NY Times should never have published those reports, but the Bush admin never targeted the reporters, nor should they have.

  4. gitarcarver says:

    eand of course on this blog Bush was “proactive” in going after people who might leak classified info to our enemies. Ahhh yes but that ws way back in 2006


    If you have any evidence where the Bush administration went after a whole group of reporters, please let us know.

    That’s the real outrage here, john.

    This administration did not have a specific person of interest in this investigation and instead decided to go after everyone. That would be akin to the police thinking a house on your block was selling drugs and making a raid on every house in the neighborhood.

    As Teach said, it was wrong for the Times to publish the material. It was wrong for people in the administration to leak such material. We should all agree on that.

    However, that doesn’t give the government the wide powers to make unreasonable searches without cause. This is not a partisan issue.

    This is an American issue.

  5. Like most Progressives, GC, John has fluid morals and policy prescriptions based on who is in the White House. Had this happened under Bush, John would be screaming bloody murder (and I, for one, would not have been on Bush’s side), yet, when it happens on Obama’s watch John tries the crap above.

  6. Kevin says:

    Americans have a right to know what their government is doing. Since 9/11 that right has been strained by NATIONAL SECURITY !!

    As they say, the devil mixes the truth with lies. This part is quite true. It needs to be resolved.

Pirate's Cove