The Senate Dawdles, And the New York Times Continues To Skate
All right. I saw this post on Hugh Hewitt's site this afternoon, and I am perplexed. Maybe you can figure it out by reading what he wrote:
Look, the flag amendment presents an interesting debate, but the national security does not turn on its fate.
Last week's Senate resolution and the House resolution the week before mattered a great deal, but their effect is being reduced by inaction by the House and Senate on the real damage done by the New York Times and Los Angeles Times.
So, where's the leadership, the draft resolutions, the debate and the vote? What's the plan? A letter from Chairman Roberts is great, but it isn't the First Branch speaking to the Fourth, which is what needs to happen. Soon.
The flag amendment? For four days the New York Times has been the center of a storm of controversy. That storm rages on because not only did they reveal a national security secret, then excuse themselves in the favor of some idea of the "public's interest," but now they claim that there were in a footrace with the LA Times to get this story out first:
"I don't think we could reasonably be accused of moving too quickly," he said. "We waited so long that the competition caught up to us." This comment referred to the Los Angeles Times' posting a story about the bank records program on its Web site last night.
That comment comes from Eric Lichtblau, one of the wirters involved with this new New York Times story, and one of the two writers involved in the revelation of the NSA surveillance program back in December. He admits that they had waited too long, and were about to be scooped. So, rather than heed the arguments of the administration, they rushed in for the next Pulitzer Prize. Nice to see the New York Times is so cheap; they will do so well in the red-light district of many cities.
But I would like to know why Congress has not responded to this, yet? They can pass a non-binding resolution that condemns this sort of behavior, and they can follow in the footsteps of Rep. Pete King and Sen. Pat Roberts. They can question authorities in the Executive Branch about the possible damage, and recriminations the times might face. There are people who still claim, albeit in an uneducated fashion, that the Times committed no crime. I beg to differ. In addition to that, we still have the Espionage Act that can be referenced. The Times committed a crime.
We--Thomas and I--would prefer to see the reporters and editor to serve the maximum amount of time, as proscribed by both 793 and 798 (linked above). That would be about twenty years in jail. However, I am sure the Justice Department might be willing to plea the charges down in exchange for the leakers involved in these two cases particularly. I cannot speak intelligently about that possibility; I offer only speculation. However, as the Times reporters and Bill Keller are willing to do what is necessary to save their own skin, they might be open to a plea deal.
And for Congress--the Senate, in particular--to waste its time with such trivialities--is a disgrace. The nation's national security has been breached, and all they can do is debate whether or not the flag needs to be protected. No offense, but I love the flag. I want it protected because it sickens me everytime I see a moonbat decide to have a weenie roast using Old Glory. However, national security comes first, and as long as the Times continues to skate on this, and other past transgressions, they will be emboldened to do it again. The government did not move decisively over the NSA revelation, and the Times likely felt that no one cared. (It is a possibility based on their spiraling subscriptions, especially on the heels of this revelation.) But both programs were classified. There are laws on the books protecting those programs. their knowledge is kept secret for a reason.
Congress should be acting. The Justice Department, I am sure, will be acting. (When questioned last Friday, Attorney General Gonzales refused to speak about the subject; an investigation could already be underway, or continuing from last December over the NSA program, and this is now included in that investigation. I would like to note that as Mr. Risen and Mr. Lichtblau have now blown two clandestine operations, it is highly likely that their sources for both are not different, but rather the same individual(s). ) I join Thomas in telling our readers to call your congressmen, and emphasize to them to condemn the Times for this heinous disregard for the security of the nation during a time of war.
Marcie
All right. I saw this post on Hugh Hewitt's site this afternoon, and I am perplexed. Maybe you can figure it out by reading what he wrote:
Look, the flag amendment presents an interesting debate, but the national security does not turn on its fate.
Last week's Senate resolution and the House resolution the week before mattered a great deal, but their effect is being reduced by inaction by the House and Senate on the real damage done by the New York Times and Los Angeles Times.
So, where's the leadership, the draft resolutions, the debate and the vote? What's the plan? A letter from Chairman Roberts is great, but it isn't the First Branch speaking to the Fourth, which is what needs to happen. Soon.
The flag amendment? For four days the New York Times has been the center of a storm of controversy. That storm rages on because not only did they reveal a national security secret, then excuse themselves in the favor of some idea of the "public's interest," but now they claim that there were in a footrace with the LA Times to get this story out first:
"I don't think we could reasonably be accused of moving too quickly," he said. "We waited so long that the competition caught up to us." This comment referred to the Los Angeles Times' posting a story about the bank records program on its Web site last night.
That comment comes from Eric Lichtblau, one of the wirters involved with this new New York Times story, and one of the two writers involved in the revelation of the NSA surveillance program back in December. He admits that they had waited too long, and were about to be scooped. So, rather than heed the arguments of the administration, they rushed in for the next Pulitzer Prize. Nice to see the New York Times is so cheap; they will do so well in the red-light district of many cities.
But I would like to know why Congress has not responded to this, yet? They can pass a non-binding resolution that condemns this sort of behavior, and they can follow in the footsteps of Rep. Pete King and Sen. Pat Roberts. They can question authorities in the Executive Branch about the possible damage, and recriminations the times might face. There are people who still claim, albeit in an uneducated fashion, that the Times committed no crime. I beg to differ. In addition to that, we still have the Espionage Act that can be referenced. The Times committed a crime.
We--Thomas and I--would prefer to see the reporters and editor to serve the maximum amount of time, as proscribed by both 793 and 798 (linked above). That would be about twenty years in jail. However, I am sure the Justice Department might be willing to plea the charges down in exchange for the leakers involved in these two cases particularly. I cannot speak intelligently about that possibility; I offer only speculation. However, as the Times reporters and Bill Keller are willing to do what is necessary to save their own skin, they might be open to a plea deal.
And for Congress--the Senate, in particular--to waste its time with such trivialities--is a disgrace. The nation's national security has been breached, and all they can do is debate whether or not the flag needs to be protected. No offense, but I love the flag. I want it protected because it sickens me everytime I see a moonbat decide to have a weenie roast using Old Glory. However, national security comes first, and as long as the Times continues to skate on this, and other past transgressions, they will be emboldened to do it again. The government did not move decisively over the NSA revelation, and the Times likely felt that no one cared. (It is a possibility based on their spiraling subscriptions, especially on the heels of this revelation.) But both programs were classified. There are laws on the books protecting those programs. their knowledge is kept secret for a reason.
Congress should be acting. The Justice Department, I am sure, will be acting. (When questioned last Friday, Attorney General Gonzales refused to speak about the subject; an investigation could already be underway, or continuing from last December over the NSA program, and this is now included in that investigation. I would like to note that as Mr. Risen and Mr. Lichtblau have now blown two clandestine operations, it is highly likely that their sources for both are not different, but rather the same individual(s). ) I join Thomas in telling our readers to call your congressmen, and emphasize to them to condemn the Times for this heinous disregard for the security of the nation during a time of war.
Marcie
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 7:40 PM
1 Comments:
The ball is in the Attorney General, Mr. Gonzales's court. Bill Keller was asked not to print the story in the interest of national security. He decided the public had a right to know. It's not his decison to make. He violated the law. He's jeopardize national security twice. The President was upset. Surely Gonzales got the message.
Determine the leaker (s) and indict them along with Keller, the reporters, Risen and Lichtblau. Rawriter.
Post a Comment
<< Home