Posted on 09/29/2004 12:43:10 AM PDT by kattracks
September 29, 2004 -- The Justice Department has charged that a veteran New York Times foreign correspondent warned an alleged terror-funding Islamic charity that the FBI was about to raid its office — potentially endangering the lives of federal agents.The stunning accusation was disclosed yesterday in legal papers related to a lawsuit the Times filed in Manhattan federal court.
The suit seeks to block subpoenas from the Justice Department for phone records of two of its Middle Eastern reporters — Philip Shenon and Judith Miller — as part of a probe to track down the leak.
The Times last night flatly denied the allegation.
U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald of Chicago charged in court papers that Shenon blew the cover on the Dec. 14, 2001, raid of the Global Relief Foundation — the first charges of their kind under broad new investigatory powers given to the feds under the Patriot Act.
"It has been conclusively established that Global Relief Foundation learned of the search from reporter Philip Shenon of The New York Times," Fitzgerald said in an Aug. 7, 2002, letter to the Times' legal department.
He said he understood journalists' concerns about protecting the identities of their sources, but national security and preventing leaks that thwart probes into "terrorist fund-raising" trump such confidentiality.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Don't type it out---cut and paste!
I'm busy right now or I'd do it for you. I'll check back soon and see how you're doing.
Not yelling. :)
TY friend
Interesting.
The NYT and Judith Miller seem to be on a bit of shakey ground here with their claim of protection of sources though, if the justice dept can tie in the leaks to terrorist supporting groups and partisan politics. The media claim of looking out for the public good would fly out the window. But then they still have the leftist judiciary to support them.
This really has me upset, it just highlights the importance of this election to preserving everything that is great about this country. I don't think we realized how close we were to losing it all in 2000.
Want to bet that if it was still Clintoon's justice department that this would be overlooked and we'd never hear about it?
Just because a Supreme Court Justice stated that she would not base her decision on the US Constitution but only on "international law" doesn't mean that the dims have her in their pocket. Sarcasm off.
But the question is what would happen to this investigation if the Democrats got back in power in November? You want to bet that the investigation would be deep sixed? The partisan CIA agents would be free to paint the Iraq war as a losing cause and Kerry would be justified in pulling out, leaving the Iraqi people to their own resources.
Soooooooo..........Sandy Berger has WHAT in his pants and socks.......wrong answer?...do it again? How many trips before he got the hot version of what was it? Some Clinton / Tenet documents, right?
Yes, it's frightening to see how members of the federal bureaucracy earning OUR tax dollars are busy leaking highly classified and sensitive information to support the media war on the Bush administration. The CIA and the FBI need to do a thorough house-cleaning after the election (when Bush/Cheney are re-elected!). Don't know if that will happen (hard to get that done in bureaucracies), but at the very least unreliable and treasonous people need to be move to marginal positions where they can't do as much harm.
OK, I have a minute to post your find, then I must dash for a bit. Here's the cut and paste of your article:
Joseph C. Wilson IV's shattered credibility illustrates much of what is wrong with the CIA, and with "mainstream" journalism.
Mr. Wilson's 15 minutes of fame began July 6, 2003, when he accused President of Bush of twisting the truth when he said in his State of the Union address that January: "The British government has learned that Saddam recently sought significant quantities of uranium in Africa."
Mr. Wilson, a former ambassador to Gabon, said he knew this wasn't true because in February, 2002, the CIA sent him to Niger to determine whether that African country had sold "yellowcake" (lightly enriched uranium ore) to Iraq. After spending eight days "drinking sweet mint tea and talking with dozens of people," he concluded Niger had not done so.
Mr. Wilson's fame soared when columnist Robert Novak disclosed a Bush administration official told him Mr. Wilson had been selected for the Niger mission at the recommendation of his wife, CIA officer Valerie Plame. He was a frequent guest on television news shows; the subject of a fawning profile in Vanity Fair magazine; awarded a lucrative book deal, and made an (unpaid) foreign policy adviser to Sen. John Kerry.
On July 9, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence issued its report on the CIA's prewar intelligence on Iraq. The SSCI concluded:
• Mr. Wilson lied when he denied his wife had got him the Niger assignment. "Interviews and documents provided to the committee indicate that his wife ... suggested his name for the trip."
• Mr. Wilson lied when he said his report "debunked" Mr. Bush's charge that Saddam Hussein was seeking uranium from Africa. "For most analysts, the information in [Mr. Wilson's] report lent more credibility to the original CIA reports on the uranium deal."
• Mr. Wilson lied when he told The Washington Post he knew the Niger intelligence had been based on forged documents. The CIA didn't obtain the document alleged to be a forgery until eight months after Mr. Wilson's return from Niger. "Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that 'the dates were wrong and the names were wrong' when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports."
On July 14, the Butler Commission issued its report on Britain's prewar intelligence. It concluded there was ample evidence Saddam tried to buy uranium from Niger and other African countries, and that Mr. Bush's statement to that effect in his State of the Union address was "well founded."
Mr. Wilson's charges against President Bush last year were big news. But the fact government investigations in two countries have concluded Mr. Wilson lied apparently isn't news at all.
NBC had Mr. Wilson on its "Meet the Press" and "Today" programs a half-dozen times when he was accusing Mr. Bush of lying. But as of this writing, no stories at all since the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Blair Commission have issued their reports. Same for ABC and CBS, according to the Media Research Center.
Mr. Wilson graced the cover of Time magazine's Oct. 13, 2003, issue, but Time managed to write a story on the Senate Intelligence Committee report without ever mentioning how it savaged Mr. Wilson's credibility.
The Senate panel criticized the CIA's sloppy work in investigating the Saddam/Africa/uranium connection. All its information came from foreign intelligence services. Aside from Mr. Wilson's tea-drinking expedition, the CIA itself made little effort to gather information on this potentially critical topic. When the Navy received a report from an African businessman that uranium from Niger was stored in a warehouse in Cotineau, Benin, the CIA didn't bother to check it out.
Some in the CIA may have been more interested in dismissing reports of an Iraq/Niger connection than in finding out if they were true. Valerie Plame told Senate investigators she told her husband "there's this crazy report" on a purported deal for Niger to sell uranium to Iraq.
If we're to win the war on terror, we need a CIA more interested in finding out what is going on than in reinforcing the prejudices of some analysts, and a news media more interested in finding the facts than in shilling for the Democratic Party.
Yikes :-(
No surprise, really, but plenty of disgust... I hope they nail him to the wall.
I'm going to mail this out to some of the more balanced media contacts but I don't think we can count on NYT competitors like the Washington Post and WSJ doing in-depth investigation and calling much attention to this... my guess is they'll want the Justice Dept to lose this fight when it comes to revealing sources. Maybe Hannity and O'Reilly would cover it.
Just noting for the record that I posted earlier that Fox reporterette Rebecca Gomez told the tale of the NY Times investigation this thread is based on and she added both times that Judith Miller is also under subpoena in the Valerie Plame grand jury.
Both times that I heard her, the second time mere seconds ago, she called Valerie Plame "Valerie PLUME".
Good grief.
Thanks! Good to know that Fox is reporting something of this, even if they're getting names a tad bit wrong LOL
Once this election is over I think we need a 527 organization that does nothing but expose the liberal bias and political sabotage to the public... we keep running around dealing with these media tumors and it'll just continue happening until we defeat the cancer that keeps causing them :-(
The WSJ has already come out and said that the NYT should have been careful what they asked for in demanding that Novak give up his sources because they can't have it both ways. They did an editorial about it a while back.
Thanks, I missed that one :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.