Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Prosecutor of the Times. A partisan "leak" probe boomerangs on the media.
Opinion Journal (WSJ) ^ | February 23, 2005 | Unsigned

Posted on 02/23/2005 4:21:38 AM PST by aculeus

"After an egregiously long delay, Attorney General John Ashcroft finally did the right thing yesterday when he recused himself from the investigation into who gave the name of a CIA operative to the columnist Robert Novak. Mr. Ashcroft turned the inquiry over to his deputy, who quickly appointed a special counsel."

In the recent annals of press freedom, there are few more regrettable sentences than those two from a December 31, 2003, editorial in the New York Times. The special counsel that the Times was cheering on, Patrick Fitzgerald, is now threatening a Times reporter with jail, and in a way that jeopardizes the entire press corps. This is what happens when liberals let their partisan disdain for a President obscure their interest in larger principles.

(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial
KEYWORDS: cialeak
The special counsel that the Times was cheering on, Patrick Fitzgerald, is now threatening a Times reporter with jail ...

Maybe God is a conservative.

1 posted on 02/23/2005 4:21:39 AM PST by aculeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Maybe God is a conservative.

Yes! A compassionate conservative.

2 posted on 02/23/2005 4:28:15 AM PST by syriacus (Was Margaret Hassan kidnapped because she knew the Oil for Food program failed to aid Iraqis?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
This is what happens when liberals let their partisan disdain for a President obscure their interest in larger principles.

No, this is what happens when a party doesn't have any principles.

3 posted on 02/23/2005 4:32:04 AM PST by mewzilla (Has CBS retracted the story yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Some of our media friends are also pushing a federal shield law, and one has been introduced in the House and Senate. A large question, however, is who will be shielded.

The answer is simple: Leftwing journalists will be shielded.

4 posted on 02/23/2005 4:33:17 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (The fourth estate is a fifth column.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Mr Fitzpatrick is burning public trust for democrat and personal advancement....

The NYT represents yellow journalism at its worst.

5 posted on 02/23/2005 4:34:18 AM PST by squirt-gun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: squirt-gun

Re # 5...Fitzgerald, that is...


6 posted on 02/23/2005 4:35:59 AM PST by squirt-gun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

Chickens coming home to roost..Bump!


7 posted on 02/23/2005 4:40:27 AM PST by MEG33 (GOD BLESS OUR ARMED FORCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MEG33

Petard.

One's own.

Hoist upon.

Priceless.


8 posted on 02/23/2005 4:47:08 AM PST by Belisaurius ("Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, Ted" - Joseph Kennedy 1958)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
both a British and a U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee probe found that the White House had been accurate and that Mr. Wilson was the one who hadn't told the truth.

Needs to be repeated.

9 posted on 02/23/2005 4:50:42 AM PST by syriacus (Was Margaret Hassan kidnapped because she knew the Oil for Food program failed to aid Iraqis?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla
No, this is what happens when a party doesn't have any principles.

They have principles. Or rather they have one principle, which is to hurt President Bush. All else is subsumed under the one guiding light, to attack this one particular politician, in any way possible.

If what harms the President also harms the country or even themselves, it matters not. All that matters is that it harms the President.

10 posted on 02/23/2005 5:34:24 AM PST by gridlock (If a man says something while alone in the forest, and no woman hears him, is he still wrong?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: gridlock

What's good for them is bad for the country. That's all anyone needs to know.


11 posted on 02/23/2005 5:35:49 AM PST by mewzilla (Has CBS retracted the story yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

The special counsel that the Times was cheering on, Patrick Fitzgerald, is now threatening a Times reporter with jail .

Half of the damned reporters in this country should already BE in jail for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.


12 posted on 02/23/2005 5:38:40 AM PST by Leatherneck_MT (A Patriot must always be willing to defend his Country against his Government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

"both a British and a U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee probe found that the White House had been accurate and that Mr. Wilson was the one who hadn't told the truth."

Now...let's have some of that good old fashioned "frog marching" that Joe Wilson demanded!


13 posted on 02/23/2005 5:43:41 AM PST by Wristpin ( Varitek says to A-Rod: "We don't throw at .260 hitters.....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

I think events have progressed beyond that. I think that any law enacted to protect journalists also will protect bloggers. As the article suggested, that coverage would be too broad to pass, and so either the law will be voted down or else the protections very limited (which in my opinion would not be a bad result).

There is transparency in every other sector of America. Why should the media be the only place in America where people are allowed to take highly inflammatory and career-ruining actions, and then say "trust us"? Certainly, they have not earned our trust in recent years.


14 posted on 02/23/2005 5:56:08 AM PST by Piranha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Wristpin
"Now...let's have some of that good old fashioned "frog marching" that Joe Wilson demanded!"

Joe Wilson and Sandy Burglar are my first two nominations. Anyway, what astounded me was that ANY newspaper or news organization could be so ignorant as to think a special counsel to investigate a news leak was something good! Did they not see, even for a moment, that if they came for Robert Novak over a leak, that their own reporters could be next? A lot of us are posting these same points, but I absolutely think that if there were ever a time for heads to roll at major news organizations it would be now, and the heads that need to roll are those who were so mind numbingly stupid to demand a special counsel!

15 posted on 02/23/2005 5:58:37 AM PST by Enterprise (President Bush thought Wead was a friend. Turns out he was just a big fat tape worm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla
What's good for them is bad for the country. That's all anyone needs to know.

That's all they say about us: anything is good if it weakens the President. In fact, that's the whole thrust of the article.

Discussion at FR generally goes beyond the opponent for who he is, and into reasoned analysis. That's what keeps me coming back, and that concern for policy over personality is precisely what DU lacks on the other side.

16 posted on 02/23/2005 5:59:59 AM PST by Piranha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise

I wonder if President Bush was indirectly criticising this investigation when he spoke in favor of a free press in Belgium last week.


17 posted on 02/23/2005 6:01:00 AM PST by Piranha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Wristpin
Now...let's have some of that good old fashioned "frog marching" that Joe Wilson demanded!

Yes!! He showed his smug face on a C-Span panel about Patriotism, Democracy, and Common Sense: Restoring America's Promise at Home and Abroad.  [February 19, 2005.].

I'm amazed that supposedly intelligent people still believe what he says.

I'm especially amazed that Wilson was even in a room where the word "patriotism" was mentioned. You'd think the word "patriotism" would be like wolfbane against him.

18 posted on 02/23/2005 6:21:46 AM PST by syriacus (Was Margaret Hassan kidnapped because she knew the Oil for Food program failed to aid Iraqis?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Piranha

There was also a case in New Mexico, when the media was denied access to a state prison, in which the court held that the media has no more access than the general public. Which means the general public has no less access.


19 posted on 02/23/2005 6:23:55 AM PST by jjmcgo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Piranha; ClearCase_guy; headsonpikes; beyond the sea; E.G.C.; Military family member; Wolverine; ...
A large question, however, is who will be shielded.
The answer is simple: Leftwing journalists will be shielded.

4 posted on 02/23/2005 7:33:17 AM EST by ClearCase_guy

The Reporters Committer for Freedom of the Press wants to protect not just reporters from established news organizations but everyone who writes anything, which means that almost anyone with a laptop and a Web site could claim to be protected from having to provide grand jury testimony. This Congress will never pass such an expansive shield, and we aren't sure it should.
As the article suggested, that coverage would be too broad to pass, and so either the law will be voted down or else the protections very limited (which in my opinion would not be a bad result). - Piranha
IMHO you are exactly correct. The Wall Street Journal takes too much of an establishment position here, for my taste. Codes of journalistic ethics aren't enforcable in court and have nothing to do with the law. That being the case, the law should have nothing to do with them, either. Whatever law makes sense to apply to "established news organizations" makes sense for bloggers; whatever law does NOT make sense to apply to bloggers does NOT make sense for "established news organizations."

I'm delighted that recognition of the rights of the bloggers we-the-people are being promoted by The Reporters Committer for Freedom of the Press.

Why Broadcast Journalism is
Unnecessary and Illegitimate

20 posted on 02/23/2005 6:43:15 AM PST by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters but PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion

BTTT!!!!!


21 posted on 02/23/2005 7:26:13 AM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson