Posted on 12/09/2005 4:52:40 AM PST by harpu
-BIG Snip-
If the Libby case goes to trial, Mr. Libby himself will be a sideshow compared to what his lawyers are likely to display to the public about the practice of journalism. It has been reported that his lawyers plan to make wide demands for reporters' notes. One can imagine them issuing subpoenas for the pen-and-pencil reporting notebooks of Matt Cooper, Judith Miller and others, having a hand-writing expert transcribe the notes, and then asking the reporters to read -- or try to read -- their notes on the stand against a transcript onscreen. That won't be pretty. Unless these reporters have the handwriting of nuns and recall of Garry Kasparov, they will look like fumbling fools. Any of us would.
The press requires the protections of the First Amendment because it could never survive legal challenge without it. But the reporting on the Plame case more resembles the Singapore press model, with its penchant for placing absurdist legal fastidiousness above knowing anything useful. In the Plame affair ideological animosity overwhelmed clear-sighted journalistic aggression.
Reporting the news is an informal, imperfect exercise. Journalism was never meant to have the unforgiving, precise exactitude of the law's needs imposed upon it. But because of Plame, it's about to be. Last month an appeals court in a civil suit ruled for nuclear scientist Wen Ho Lee that reporters for the Washington Post, AP, New York Times, L.A. Times and CNN had to testify about confidential government sources who leaked information about Mr. Lee.
Someone in authority should have called off the Plame dogs. But it's too late for that. Now everyone's blood is in the water.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
This whole thing smells like a dirty campaign trick of Kerry's to damage President Bush's Reelection.
That's a part of the story. It was going to be a campaign trick, before Wilson looked foolish in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Another trick that blew up in the RATS faces -- just like the National Guard. Silly RATS!
Meant to say National Guard MEMOS.
Bush needs to get somebody in there who can disinfect the place. I have no idea what Porter Goss is doing, if anything.
Do I remember a story about Wilson and Plame hosting Walter Pincus for a dinner at their house before the story broke? Can a covert CIA agent meet with a Washington Post reporter and not have it approved in advance by the CIA legal office?
I would like to read 'the rest of the story', harpu!
Thankx. :-)
Russert .............. The Spud Walk
agreed
(( ping )) Check this out.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1538262/posts
I'll bet that about 10 to 15 years from now he will become severely depressed at how he sold himself out to the Democrat party.
He wrote that book of love to his Dad. If his Dad knew what he is truly doing, his dad would want to disown his sorry *ss.
Russert, smart enough to realize his pathetic sellout, will be just the kind of guy to take his own life.
Good riddance.
But what a waste, he was a pretty darn nice guy about 15 years ago. Now he's just a funny looking, despicable sellout!
I believe Woodward testified after his source told Fitz about their conversation with Woodward.
Harpu,
Thanks very much for posting this article. I continue to be very interested in the Plame case. The thrust of this article is correct. Journalism is about to take a huge -- and long overdue -- hit to its credibility.
News reporting is nothing like what most people in the general public think it is. News is a product sold by for-profit corporations. Reporters are their employees, and the reporter's job is to tell stories -- tales -- preferably in as sensationalistic a manner as possible. Sensationalism is what gets a story noticed and keeps the public coming back for more.
I would like the rest of the story when you can get a few minutes to send it to me. Thanks again.
Wolfie
Well, there is, but only in a limited way. Here's the First Amendment in its entirety:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom...of the press. "Abridge" in this context means to deprive or reduce. In other words, Congress can't make laws to shut down the press (media in our times). That's it. Although, it has been stretched by the courts almost beyond recognition, the First Admendment does not absolve the media of their responsibilities as citizens.
Reporters (and news corporations) can be sued, can be made to testify in court, and their actions should be honest enough to survive a legal challenge, with or without invoking the First Amendment.
Belated comment: Among other things, Libby's lawyers should get all these reporters on the stand, have them admit that they were confused about timelines and about who said what to whom, and whether they clearly remember what - if anything - was said about Plame, and whether they ever had to backtrack and correct their testimony, and whether these memory lapses and contradictions caused them to be indicted. And when the lawyers have shown that the reporteres were every bit as confused as Libby, and got off scot free, they will have undermined the moral legitimacy of the indictments.
RE: C-SPAN segment - sorry I missed it. Was it a special edition of Washington Journal? Were they taking any calls from anti-war moonbats?
The closer this gets to trial the more pressure will be put on Fitzy by TPTB to settle or withdraw the indictment.
When he had his news conference, it was VERY CLEAR that Libby's indictment was Fitz's decision and the 12 jury members were only following his lead.
It was a call-in show with a request that only service members that had been to Iraq call in. Very uplifting. They told of schools, hospitals and ordinary citizens who had benefitted by the U.S. being in their country. At the beginning of the call-ins the host explained that they were doing this show as they had received so many complaints about all bad news concerning Iraq. The only negative remarks that I can remember were the frustrations of having insurgents blow up some of their good deeds and some of the foot soldiers would have liked to see the officers allow more resistance against the insurgents.
The show was repeated as they do later in the day. Some of the callers expressed a desire to have another show similar to this again soon.
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.