Posted on 02/11/2006 10:02:38 AM PST by 68skylark
WASHINGTON, Feb. 11 — Federal agents have interviewed officials at several of the country's law enforcement and national security agencies in a rapidly expanding criminal investigation into the circumstances surrounding a New York Times article published in December that disclosed the existence of a highly classified domestic eavesdropping program, according to government officials.
The investigation, which appears to cover the case from 2004, when the newspaper began reporting the story, is being closely coordinated with criminal prosecutors at the Justice Department, the officials said. People who have been interviewed and others in the government who have been briefed on the interviews said the investigation seems to lay the groundwork for a grand jury inquiry that could lead to criminal charges.
The inquiry is progressing as a debate about the eavesdropping rages in Congress and elsewhere. President Bush has condemned the leak as a "shameful act." Others, like Porter J. Goss, the C.I.A. director, have expressed the hope that reporters would be summoned before a grand jury and asked to reveal the identities of those who provided them classified information.
Mr. Goss, speaking at a Senate intelligence committee hearing on Feb. 2, said, "It is my aim, and it is my hope that we will witness a grand jury investigation with reporters present being asked to reveal who is leaking this information. I believe the safety of this nation and the people this country deserve nothing less." The case is viewed in as potentially far reaching because it places on a collision course constitutional principles that each side regards as paramount. For the government, the investigation represents an effort to punish those responsible for a serious security breach....For news organizations, the inquiry threatens its ability to protect sources and report on controversial national security issues free of government interference....
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I couldn't agree more BB..it's not funny when the rules don't apply to certain people, at certain times, under particular circumstances...that could get Americans killed for no reason but the arrogant pride of journalists.
Oh, I quite agree. But there is a conciliatory tone to this article that bears sharp contrast with the confrontational tones of their previous stories.
It is as if they only now have come to realize the Espionage Act has real teeth...
Screw 'em.
I think a lot of us expected the Bush administration to buckle under liberal pressure, and to not investigate or prosecute these leaks.
Now, it looks like a real investigation is underway, and that strikes me as real news.
A real investigation will inevitably entangle the Times in its web, and it's possible we could see people from the Times going to jail. That's real news too.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1575696/posts On the other hand, those who choose to bypass the law and go straight to the press are not noble, honorable or patriotic. Nor are they whistleblowers. Instead they are committing a criminal act that potentially places American lives at risk. It is unconscionable to compromise national security information and then seek protection as a whistleblower to forestall punishment."
I used to think that too. Now I'm not so sure. The bloggers over at Powerline (who are also lawyers) have made a serious argument that the Times is guilty of criminal violations.
It seems unlikely that the administration would prosecute them, even if they're guilty -- they have enough trouble with a hostile MSM right now, and I don't think they want to go poking at that hornets nest a lot more. But we'll see.
Reporters don't hold clearance and cannot be prosecuted.
But their sources can be, and should be, and should get the maximum sentences to Leavenworth.
There are too many people around the Beltway who - often for decades - have held dear the sanctity of their clearances, their oaths, and their responsibilities to the nation. They DO NOT LEAK. Even after retirement, they honor their commitments and promises. For years, often until the day they die, they do not discuss operational information.
That is the oath they took, and on principle the commitment they honor.
I suspect these NSA leakers are the same despicable sort who have lobbied-for and approved "Gay Day" on the NSA premises. Despicable scum.
Actually these people WERE around in World War II.
A few days after the battle of Midway The Chicago Tribune was leaked what the US knew of the order of battle of the Japanese at Midway, and that we knew the exact Japanese plan, and published it verbatim, giving away that we'd broken the Japanese naval code.
The Government began to attempt to prosecute the Tribune reporter but gave up.
People need to disabuse themselves of this fantasy that there was some sort of "Good 'ol days" where reporters never published sensitive info and if they did they were being prosecuted for treason left and right.
Exactly, only in the showcase trials of Ames, Hanssen, etc.
But these leakers to the NY Slimes are equally (if not more) damaging, and they need to start serving time.
Not the reporters, the cleared leakers who are violating their oaths and commitments.
What is there to investigate? The original NYTimes story referred to a letter expressing concern about the program two years earlier. A few days after the story is published, Sen. Rockefeller divulges the contents of the letter on the internet which he had written, yet he was the only one who had a copy of it (by his testimony). And as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, he was sworn to keep such information secret. Yet the NYTimes got a copy of it. Go figure.
It doesn't take an Oliver Wendell Holmes to figure that one out.
Do you work for the Times?
"....rages....", LMAO! That sounds so..... European.
If it wasn't for hearing Rush and other talk show hosts mention it on the radio, I would completely forget that Bush was eavedropping on terrorists and their collaborators in the United States. Of course, thanks to the treason of those pieces of sh!+ at the New York Times, I doubt the program is very effective at this point. We can only hope that the next target for the Muslim terrorists is the New York Times' building, in the middle of the day.
I do make an exception for some of the folks who work at the New York Times -- but not for those who work at the NSA or any other employer I can think of.
Yep. But you need to add a few phrases from the statute ...
Whoever knowingly and willfully ... publishes ... any classified information ... concerning the ... procedures and methods used in the interception of communications and the obtaining of information from such communications by other than the intended recipients ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
I dropped in the statutory definition of "communications intelligence", and provide a link to the statute so readers can confirm that the elipses above don't change the intent or meaning of the statute.
The "fine" is forfeiture of all assets used to publish. It is a mandotry fine, with no room for discretion on the part of the trying Court.
If indicted and convicted, it's "bye-bye printing presses and internet servers."
And the beauty is, there is no need for investigation to find out who the leaker is! The only question is "classified information concerning the procedures and methods used in the interception of communications." Seems pretty easy to compare the NYT story with those critera, eh?
Actually that's very true and it's a great point.
I think some of out code-breaking successes were published in papers during WWII. And in earlier wars, the trend was even stronger. The press during the Civil War makes reporters today look like pussycats. And it was much more virulent than that during the War of 1812, when New England papers were trying to whip up armed rebellion against Washington, DC.
There never really was a golden era of harmony between the press and the military -- WWII is about as close as we ever got, and it was the exception.
NAZI CODES BROKEN
Army Possesses Encryption Machine
"Before running the story we gave long and sober onsideration to the administration's contention that disclosing the program would damage the country's war efforts," Mr. Keller said. "We were not convinced then, and have not been convinced since, that our reporting compromised national security."
Thanks for the ping, Mo1....glad to see THIS investigation hasn't been stopped.
I hope Rockefeller's threat that THEIR investigation into Bush comes back to get HIM but good!
Do you mean Sherlock Holmes?
LOL. When rodguy911 says it will be reported accurately here, he is referring to FR, not the Times.
Let's just execute them then & get it over with. Treason is as treason does.
Off with their heads.
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.