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

Skip to comments.

Suing the NY Times for dis-closing classified information
Just Truth Please

Posted on 06/24/2006 3:24:43 PM PDT by just truth please

To the Lawyers in Free Republic land: How would a Citizens Action Group go about filing a lawsuit against the NY Times for their, seemingly, illegal release of classified Government information? It seems obvious the US Attorney General is not going to. Someone, some how needs to get this moving. Free Republic might be a good starting point.


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-103 next last
To: photodawg

Were Gun Manufacturers sued inspite of the second ammendment? They did'nt pull the trigger but...
The leaker needs to be hung and the Times owners need to be brought to justice!


51 posted on 06/24/2006 4:37:21 PM PDT by outofsalt ("If History teaches us anything it's that history rarely teaches us anything")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: just truth please

First you have to identify the classified information. Is there something in particular that you have in mind?


52 posted on 06/24/2006 4:37:30 PM PDT by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4
Classified means no unauthorized access. The reporter who ran is not authorized, and he knew it.

Where does this come from?

53 posted on 06/24/2006 4:39:32 PM PDT by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin
I'm to the point that I see no reason to continue this war if we are going to lose it because of our own stupidity.

You mean stupidity like quitting because some paper leaks something? That kind of stupidity?

54 posted on 06/24/2006 4:39:33 PM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited

When Bush grants amnesty to 15 or 20 million illegals and the GOP can only hope for 35-40% of their vote come back and talk to me about stupidity.


55 posted on 06/24/2006 4:42:54 PM PDT by John Lenin (The RAT party is still Stuck on Stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: MIchaelTArchangel

"You need to allege that the leaks make you less safe and cause you -- and if you make this a class action lawsuit millions of other Americans -- less safe in your person and cause you great emotional anguish."

If you can't do that, then all the money given for Homeland Security should be refunded.


56 posted on 06/24/2006 4:44:48 PM PDT by TET1968 (SI MINOR PLUS EST ERGO NIHIL SUNT OMNIA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes

Classified info is for authorized folks only. Thats why its classified. I dont which stsute its under but its definitley there..


57 posted on 06/24/2006 4:46:00 PM PDT by cardinal4 (Allah is the opium pipedream of a desert pedophile...Freeper Ax)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin

No utter stupidity is wanting to cut+run in the WOT because of a newspaper leak. Are you a troll that was planted by the New York Slimes? You and them seem to have this pathologicaly incessant need to undermine our President and anything he's doing.


58 posted on 06/24/2006 4:46:08 PM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: just truth please

President Bush has been very tentative in responding to his critics. The hands off approach is probably a result of the new tone he wanted to establish in Washington at the beginning of his first term. Most people think that he is naïve to let his critics incessantly hammer away with immunity, but you could argue that its been a good strategy. While his opponents have been busy acting like fools, they have been unable to win elections. But the NY Times disclosing National Security Secrets is a whole other thing. The NY Times is fighting a war against the War on Terrorism and one day risks being complicit if a future terrorism attack is successful in the United States. The United States Attorney General must aggressively prosecute the leaker and the NY Times for treason in a time of war. Nothing less is shameful and dishonors the memory of all that have given their lives in the defense of their country since 9/11.


59 posted on 06/24/2006 4:46:38 PM PDT by Keflavik76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
Wikipedia

According to David Johnston and Scott Shane of The New York Times, "In an effort to stem leaks, the Bush administration launched several initiatives this year [2006] targeting journalists and national security employees. They include FBI probes, extensive polygraphing inside the CIA and a warning from the Justice Department that reporters could be prosecuted under espionage laws."[12][20]

As of yet, no criminal charges have been filed against McCarthy. The media has also reported that intelligence and law enforcement officials indicated that charges would not likely be filed against McCarthy.[21] According to news reports, other CIA officials have leaked classified information without being fired or prosecuted. Most notable among these is Paul R. Pillar who leaked portions of a classified National Intelligence Estimate he worked on.[22]

60 posted on 06/24/2006 4:49:45 PM PDT by John Lenin (The RAT party is still Stuck on Stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin
According to David Johnston and Scott Shane of The New York Times

Oh that is downright hilarious! Using the NYSlimes as your source about what's being done about the leaks.

61 posted on 06/24/2006 4:52:01 PM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin

How do you know that nothing is being done?????


62 posted on 06/24/2006 4:54:04 PM PDT by Coldwater Creek ("Over there, over there, We won't be back 'til it's over Over there.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited

Keystone Cops.


63 posted on 06/24/2006 4:54:06 PM PDT by John Lenin (The RAT party is still Stuck on Stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4
The reporter who ran is not authorized, and he knew it. They are just as guilty..

Agreed!

64 posted on 06/24/2006 4:54:10 PM PDT by ladyinred (Liberals are dangerous for America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mariabush
Because he read it in the NYSlimes.
65 posted on 06/24/2006 4:55:19 PM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: MIchaelTArchangel

Stock holders suit would be more effective.

Split 100 shares 100 ways you have a class action.

Fabricated stories and leaked stories are driving down stock values.


66 posted on 06/24/2006 4:58:11 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (The Internet is the samizdat of liberty..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mariabush
I always look at the end results. The leaks keep coming and our safety is being compromised.
67 posted on 06/24/2006 4:58:21 PM PDT by John Lenin (The RAT party is still Stuck on Stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin

It takes a while to get all of the ducks in a row!


68 posted on 06/24/2006 4:59:52 PM PDT by Coldwater Creek ("Over there, over there, We won't be back 'til it's over Over there.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4
Classified info is for authorized folks only. Thats why its classified.

It's really the other way,

You don't release classified information and then say whoops.

69 posted on 06/24/2006 5:11:07 PM PDT by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes

Its quite simple-only those with a clearance are authorized to access it. A NYT reporter would have no reason for a clearance. Ergo-both are culpable, as he had to view the info to write the story..


70 posted on 06/24/2006 5:25:38 PM PDT by cardinal4 (Allah is the opium pipedream of a desert pedophile...Freeper Ax)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Wristpin
Seems to me a better tact would be a mass email campaign to companies that support treason by advertising in the Slimes.

Yes, definitely! AND, we need to also add the administration on the mass email campaign, demanding they go after the leaker.

THIS CANNOT STAND!

71 posted on 06/24/2006 5:29:05 PM PDT by demkicker (democrats and terrorists are intimate bedfellows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

Everytime I see the photo of people hanging their heads
out of the windows of the WTC I just go ballistic. Really. It makes me really want to kill somebody (the enemy.) Why is America still allowing Arabs/Muslims to come to our shores and settle here or even allowing them to just transit our territory? It infuriates me. Why are Americans tolerating these people and their insulting behavior and remarks thrown at us?


72 posted on 06/24/2006 5:39:26 PM PDT by StormEye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited; MIchaelTArchangel
I for one find their actions very frightening...

Dear Attorney General;

I am writing to you to express my dismay that National Security Secrets have again found their way into the Press. I am deeply concerned at the negligence of those involved and the high crimes that are being committed.

As a citizen of the United States, I would like to see prosecutions begin regarding those who are 'leaking' secrets to the press and I would like to see the reporters, editors, and publishers of those secrets at least have charges filed against them.

The failure of your office to enforce the laws that protect America is both disappointing and frightening to the citizens. At this time we feel defenseless in that no one is willing to prosecute actions that are clearly against the law. Actions that border on treason and aidding & abetting the enemy.

73 posted on 06/24/2006 5:50:59 PM PDT by EBH (We're too PC to understand WAR has been declared upon us and the enemy is within.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy

"Do you mean McCarty..not McBride?"

Well, at least I was on the right Isle ;)


74 posted on 06/24/2006 5:53:20 PM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: StormEye

The mainstream media does not want you furious at the enemies of the United States. There was hardly no mention of the barbaric torture and slaughter of the two U.S. Soldiers that were captured. They do not want you looking at pictures of 9/11 because it may give rise to a righteous anger. But the MSM wants you to look at pictures of our poor enemies being humiliated by the U.S. Armed Forces. Its a twisted logic that the MSM is engaged in that will probably cease if ever a democrat win the presidency.


75 posted on 06/24/2006 5:55:03 PM PDT by Keflavik76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Dallas59

Some enterprising cartoonist here at FR should depict a bleeding pen, labeled the NYT, stabbing the heart of the World Trade Center. Or the Sears Tower. Either one would work and get the point across.


76 posted on 06/24/2006 5:55:45 PM PDT by Kieri (Dump "Dangerously Incompetent" Debbie, Support Keith Butler for Senate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: TASMANIANRED
Try a fiduciary responsibility to the minority shareholder class action suit.

The management have put the shareholders at risk for knowingly violating the Espionage Act. They admitted their knowledge.

If I were a shareholder, I would be real pissed at their stupidity. At the very least, the lawsuit might just draw out some additional information to help the government. Anything to get the barking traitors on the stand and under oath as far as I am concerned.
77 posted on 06/24/2006 6:00:37 PM PDT by allen08gop ("Woman is the most powerful magnet in the universe... and all men are cheap metal!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: allen08gop

Their stock performance for the past 10 years.

78 posted on 06/24/2006 6:23:49 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (The Internet is the samizdat of liberty..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Wristpin; demkicker
Going after the NYTimes advertisers is a waste of effort.

The NYTimes is not controlled by its shareholders, nor by the profit motive. There are two classes of voting stock. The Sulzberger family controls 91% of the Class B stock that controls the NYTimes. From (a good read) BusinessWeek Online: The Future Of The New York Times (JANUARY 17, 2005):

Like other Old Media families, the Sulzbergers have been able to maintain unquestioned control of their company by creating a new class of voting stock and reserving most of it for themselves. Among them, the various branches of the Sulzberger family control 91% of the Class B voting shares.

A month ago, I heard news of a shareholder revolt, but haven't noticed anything of it since. See further: New York Post Online: SHORT TIMES-ERS TRADERS BOOST BETS ON FALLING SHARES (May 5, 2006).

79 posted on 06/24/2006 6:25:37 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (We are but Seekers of Truth, not the Source.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: outofsalt
Aha - good post. You beat me to my Post #79. Thanks.
80 posted on 06/24/2006 6:29:45 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (We are but Seekers of Truth, not the Source.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: just truth please

from another thread: " ......then his Administration must not let the Times continue to disregard the law. Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917 specifically to punish the kind of subversive acts in which the Times engaged by exposing the wiretapping and SWIFT programs."

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1655044/posts?page=74#74


81 posted on 06/24/2006 6:30:09 PM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polybius
bttt
82 posted on 06/24/2006 6:44:37 PM PDT by angelsonmyside
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: outofsalt
Were Gun Manufacturers sued inspite of the second ammendment?
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

In a civil suit where a product was deemed to have caused an injury the plaintiff has to prove negligence on the part of the manufacturer that directly resulted in injury. Not every shooting results in a law suit against a gun manufacturer. The manufacturer, in this instance, is not an individual, but a company and damages would be paid by the company. Also, no criminal statute violations result in damages in civil cases. Criminal law results in punishment not damages. The publisher of NYT does not break criminal law by operating his newspaper and is not directly responsible for the actions of his business personally. The times is a corporation. The individuals involved in the act, if illegal, bear the responsibility.
83 posted on 06/24/2006 7:06:47 PM PDT by photodawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Loyal Buckeye

Add a 4th. Try Marxists! Maybe a 5th, destroy Democracy.


84 posted on 06/24/2006 7:35:58 PM PDT by just truth please
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: just truth please
I've been thinking about a lawsuit against the Slimes and just how the h3ll it could be done by ordinary citizens. The only thing I can think of is suing them for UNDULY or negligently subjecting me and my family to physical harm or death.

Nam Vet

85 posted on 06/24/2006 7:41:42 PM PDT by Nam Vet (Bozone (n.): The substance surrounding liberals that stops bright ideas from penetrating.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TASMANIANRED

Sure looks like Kerr McGee's stock price to me.

Perhaps you meant this one:

http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ticker=NYT&script=300&layout=-6

They have been in a downward trend for 4 years now.


86 posted on 06/24/2006 8:09:15 PM PDT by allen08gop ("Woman is the most powerful magnet in the universe... and all men are cheap metal!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin

Jay Rockefeller


87 posted on 06/24/2006 8:22:38 PM PDT by WVNan (Liberalism is never having to say you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: purpleland

Jay Rockefeller


88 posted on 06/24/2006 8:23:09 PM PDT by WVNan (Liberalism is never having to say you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: just truth please

Jay Rockefeller


89 posted on 06/24/2006 8:24:08 PM PDT by WVNan (Liberalism is never having to say you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: allen08gop

Woops..Egg on my face.


That's the graph that came up when I did NYT....

Thanks for the correction.


90 posted on 06/24/2006 8:25:00 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (The Internet is the samizdat of liberty..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: sageb1

Jay Rockefeller


91 posted on 06/24/2006 8:25:37 PM PDT by WVNan (Liberalism is never having to say you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: photodawg
probably a democrat senator

Jay Rockefeller

92 posted on 06/24/2006 8:35:09 PM PDT by WVNan (Liberalism is never having to say you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: WVNan


The Rockefeller File
93 posted on 06/24/2006 8:56:06 PM PDT by John Lenin (The RAT party is still Stuck on Stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Nam Vet

I've been thinking about a lawsuit against the Slimes and just how the h3ll it could be done by ordinary citizens. The only thing I can think of is suing them for UNDULY or negligently subjecting me and my family to physical harm or death.
Nam Vet

*Americans from all corners (ala the "vast "Right-Wing Conspiracy" ;)
unified to form a massive tidal wave in Class Action suits against the ACLU and the NY Times, as well as J. Rochefeller, et al, would guarantee the extinction of these subversive entitites - toot sweet.


94 posted on 06/25/2006 7:37:27 AM PDT by purpleland (Elegy 9/11/01 Vigilance and Valor! Socialism is the Opiate of Academia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: penelopesire

"I count three (if not more). Secret Prisons..NSA...and now the newest one detailing our sources and methods of tracking terrorist money all over the world!"

Is the government/administration mandated to provide vital national security and critical classfied information to the MEDIA - the FIFTH COLUMN? Is the present administration so intimidated by the self-serving MEDIA which assert the "most secret..."???


95 posted on 06/25/2006 7:43:05 AM PDT by purpleland (Elegy 9/11/01 Vigilance and Valor! Socialism is the Opiate of Academia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: penelopesire

"I count three (if not more). Secret Prisons..NSA...and now the newest one detailing our sources and methods of tracking terrorist money all over the world!"

Is the government/administration mandated to provide vital national security and critical classfied information to the MEDIA - the FIFTH COLUMN? Is the present administration so intimidated by the self-serving MEDIA which assert the "most secret..."???


96 posted on 06/25/2006 7:44:09 AM PDT by purpleland (Elegy 9/11/01 Vigilance and Valor! Socialism is the Opiate of Academia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: purpleland

It is up to the DOJ to investigate and prosecute these leaks..which are coming from Clinton holdovers in the CIA & NSA and probably Senotor Rockefeller and other Democrat Senators.


97 posted on 06/25/2006 7:49:03 AM PDT by penelopesire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: purpleland

Back in the early 80s I worked for Lockheed on the F-117 production program. This was long before the F-117 was ever disclosed to the American people. I held a DoD Secret Security Clearance and we we're firmly warned that if we ever talked about our work outside of the plant(even to family members), made sketches, accidently exited the plant with documents or blueprints, that we could expect a quick visit by the FBI. I remember how impressed I was with our great nation that we could keep Secret projects under wraps. And now the NY Times can take similar Secret National Security programs and disclose them to the entire world with what seems to be complete immunity. It's time that our Govt. take a stand and go after the NY Times and their treason and arrogance. The NY Times has no concern for national security. I know that their are times when our national security trumps the public's right to know. Publications like the NY Times make me feel less safe and they need to be held accountable.


98 posted on 06/25/2006 7:57:23 AM PDT by One4Indictment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Loyal Buckeye
Tell me again what the compelling reason is that THE new york times disclosed the program:

1. Because they uncovered government abuses in the program;

2. Because the program is unconstitutional;

3. Because they could?

I have not seen any evidence of #1.

#2 could not be any more incorrect. There is a Supreme Court ruling that states this action is expressly allowed under the constitution. In response to that ruling, Congress specified the procedure for obtaining warrants and that procedure was followed exactly. The law is overwhelimgly on the side of the administration here.

99 posted on 06/25/2006 8:17:33 AM PDT by CMAC51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin
They talked it over with the White House.

Well then, who are we to require laws be followed if they talked it over with the WH. (/sarc)

100 posted on 06/25/2006 8:22:34 AM PDT by JoeSixPack1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-103 next last

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