Will the Gray Lady Leakers Get Frog Marched to the Hoosegow?
After yesterdays high fives and back slaps, the mood at the New York Times was not so jolly today after about, oh, 10:06 AM, when GW talked about how he really feels about the latest national security leak reported in yesterday’s edition:
“This is a highly classified program that is crucial to our national security. Its purpose is to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against the United States, our friends and allies. Yesterday the existence of this secret program was revealed in media reports, after being improperly provided to news organizations. As a result, our enemies have learned information they should not have, and the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk. Revealing classified information is illegal, alerts our enemies, and endangers our country. ”
Hmm. George Bush is not one to speak in symbols or mince words. His message today leaves you with the impression that “W” is more than miffed. He has lately not ignored the vicious political attacks from the Left. In November, he pointed out the dishonest reporting from the New York Times. Bush won’t let this national security leak go that easy. He stated today the information was “improperly reported”. Look for an investigation into this leak. “W” isn’t letting this one go! And, this of course, is very bad news for the New York Times.
Powerline said as much yesterday:
The Times believes that it should be the arbiter of what will and will not help the terrorists and thus impair our national security. I don’t agree. Under the Plame precedent, this case is a no-brainer. The intelligence officials who leaked to the Times should be identified, criminally prosecuted, and sent to prison. Under the Pentagon Papers case, the reporters and editors at the Times who published the leaked story can’t be criminally prosecuted. Perhaps the Supreme Court should revisit that precedent when the opportunity arises.
Tom Maguire has more on the NY Times reporting from thier followup segments today.
Jeff Goldstein writes about the shameless congressional members trying to stir up outrage over the legal practice:
I think it high time that we push back against the implied cultural assertion that patriotism and national security are quaint throwbacks to modernism and the early days of the Cold War—and that, as a hyperpower, we can easily absorb such leaks, used as political cudgels, as the price of doing business in the partisan divide of Washington.
In the last week alone, we’ve seen a huge victory in Iraq, where close to 15 million cast ballots in favor of self-determination, cheapened by the leaking of important (and legal, we’ll certainly find) intelligence gathering operations; we’ve seen the defeat of the PATRIOT Act—the very measures that we know to have thwarted terrorist attacks, and the measures our Commander in Chief and his Justice Dept is asking for to keep us safe—thanks to a timed assault by the New York Times and congressional Democrats (reacting with practiced outrage to what we now know that in many cases they’d been briefed on); and we’ve seen proven interrogation techniques made ostensibly “illegal” by officially defining torture down, providing our enemies with yet another measure of victory.
Agreed. Bottom line, the way “W” was sounding today… Look for an investigation. And, look for some frog marching to the hoosegow. “W” won’t let this slide. And, he shouldn’t.
Michelle Malkin covered the story yesterday with a great amount of background information.
Glenn Reynolds is posting on the latest leak. Glenn also thinks: This story was bad for Bush on Friday, but it’ll be bad for a lot of other people by next week.
La Shawn Barber has more on the screaming-banshee politicians and other dunces.