Posted on 09/29/2004 2:33:45 AM PDT by Shellback Chuck
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The New York Times on Tuesday sought a court order to block federal investigators from obtaining records of telephone calls made by two of its reporters immediately after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.
The U.S. Department of Justice (news - web sites) is subpoenaing the records from telephone companies as part of a probe into whether government officials tipped off the reporters about investigations of Islamic charities, the newspaper said in court papers.
Question: Is the First Amendment guarantee of a free press a guarantee that a so-called free press can give aid and comfort to enemies of the United States?
Evidently they think the first amendment is to allow them to give aid and comfort to the enemy.
They'll have no luck on that at all!
a probe into whether government officials tipped off the reporters about investigations of Islamic charities, the newspaper said in court papers.
This is the papers spin, the other side is,
a probe into whether reporters tipped off Islamic charities about investigations by government officials, the Justice Department said in court papers.
Hmmmmmm.
Really makes you wonder what they've got to hide.
Justice should take this all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary.
Feelin' a little "paranoid" tonight?
Yes. I'm always paranoid, and I speak the truth.
Paranoid that those bastards at the Slimes are tipping off the enemy!
The headline should be:
NYT Obstructs Justice Investigation of National Security Leak
The also want to cover up all the phone calls to DNC headquarters.
I am paranoid too. Paranoid enough to know that if I am going to tell someone they are about to be busted: TO NOT CALL FROM WORK. With the advent of prepaid cell phones I would think that most reporters would have one, but that would require being able to think independently. Sorry, my mistake.
Simply put -- No.
In addition, this 'freedom of the press' thingy is highly overrated, after all it's only 1/6th, or .166667% of the complete amendment. And there's never been any formal court declaration that reporter's sources are 'protected'. It exists only as a customary practice.
And if the 'Freedom of the Press' was sooooooo important why didn't the founders single it out as they did with the 2nd?
As such, legally - many and numerous "common sense press controls" can and should be enacted. Heck, we can't have just anyone running around writing and publishing stuff 'willy-nilly'. Think of all the innocent children that get harmed daily by these 'journalists'. "Common Sense Press Control Laws" need to be enacted ASAP - "for the children."
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.