Posted on 02/19/2005 8:34:22 AM PST by Isara
Jervis S. Finney, chief counsel to Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr., has questioned members of the media - including two Sun reporters - about "MD4BUSH," an anonymous contributor to a Web site that posted adultery rumors about Mayor Martin O'Malley. Finney said he was asking the questions as part of his investigation into the activities of Joseph Steffen, an aide to the governor who was fired February 8 for his involvement in spreading the rumors about O'Malley's personal life, The (Baltimore) Sun reported. O'Malley has denied the rumors. MD4BUSH had several Web log exchanges with Steffen about the O'Malley rumors and gathered a number of Steffen's most damaging postings on the Web shortly after the story reporting Steffens' connection with the rumors broke on a media Web site. In a Feb. 16 letter to Sun reporter Michael Dresser, Finney cited a federal appeals court panel's decision this week that undercuts reporters' right to shield their sources. In a separate letter to Sun columnist Michael Olesker, Finney asked "whether you are in fact 'MD4BUSH."' Olesker and Dresser said they had no knowledge of MD4BUSH. "Of course I'm not that guy," Olesker said in an interview. "It's not me, and I have no idea who it is." Dresser said, "I am not MD4BUSH, and I would not care to speculate who MD4BUSH might be." Finney's questions followed Freedom of Information Act requests by The Sun and other media about details of the administration's investigation into Steffen's activities. Dresser made The Sun's Freedom of Information Act request. Olesker and Dresser appear to be the only ones to have received written questions this week as part of the investigation. Finney said that he "verbally" asked other media members about MD4BUSH and intends to follow up in written form. He said the decision to question the media is part of his effort to conduct a thorough investigation into the spreading of the rumors about the mayor. "I am trying to seek information that is relevant to the governor - whether a state employee or official might be MD4BUSH," Finney said. In support of his decision to question the media, Finney cited the U.S. Court of Appeals case involving reporters Matthew Cooper of Time and Judith Miller of The New York Times, who face contempt-of-court charges for refusing to tell prosecutors about their confidential talks with an official or officials in the Bush White House who revealed the identity of a CIA operative. In that case, he said, it was suggested that there are times when it is appropriate for the media to reveal information and sources. "It's up to the newspaper whether this is one of those times," Finney said. "It's entirely appropriate for me to ask the question. If you all are going to decline to answer the question, then so be it." On Friday, the Ehrlich administration supported Finney's decision to question reporters and promised that the investigation would continue to be aggressive. "Inquiries related to the identity of MD4BUSH is part of the investigation requested by Governor Ehrlich," said Shareese N. DeLeaver, a spokeswoman for the governor. "This is intended to be a thorough investigation that will include leaving no rock unturned." Several other media organizations, including WBAL have been contacted by the governor's office, regarding MD4BUSH.
BUMP
Right now, google links to 70 pages of
entries for "md4bush"...
Wild!
Good sleuth work. Thanks for the post.
I agree with this and your previous points. I didn't know at the time I had posted that MD4BUSH had already posted (allegedly) FReepmail from NCPAC.
Seems to me that MD4BUSH may have risked his rights by posting NCPAC's Freepmail (presumably, without permission). Nonetheless, your point is well taken -- any communications via FR should only be released following agreement by the parties or in response to subpoena.
Hopefully, Governor Ehrlich will ask for this soon. MD4BUSH would seem to have forfeited any protection as per rules of the forum. He seems to be a scumbag wanker to me.
"MD4BUSH has been banned since this business broke. I saw rumors that he had deleted his freepmail before he was banned, but of course I have no way to know if it's true or not. In any case, I don't believe they should be released unless there is a subpoena. Villain or not, they are his private emails."
I agree that they should not be released. But, if MD4BUSH deleted his emails, a subpoena to him is useless, since he's no longer in possession of them. Unless the subpoena is served to FR, of course.
Can you post the search term you used, or can I just search for MD4BUSH?
"any communications via FR should only be released following agreement by the parties or in response to subpoena."
I agree. But I saw once someone posting in the forum an exchange of FReep mail. This was a while back before I registered to FR.
I'll wait for the book/movie to come out...
For the record,
gathered a number of Steffen's most damaging postings on the Web
Steffan's "most damaging postings" were taken from Freepmail, not publicly posted. The man was clearly set-up and betrayed.
Evidently he persuaded NCPAC (Steffen) to send him some private freepmails and enough information to establish his identity. He then turned that identity and some unspecified "email" mentioned by the Washington Post, probably a freepmail or freepmails, over to the Post.How could the WP verify the correspondence as authentic? Their source must have been trusted.
Sometimes my ability to screw up amazes me...
Or someone with a vendetta against FR, like one of Hannity's friends...
Who is going to write the book? Jim?
Bookmark bump
It used to be that reporters questioned the politicians and their reps, not the other way around. Seems like something is back-asswards here.
"In that case, he said, it was suggested that there are times when it is appropriate for the media to reveal information and sources."
Only if they do not ever want any further info from the source in the future. Protect your source. It's the number one cardinal rule of journalism, and many journalists have gone to jail rather than turn canary.
I would hope that JimRob would refuse. Don't know how he feels about this, but like it or not, intended or not, JR and FR have become the biggest journalist in the US due to this site. He might not write the articles, but he, through us, has acquired major power in reporting, discussing, and influencing what is going on in the power corridors of the United States, and the world for that matter.
JimRob is bigger than Rush. If you don't believe it, think back to how many times you have listened to Rush and thought, "I read about that last night."
There is no doubt in my mind that Rush regularly uses FR as a source for what he is going to discuss in the morning.
Any journalist worth his salt NEVER reveals a source.
Exactly!
FreeRepublic has a published privacy policy.
Jervis Finney will have to employ subpoena powers to obtain infromation.
Jim Robinson is probably last on his list of people he wants to talk with. Jervis wants everyone else to provide an answer first.
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.