Skip to comments.
Time Magazine to Hand Over Reporter Notes
Yahoo! News ^
| 6/30/2005
| AP
Posted on 06/30/2005 6:15:10 AM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-155 next last
To: cyncooper
Thought you might be interested in this; I haven't kept up on the case so maybe it's not breaking news.
2
posted on
06/30/2005 6:19:41 AM PDT
by
Peach
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
I wonder who the leaker is.
3
posted on
06/30/2005 6:20:11 AM PDT
by
Perdogg
(Perdogg V Tyson, 12/31/05 at the Bellagio, Las Vegas)
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
In a statement, Time said it believes "the Supreme Court has limited press freedom in ways that will have a chilling effect on our work and that may damage the free flow of information that is so necessary in a democratic society." 'Welcome to our world.
4
posted on
06/30/2005 6:20:13 AM PDT
by
eyespysomething
( A penny saved is a government oversight)
To: Shermy
5
posted on
06/30/2005 6:21:53 AM PDT
by
Dog
(As Iraqi 's stand up, America will stand down.-- - - - President Bush)
To: Peach
Thanks---very early here and this is new news. The previous reports were they were contemplating giving the information, so the fact that they have decided to is indeed breaking (and no surprise, imo).
6
posted on
06/30/2005 6:21:54 AM PDT
by
cyncooper
To: Peach
FWIW: I did initially post it under "Breaking News"... but: it was relocated. :)
7
posted on
06/30/2005 6:23:10 AM PDT
by
KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
("As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-G-d, PRO-LIFE..." -- FR founder Jim Robinson)
To: cyncooper
There is someone in a office in DC...who just got this very sinking feeling sweep over them.
:-)
8
posted on
06/30/2005 6:24:33 AM PDT
by
Dog
(As Iraqi 's stand up, America will stand down.-- - - - President Bush)
To: Dog
I'm sure they are busy "collecting" the notes as we speak.
9
posted on
06/30/2005 6:24:43 AM PDT
by
Wristpin
( Varitek says to A-Rod: "We don't throw at .260 hitters.....")
To: Peach
Fox doing an Alert on it now and I could slap them. The guy (sorry, forget his name) presented it as if it's precedent setting.
This is absurd. Matt Cooper has already spoken with this grand jury after having been held in contempt before. Is it so hard to report in context?! The rulings ordering Cooper and Miller to cooperate were based on Supreme Court precedent that said reporters had to testify in criminal cases.
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
11
posted on
06/30/2005 6:25:31 AM PDT
by
kcvl
To: Peach
Wow, even Time ragazine is mad at the SCOTUS.
;^)
12
posted on
06/30/2005 6:27:36 AM PDT
by
prairiebreeze
(Does my American flag offend you? Dial 1-800-LEAVE THE USA!)
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
"In a statement, Time said it believes "the Supreme Court has limited press freedom in ways that will have a chilling effect on our work...""
One can only hope.
13
posted on
06/30/2005 6:30:26 AM PDT
by
Buck W.
(Yesterday's Intelligentsia are today's Irrelevantsia.)
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
At least maybe they can still throw Judith Miller in jail.
14
posted on
06/30/2005 6:31:08 AM PDT
by
aynrandfreak
(When can we stop pretending that the Left doesn't by and large hate America?)
To: prairiebreeze
SCOTUS...just racking up enemies with every ruling. They've forgotten that the government that governs least, governs best.
15
posted on
06/30/2005 6:31:08 AM PDT
by
Peach
To: Dog; All
Will someone explain to me so that I can understand it why Robert Novak was not before this judge for HIS column?
To: cyncooper
I can't wait to hear what's in those notes.
17
posted on
06/30/2005 6:31:48 AM PDT
by
Peach
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Jail them anyway. Indeed they ought to be uncommonly grateful for not being tossed to lions, which should have been an SOP.
18
posted on
06/30/2005 6:32:12 AM PDT
by
GSlob
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
It should be in breaking news, imo. Some days I just don't understand what is considered breaking and what isn't.
19
posted on
06/30/2005 6:32:18 AM PDT
by
Peach
To: aynrandfreak
"At least maybe they can still throw Judith Miller in jail."
Nah, they'll probably just put her in Gitmo. Not even the full Martha Stewart treatment.
20
posted on
06/30/2005 6:32:21 AM PDT
by
Buck W.
(Yesterday's Intelligentsia are today's Irrelevantsia.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-155 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson