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

To: demlosers
Wilson was sent by the CIA in 2002 to investigate allegations that Iraq had sought to buy uranium in the African nation of Niger, and he reported that he found no proof. His opinion piece accused the administration of twisting intelligence to justify going to war with Iraq. -Carol D. Leonnig, Washington Post Staff Writer

The 100% established fact that Wilson was a liar and/or incompetent miraculously goes unmentioned by the Washington Post. Since the discrediting of Wilson's information doesn't bear directly on this (non-)story, the false information is reported as true. Amazing.

It is a felony to knowingly identify a covert operative. -Leonnig

More tendentious reporting. The potential harm must be very high, a standard I think is ridiculous, but it is the law. Highly doubtful that Plame's outing meets the standard. But the (non-)story loses its (anti-Bush) punch if you acknowledge that.

7 posted on 07/03/2005 3:18:44 AM PDT by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: NutCrackerBoy
A couple of things.

First President Bush appointed the special prosecutor.

Second NOVAK is the reporter who actually reported Plumes name has not been charged with contempt for not revealing his sources... That screamed that NOVAK DID REVEAL HIS SOURCES to the special prosecutor

Three.. The leaker lied to the Special Prosecutor. The leaker denied he leaked the info. Lying to a federal prosecutor is a felony.. Ask Martha Stewart how that works. The leaker is in a heap of trouble.

The Special prosecutor wants the notes of the New York Times and Time magazine reporters.

That says to me the Special prosecutor is going to indict the leaker. He needs the documentation to prove that the leaker in fact leaked and then committed perjury. The will put the reporters in jail if they do not come clean and testify. The news corporations giving up notes and the reporters tesfifying are two separate issues. It is very dangerous for a corporation to refuse to supply documents ordered turned over by a court. This is not just a reporter issue. It is a news organization issue.

The punishment a corporation gets for defying a court order is a lot more damaging than the punishment handed out to a reporter.

The leftist media demanded that a special prosecutor be appointed. The loudest voice demanding a special prosecutor was the New York Times. The times knew who the leaker was... But must have felt that the Special Prosecutor would do what others have done.. and try to take down the administration. They thought they would get a Ken Starr who would make a stink that would embarrass the administration.

But the special prosecutor is most likely going to destroy the leaker's career by turning him or her into a convicted felon.

That will prove that the media can't protect leaker's and that leaker's can become convicted felons if they leak and do not confess.

This reality is a disaster for the media and they are trying to make the President and Karl Rove pay for making it very dangerous for leakers to trust the media. And impossible for the media to refuse to hand over information the media organization has in its possession.

This special prosecutor is going after both the reporters and the corporations for whom they work.

13 posted on 07/03/2005 4:05:41 AM PDT by Common Tator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

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