Washington Post Now Claims "Authorized" to Access MD4BUSH Account

Saturday, November 5, 2005 | Kristinn

[kristinn]

After yesterday's press conference in front of The Washington Post building in downtown Washington, D.C. that criticized The Post for violating their sourcing guidelines and for accessing a FreeRepublic.com account in possible violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, an editor for The Post is now claiming authorization to log-in to the account of MD4BUSH.

Earlier this week, Post Maryland editor R.B. Brenner made statements that reporter Matthew Mosk had logged in to MD4BUSH's account "two or three times" after being given the password by an "intermediary" in order to authenticate private messages sent between MD4BUSH and NCPAC on Free Republic.

Brenner has maintained that The Post does not know who MD4BUSH is.

Brenner is reported to have made the following statement to The Post for their story today about the press conference:

"As part of our reporting, we needed to verify that the chat room postings were authentic. We were authorized to view them, and it was appropriate to do so under the circumstances."

Link to Post article here.

[newzjunkey]

But as a major newspaper of record how do you know the lawyer is an authetic source without knowing the client? You can't run articles based on the say-so of a random lawyer (or even a known lawyer) who might've posted something online in a dirty tricks campaign. How did the Post discover and verify the true identify of NCPAC?

From my perspective, they have to know the identity of MD4Bush to verifty the chain of custody of this "information" and the veracity of MD4Bush's claims. It would seem they should have to know who NCPAC is so it's not a crank. You can't simply take MD4Bush's say-so interpretation on the freepmail exchange.

This isn't just any newspaper: it's the Washington Post. They took down a GOP president. They also sued FR.

[dalight]

nope.. this was done to sell newspapers which is for commercial advantage.. therefore.. its a year..

[gov_bean_ counter]

IMHO, MD4BUSH is the whole stinking newsroom using a shared password.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

They're busted hard and they know it. I read this as the distress signal - they're hoping the NYT and the rest of the media will circle the wagons like they did when the TANG documents were exposed.

I'm waiting for the "We knew the story was right, even though the evidence was false" argumentum, ala Captain Dan Ahab.

We're going to need a lot of popcorn...

[mrsmith]

It's discovery time: They said we were hurting their business, and now they come on here and try to discredit members.

"Just what have you got there in the Washpost files about us? What have you been plotting and saying about us at your meetings?"

Sic the lawyers on 'em.

[Abby4116]

I wouldn't publish private Freepmails from others on a public thread unless you have the sender's permission. Even then, I'm not sure it's a good idea in a case like this, since there are serious legal issues at stake. Communicate privately with the site's proprietors if you think it is significant.

Remember what your mother taught you - don't put anything in writing that you would be ashamed to have everyone see.

[conservative in nyc]

But as a major newspaper of record how do you know the lawyer is an authetic source without knowing the client?

That's a very interesting question. I guess you could ask the lawyer for his client to do something to prove he has authority - like post something here. Or, if you know the lawyer's trustworthy, you can just trust him and hope all is for the best.

How did the Post discover and verify the true identify of NCPAC?

We still don't know for sure. Most likely, the "intermediary" told them, or they did a simple search through NCPAC's threads here. NCPAC left some snippets of personal information here and there which, in hindsight, could have been used to identify him. There were also more exotic theories that someone used a keystroke logger, or someone who worked with NCPAC (Michelle Lane is the name that is most mentioned) outed him.

[Cicero]

Agreed. But if someone else writes you a letter, you should preserve their confidences.

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

I am late learning of this story (that plame thing captures my attention, LOL!).

...We were authorized to view them, and it was appropriate to do so under the circumstances.....

My impression is that the WaPo wants the average reader reader to believe JimRob granted permission.

...The Post asserts that it obtained the password to enter this private area from "an intermediary who was acting on behalf of MD4BUSH." But at the same time, the Post claims it does not know who MD4BUSH is, much less that he may have been at that time the Communications Director of the Maryland Democrat Party....

At the same time, it inserts enough "wiggle room" to protect itself in court if need be.

[HAL9000]

"As part of our reporting, we needed to verify that the chat room postings were authentic. We were authorized to view them, and it was appropriate to do so under the circumstances."

Of course, it's legal to view public chat room posts - but the Washington Post went way beyond that. The blithely admitted to violating the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act by accessing the private e-mail account of a person who identity is unknown to them. Soon, they'll be telling us that breaking and entering in pursuit of a story is protected under the First Amendment.

Mosk is in legal jeopardy - and if editor Brenner authorized Mosk to do it, he'd better get an attorney too.

[staytrue]

Using an intermediary is what Tom Delay was accused of doing in money laundering.

Also, no one "outed" Valerie Plame directly. It was done via intermediaries in the press.

The russians used intermediaries (cubans) to fight the cold war.

Most murder for hires are intermediary in nature.

If you ever solicit for prostitutes, make sure you use and intermediary like a pimp first.

[hoosiermama]

The blithely admitted to violating the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act by accessing the private e-mail account of a person who identity is unknown to them. Soon, they'll be telling us that breaking and entering in pursuit of a story is protected under the First Amendment.

Any one have a brief synopsis of what the FECPA contains?

[conservative in nyc]

Okay...then why hasn't NYTimes or Washington Times done a story???

Both papers did stories back in February, when the story first broke. The Washington Times has been reporting on the MD firing probe investigation every now and then.

This story is very complicated. It's not easy to explain to someone who knows nothing about it. And as Chip Franklin said on WBAL Radio on Friday, it's become a wonkish story. Without the media being able to confirm MD4Bush's identity, it's no longer about someone pushing rumors of Mayor O'Malley's marital infidelity. It's about a fairly dry issue - whether the Washington Post acted ethically or illegally when it logged on Free Republic using someone else's password.

Kristinn - Was anybody from Editor & Publisher at the news conference? You'd think they'd be interested in the story.

[maica]

This story equals the Dan Blather story in the pleasure factor. It's definitely a "10" if I ever saw one. Heh, heh. I'm lovin' it.

####

Have you ever read and given time to the thread "O'Malley Rumours"? It ran in the summer of '04 - before the thread that NCPAC got snared on. It included about six unique posters who opened accounts and posted one comment. The thread kept getting resurrected about twice a week by another brand-newbie. I am sure that Jim Robinson knows where all those posts originated from. Wouldn't it be fab if they came from the WaPo or some Md Dem party office.

I live in hope of the denouement. /pardon the french lingo!

[shutup_you_idiot]

Hey, how about this? It's Google's fault. This was their first listing:

World O'Crap

Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. resigned his state job yesterday after admitting he had been ... about O'Malley at Free Republic, he should at least know what FR is. ...
blogs.salon.com/0002874/2005/02/09.html - 72k - Cached - Similar pages

Okay, okay... That absolves me of the stupidity, but not the laziness. :-)

[DBrow]

Just for kicks I checked Bugmenot, and MD4Bush's pw is not up there, so BMN was not the "intermediary authorized to give the password."

[HAL9000]

A couple of relevant sections posted here.

[shutup_you_idiot]

Great memory.

Look at this. Look at the reply/views ratio:

O'Malley Rumours ^
	Posted by xcullen On News/Activism ^ 07/19/2004 3:37:42 PM CDT · 106 replies · 14,176+ views

Man. That's a lot of views.

[VRWCTexan]

Claiming "ignorance of the law" they may have actually violated is not a legally acceptable defense.

[Anti-Bubba182]

I don't think so either.