Posted on 11/05/2005 5:54:32 PM PST by Congressman Billybob
In yesterday’s (Saturday) Washington Post is a brief article in its Metro section, responding to well-attended press conference the previous day in front of the newspaper’s offices.
The press conference accused the Post of violating the privacy rights of certain individuals on the website FreeRepublic.com This exchange, printed by the Post, explains the charge, and the newspaper’s response to it, so far:
"How in good faith could The Washington Post access a private Internet account without the express permission of the account holder?" Kristinn Taylor, a spokesman for the conservative FreeRepublic.com, asked in a morning news conference in front of The Post's offices in Northwest Washington.
“In response, R.B. Brenner, The Post's Maryland editor, said: ‘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.’ [Sic: This was not a “chat room.” This was a private e-mail exchange between two individuals.]
“The claims relate to a series of Internet chats in October and November 2004 between Joseph Steffen, then an aide to the governor, and a person using the screen name MD4BUSH. In those postings, MD4BUSH coaxed Steffen into revealing his role in spreading rumors about Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley, now a Democratic candidate for governor.”
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/04/AR2005110401908_pf.html
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.
How could the Post claim it had valid permission, without knowing who was granting that permission? This may be a violation of the federal internet secrecy statute. It is certainly a violation of the website’s privacy rules, which are presented to all users.
For the kind of information that MD4Bush posted while posing as a red-meat Republican and trolling for like-minded responses, see the fullest reporting which as been done by WBAL radio, which broke the story of this “anonymous”poster at the center of this Maryland political scandal.
Source: http://wbal.com/news/story.asp?articleid=36721
Their story is complete except for their editorial judgment to ignore the sexual charge against Senator Barbara Mikulski, which was included in the materials the Post accessed from the private source.
John_Armor@aya.yale.edu
John / Billybob
'MD4BUSH coaxed Steffen into revealing his role in spreading rumors about Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley'
Heh, considering from the actual emails NCPAC had no role in spreading rumors it's soooooo nice of them to give him credit.
Just keeping my scorecard accurate: Steffen is NCPAC?
You are right. I went through every thread in detail when this story broke, and one thing that was obvious to me is that NCPAC never spread any rumors. Other Freepers, presumably innocent third parties who happened by, mentioned the rumors, which were evidently commonplace in Baltimore and I believe had been mentioned in the media.
The whole accusation against NCPAC was a lie from beginning to end. Their agent provocateur never managed to get him to say anything damaging against the mayor.
Yes, Steffen is the guy who a Democrat tried to coax into spreading rumors but failed. But was still fired for having talked to a guy online who tried to spread rumors.
Sure a lot of muckety mucks running around on the freeper board.
I'll be we could ferret them out by looking at how they voted in the sidebar polls..........
Sounds to me that the Post had a plant and acted to entrap Steffen and is another example of how low the Post is willing to go to relive it's glory days of Deep Throat.
And just to be crystal clear, didn't NCPAC / Steffen resign in order to stop the media storm from engulfing the governor? I thought he honorably fell on his sword rather than was fired. Google returns articles that say resigned and others that say fired. Even posts within FR are contradictory. Some even say that the governor asked for the resignation which might explain the controversy.
I used to be a muckety muck but I had to quit
;-)
" . . . uh, what's my sign?"
That is correct, he resigned. I talked to him on the thread that announced it.
As opposed to all the lies they've been caught in over the years, this is different, ...why? ;)
Bogey, see #14
ping
Since their lies are so blatant and so easily disproved, you'd think that they'd shut up now. I doubt that they shall and if this ever goes to court, their tacit part in this conspiracy ( and YES, that's exactly what this was !) will become a prominent part of any trial.
I remember that he resigned.
bump
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.