WaPo Confirms Suspicious Timing of NY Times “U.S. Spying” Article

NewsBusters ^ | 12/17/05 | Noel Sheppard

[Only Waxing]

Paul Farhi wrote an article for today’s Washington Post that confirmed yesterday’s Drudge Report exclusive sited by NewsBusters that the New York Times failed to disclose a major story it broke surrounding U.S. spying in America was part of a soon to be released book by one of its columnists, James Risen. In addition, Farhi indicated that the timing of the release of this report might indeed have been designed to correspond with a Congressional vote to renew the Patriot Act. The antiterrorism bill was blocked last evening in the Senate with members claiming revelations in the Times article may have been the death knell.

According to the Post:

“The [Times] offered no explanation to its readers about what had changed in the past year to warrant publication...

[brivette]

Guess they "pinched" the article.

[Cicero]

“‘I went to bed undecided,’ Mr. Schumer said on the Senate floor, ‘but today's revelation that the government has listened in on thousands of phone conversations is shocking and has greatly influenced my vote.’"

Permit me to doubt that little Chuckie Schumer went to bed undecided. Permit me to think that he preplanned this with the editors of the Times in order to derail the vote.

[Fielding]

WaPo Confirms Suspicious Timing of NY Times

Is there anything about the activities of the New York Times that is not suspicious?

[Eric in the Ozarks]

The man's a liar.

[mewzilla]

Permit me to think that he preplanned this with the editors of the Times in order to derail the vote.

I think the vote was already derailed. This was to provide cover.

[msnimje]

James Risen at some date in the future.

[Paladin2]

The NYT is trying to shift attention away from its horrendous fall in stock price. Where is their plan to turn the operation around? Why have we not had that plan laid out so we can examine its viability?

[Brilliant]

He says "thousands" of phone calls, but the President says about 30. Let me put it this way... If there is another 911 sized attack on NY, he gets no sympathy from me.

[carlr]

The Rockefeller memo?
It called for leaks.

[t2buckeye]

I don't believe for a moment that Schumer was affected by the article BUT I do believe it gave the Dems and RINOS cover for their vote! And above all, they are worried about their vote coming back to haunt them. Now they can say that they only voted that way because of Bush blah blah blah.
It's sickening...especially because it WILL come out that Congress memebers were in the know..but by then the press will have moved on again. Yellow journalism has returned in full force!

[MarkL]

Seems to me that if a "news organization" is actively involved in influencing political outcomes, then they should lose their exemptions from the McCain/Feingold CFR abomination...

I would be SO THRILLED to see CBS News, the Washington Post, and the New York Times all lose the ability to publish or broadcast a single story regarding politics before the primaries or elections! Oh, that would be SO COOL!

Mark

[MillerCreek]

Exactly.

[MillerCreek]

Exactly!

[LibertarianInExile]

Hey, Noel, it's "cited," not "sited."

[TASMANIANRED]

Sure looks like Rockefeller would be a likely source.

He was on the Intelligence committee, he called for leaks.

Not a smoking gun but it sure looks like he pulled a leaky Leahy.

[Petronski]

I can smell the old grey whore from here.

[OldFriend]

Does anyone believe that the NYSlimes did not discuss the timing with Rockefeller and/or other demon leakers?

[Zacs Mom]

[Valin]

Is there anything about the activities of the New York Times that is not suspicious?


The Want Ads & the Box Scores?