Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Justice Department going after leakers! - Fox News
Fox News

Posted on 12/30/2005 7:26:42 AM PST by Pukin Dog

Just announced on Fox News, the Justice Department is going to investigate leaks pertaining to Goverment Wiretapping and Security programs.

TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government
KEYWORDS: abouttime; absoultetreason; adiosmofo; bagthemthenhangthem; binladensbuds; cia; circularfiringsquad; deathpenalty; doj; dojprobe; doubleaughtspy; firingsquad; frogmarchwilson; heirsoftokyorose; heneededhangin; homelandsecurity; jamesrisen; leaks; letumfry; liberalstupidity; liberaltreason; nailemandjailem; nationalsecurity; newyorktimes; nsa; nyaljazeeratimes; patriotleak; prisonforrisen; reporterropetree; rockerfeller; sabateurs; scumstock2006; spying; thespywhoshaggedme; timesgoneinfiveyears; timetopaysulzberger; traitorjayrockefeler; traitormedia; traitorousbazturds; traitors; traitorsalad; traitortommydaschle; traitortots; tryagainsoros; turbindurbin; wheresthenoose; wolfpischer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 881-900901-920921-940 ... 1,221-1,225 next last
To: Yasotay
NOT Declaring War.

and who or whom should have Congress declared war on??? don't sound like you're playing Devils Advocate....

901 posted on 12/30/2005 2:09:18 PM PST by Getsmart64
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth; Chuck54

There were two interesting things about FISA. One was an article that detailed that the Court had rejected or modified more warrants under the Bush administration than all the previous four administrations combined.

But the post you are referring to, I think, Txsleuth, is regarding the chief of the court, Lamberth. And it was pretty scary. Here it is in post #208:

902 posted on 12/30/2005 2:12:14 PM PST by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 836 | View Replies]

To: Palladin; Howlin
What? You do not have a TV in your computer room? You can't do live threads without them!

Howlin nagged me until I got my husband to run a line for the satellite to the computer room and put a small TV in. Now I don't know how I functioned without this set up!

903 posted on 12/30/2005 2:12:52 PM PST by Miss Marple (Lord, please look after Mozart Lover's son and keep him strong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 856 | View Replies]

To: Peach


904 posted on 12/30/2005 2:14:36 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 902 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
LOL ! Mr. TOL, bought me a TV for the office (his office, he thinks)for a Birthday present last year! I recently hung my autographed pic of Tony Snow on the wall! I no longer call it the Front Office, I call it the FReep office!
905 posted on 12/30/2005 2:18:12 PM PST by tiredoflaundry (I'll admit it , I'm a Snow Flake !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 903 | View Replies]

The Criminal Code contains numerous provisions potentially relevant to these cases. Section 797 5 makes it a crime to publish certain photographs or drawings of military installations. Section 798, 6 also in precise language, proscribes knowing and willful publication of any classified information concerning the cryptographic systems [403 U.S. 713, 736] or communication intelligence activities of the United States as well as any information obtained from communication intelligence operations. 7 If any of the material here at issue is of this nature, the newspapers are presumably now on full notice of the position of the United States and must face the consequences if they [403 U.S. 713, 737] publish. I would have no difficulty in sustaining convictions under these sections on facts that would not justify the intervention of equity and the imposition of a prior restraint.

The same would be true under those sections of the Criminal Code casting a wider net to protect the national defense. Section 793 (e) 8 makes it a criminal act for any unauthorized possessor of a document "relating to the national defense" either (1) willfully to communicate or cause to be communicated that document to any person not entitled to receive it or (2) willfully to retain the document and fail to deliver it to an officer of the United States entitled to receive it. The subsection was added in 1950 because pre-existing law provided no [403 U.S. 713, 738] penalty for the unauthorized possessor unless demand for the documents was made. 9 "The dangers surrounding the unauthorized possession of such items are self-evident, [403 U.S. 713, 739] and it is deemed advisable to require their surrender in such a case, regardless of demand, especially since their unauthorized possession may be unknown to the authorities who would otherwise make the demand." S. Rep. No. 2369, pt. 1, 81st Cong., 2d Sess., 9 (1950). Of course, in the cases before us, the unpublished documents have been demanded by the United States and their import has been made known at least to counsel for the newspapers involved. In Gorin v. United States, 312 U.S. 19, 28 (1941), the words "national defense" as used in a predecessor of 793 were held by a unanimous Court to have "a well understood connotation" - a "generic concept of broad connotations, referring to the military and naval establishments and the related activities of national preparedness" - and to be "sufficiently definite to apprise the public of prohibited activities" [403 U.S. 713, 740] and to be consonant with due process. 312 U.S., at 28 . Also, as construed by the Court in Gorin, information "connected with the national defense" is obviously not limited to that threatening "grave and irreparable" injury to the United States. 10

It is thus clear that Congress has addressed itself to the problems of protecting the security of the country and the national defense from unauthorized disclosure of potentially damaging information. Cf. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 585 -586 (1952); see also id., at 593-628 (Frankfurter, J., concurring). It has not, however, authorized the injunctive remedy against threatened publication. It has apparently been satisfied to rely on criminal sanctions and their deterrent effect on the responsible as well as the irresponsible press. I am not, of course, saying that either of these newspapers has yet committed a crime or that either would commit a crime if it published all the material now in its possession. That matter must await resolution in the context of a criminal proceeding if one is instituted by the United States. In that event, the issue of guilt or innocence would be determined by procedures and standards quite different from those that have purported to govern these injunctive proceedings.

NEW YORK TIMES CO. v. UNITED STATES, 403 U.S. 713 (1971)
"The Pentagon Papers Case"

I assume that the NYT has a fresh legal opinion on hand, that concludes that the publication as fact that a certain sureveillance activity is going on does -not- constitute publication of a procedure or method used in the interception of communications. That is, that publication does not run afoul of 18 USC 798(a)(3).

The existence of "keyword" surveillance of international communications is not classified information. See cites to Jabara v. Webster, 691 F.2d 272 (6th Cir. 1982); Halkin v. Helms, 598 F.2d 1 (D.C.Cir.1978); and Hearings Before the Select Comm. to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities of the U. S. Senate, 94th Cong. at

There is no dispute that NYT published, nor is there dispute about the contents of the publication. If said publication is a violation of 18 USC 793(a)(3), then indictment can occur independently of any investigation into how the NYT obtained the information.

906 posted on 12/30/2005 2:19:12 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tiredoflaundry

My husband calls it "The Bunker." LOL!

907 posted on 12/30/2005 2:20:00 PM PST by Miss Marple (Lord, please look after Mozart Lover's son and keep him strong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 905 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple


908 posted on 12/30/2005 2:21:36 PM PST by tiredoflaundry (I'll admit it , I'm a Snow Flake !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 907 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple

My wife has some other terms for it. LOL

909 posted on 12/30/2005 2:21:48 PM PST by DoughtyOne (MSM: Public support for war waining. 403/3 House vote against pullout vaporizes another lie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 907 | View Replies]

To: defenderSD
I disagree with your take on this, because this is not a winning issue for most Dem politicians.

I like your version much better, and I'm not one of the Freepers who is constantly pessimistic.

There's just something about this issue that really grabs me, and I almost consider it a personal thing, and I'm not sure I can explain why.

910 posted on 12/30/2005 2:22:06 PM PST by lawnguy (Give me some of your tots!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 893 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog

Re#894 Great observations. My hope of hopes is that Goss and the FBI set up some sting ops as well. Time will tell...

911 posted on 12/30/2005 2:24:45 PM PST by eureka! (Hey Lefties and 'Rats: Over 3 more years of W. Hehehehe....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 894 | View Replies]

To: Charlespg

Well, since you mentioned it...

... :)

912 posted on 12/30/2005 2:24:55 PM PST by Democracy In Iraq (When a soldier dies, a protester gloats, a family cries, an Iraqi votes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 899 | View Replies]

To: lawnguy
I am beginning to wonder if the silence from the White House this summer and fall was to lull the traitors into thinking that the President wasn't engaged. Meanwhile, the DOJ was monitoring phone and e-mail contacts.

It makes me quite happily smug to think that this is so.

913 posted on 12/30/2005 2:25:47 PM PST by Miss Marple (Lord, please look after Mozart Lover's son and keep him strong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 910 | View Replies]

To: Peach

Thanks Peach. I had seen the info somewhere and was too lazy to search. You're a Peach.


914 posted on 12/30/2005 2:27:40 PM PST by Chuck54 ( "Happy people need no particular cause to be happy.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 902 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

This may have already been posted but here is the NYT article about the investigation, from about 1 hour ago.

915 posted on 12/30/2005 2:32:54 PM PST by TheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 906 | View Replies]

To: Arizona Carolyn
I can't imagine anyone giving Dowdy any secret information.

Maybe secret information about a purse or a "tag sale."

916 posted on 12/30/2005 2:33:40 PM PST by Mad_as_heck (The MSM - America's (domestic) public enemy #1.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 357 | View Replies]

Comment #917 Removed by Moderator

To: TheLion
I see the NYT is pushing the whisle-blower line.

Ain't going to work.

918 posted on 12/30/2005 2:36:59 PM PST by mware (everyone that doesn't like what America and President Bush has done for Iraq can all go to HELL.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 915 | View Replies]

To: Getsmart64
and who or whom should have Congress declared war on??? don't sound like you're playing Devils Advocate....

DUH Dude ....It's pretty clear ... In his constitutionally required State of the Union Address, the President IDed the "Axis of Evil". Two of the three still stand .... US History is pretty clears about who decides what is an unreasonable search ... the Courts ... and no I'm not taking my ball home

919 posted on 12/30/2005 2:37:01 PM PST by Yasotay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 901 | View Replies]

Comment #920 Removed by Moderator

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 881-900901-920921-940 ... 1,221-1,225 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson