Skip to comments.
Leak in Domestic Spy Program Investigated [“ ...could reach high into the White House”]
Los Angeles Times ^
| December 31, 2005
| By Josh Meyer
Posted on 12/31/2005 5:05:34 AM PST by johnny7
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 221-224 next last
To: bert
I was convinced the leaker was in the Rockefeller office until yesterday when on a similar thread a eureka light turned on..... there was a federal judge involved in the process and he resigned. U.S. District Judge Robertson only resigned from the FISA court, which was basically an extra duty to him. He's a die hard anti-Bush type. I doubt that it's him because, assuming we can believe what we read in the papers, only the FISA court Presiding Judge Kollar-Kotelly was briefed on the program. It sounds more like he was bent out of shape for being left out of the loop, and quit in protest. It's a symbolic move, to slap the Administration. It's not like resigning an extra duty (as opposed to your day job) has any other effect.
101
posted on
12/31/2005 6:46:59 AM PST
by
Steel Wolf
(If the Founders had wanted the President to be spying on our phone calls, they would have said so!)
To: johnny7
A good start would be to jail the two NYT reporters if they don't give up their sources.
102
posted on
12/31/2005 6:47:59 AM PST
by
Pusterfuss
(Proud member: Minnesotans for Global Warming)
To: Lurker
Find 'em. Indict 'em. Prosecute 'em. Convict 'em. Jail 'em Hang 'em.
103
posted on
12/31/2005 6:49:50 AM PST
by
grobdriver
(Let the embeds check the bodies!)
To: Steel Wolf
They genuinely feel that he is a greater threat to their interests then Al Qaida, Wow. You just nailed it. Something just crystalized for me. The American Left are POLITICAL ACTIVISTS first and American Citizens some where way down the list of their priorities.
104
posted on
12/31/2005 6:50:02 AM PST
by
MNJohnnie
(We do not create terrorism by fighting the terrorists. We invite terrorism by ignoring them.--GWBush)
To: Steel Wolf; Pukin Dog
Politically, I think you're right. I'm more worried about the legal aspect, which I imagine the Republicans will fumble with clockwork precision.I'm less concerned with their fumbling that I am that "certain" Republicans, e.g. Specter, McCain or Lindsey Graham, will actually attempt to sabotage the legal process.
Comment #106 Removed by Moderator
To: MNJohnnie
Oh really, then why did the original NY DNC Times story specifically refer to Sen Jay Rockefeller's objections to the program despite the fact that Rockerfeller's "letter" specifically bemoans the fact HE CANNOT TALK ABOUT IT to anyone? There are two possibilities.
1. They just *knew* that Senator Rockefeller would object to this program, and figured they'd just work him into the story without his prior consent.
2. Uh... Hmm. I dunno. How else could they have gotten that information?
107
posted on
12/31/2005 6:52:28 AM PST
by
Steel Wolf
(If the Founders had wanted the President to be spying on our phone calls, they would have said so!)
To: Pukin Dog
"I'm being told that they already know which persons are responsible, and are just tidying up the investigation before indictments are announced. Make no mistake, the Left is in a full scale panic over this."That sounds excellent, Pukin'. Can you elaborate?
108
posted on
12/31/2005 6:52:56 AM PST
by
Reo
To: Cboldt
Thanks for the information, it's quite valuable. Remember that the NYT based their actions on advice from council, but that doesn't mean the advice was correct. They were specifically told by the POTUS that the information was damaging to national security and they were "asked" not to use it.
I would say off hand that the Commander in Chief would be better versed on the damage it would do than the NYT lawyers. However, in a closed court, the full impact would be revealed and the NYT would be unable to claim they didn't realize what they were doing. They were told.
109
posted on
12/31/2005 6:53:51 AM PST
by
McGavin999
(If Intelligence Agencies can't find leakers, how can we expect them to find terrorists?)
To: Reo
I can, but I wont. Lots of people read Free Republic, and not all of them are our friends.
110
posted on
12/31/2005 6:58:00 AM PST
by
Pukin Dog
(Sans Reproache)
To: McGavin999
If the investigation did not start as soon as the WH had a inkling this was going on that would have been the highest in malfeasance on the WH's and DOJ's part. No doubt there has been some sort of sting operation going on over the last several months. I cannot wait.
111
posted on
12/31/2005 6:58:47 AM PST
by
babaloo
To: McGavin999
Nice tagline!
"Leak" sounds like such a non-threatening word, so is used in a sympathetic way by the Leftmedia.
I am going to try to give the word some of the powerful image of the "leaks" that flooded New Orleans. IOW, causative of devastation, and extremely difficult or impossible to stop or correct.
- when I call my senators and congressman's offices
- when I call talkshows
- when I even write the Sunpaper (hopeless waste of effort)
112
posted on
12/31/2005 7:05:02 AM PST
by
maica
(We are fighting the War for the Free World and the media is not on our side.)
To: MNJohnnie
Let em hope. Still, MONTHS later, and no Rove indictment. Libby will be acquitted, and these idiots will have put a dozen reporters in jail.
113
posted on
12/31/2005 7:06:09 AM PST
by
LS
To: Pukin Dog
"I can, but I wont. Lots of people read Free Republic, and not all of them are our friends."Works for me. I'll be watching eagerly.
114
posted on
12/31/2005 7:06:56 AM PST
by
Reo
To: Steel Wolf
Oh really, then why did the original NY DNC Times story specifically refer to Sen Jay Rockefeller's objections to the program despite the fact that Rockerfeller's "letter" specifically bemoans the fact HE CANNOT TALK ABOUT IT to anyone? There are two possibilities.
1. They just *knew* that Senator Rockefeller would object to this program, and figured they'd just work him into the story without his prior consent.
2. Uh... Hmm. I dunno. How else could they have gotten that information
If Rockie is the leaker.
115
posted on
12/31/2005 7:07:40 AM PST
by
MNJohnnie
(We do not create terrorism by fighting the terrorists. We invite terrorism by ignoring them.--GWBush)
To: tarheelswamprat
I'm less concerned with their fumbling that I am that "certain" Republicans, e.g. Specter, McCain or Lindsey Graham, will actually attempt to sabotage the legal process. Specter's still goin for the gold in the RINO Olympics, after all these years. As far as McCain, I was unaware he's actually a Republican. I always thought that was just some kind of running joke. Lindsey Graham is a wannabe McCain-like maverick who needs to keep her fool mouth shut.
116
posted on
12/31/2005 7:09:32 AM PST
by
Steel Wolf
(If the Founders had wanted the President to be spying on our phone calls, they would have said so!)
Another thing we are going to hear a lot of is "The people's right to know". There is NO such right. This is just Journalist Propaganda spewed forth to rationalize their arrogant self interjection into every aspect of political life. Citizens elect people to office. We delegate to them certain powers to act on our behalf. One of the things we assign them is the duty to PROTECT THE NATIONAL SECURITY. We do NOT elect "Journalists" to anything. Their arrogant claim to be "the people's watchdog" is nothing more then arrogant self promotion on the part of the Journalists.
117
posted on
12/31/2005 7:11:50 AM PST
by
MNJohnnie
(We do not create terrorism by fighting the terrorists. We invite terrorism by ignoring them.--GWBush)
To: MNJohnnie
If Rockie is the leaker. If it wasn't Rockefeller, it was someone very close to him that was briefed on the program, present where Rockefeller was able to air these concerns, and inclined to leak the information.
That's a list of people so short you don't even need to take your shoes off to count them.
118
posted on
12/31/2005 7:12:39 AM PST
by
Steel Wolf
(If the Founders had wanted the President to be spying on our phone calls, they would have said so!)
To: maica
I think "Catastrophic leak" has a nice ring to it, don't you?
119
posted on
12/31/2005 7:13:08 AM PST
by
McGavin999
(If Intelligence Agencies can't find leakers, how can we expect them to find terrorists?)
To: atlaw
NO one is off limits in the investigation. However, some folks have more to gain than others in leaking this top secret information. This leak does not advantage the goals of the White House but it does further the cause of the anti-war, anti-Bush side. That side includes some Republicans, but statistically, it is more likely that Democrats are behind the leak.
120
posted on
12/31/2005 7:16:51 AM PST
by
Galveston Grl
(Getting angry and abandoning power to the Democrats is not a choice.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 221-224 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson