Skip to comments.Has the New York Times Violated the Espionage Act?
Posted on 02/02/2006 3:22:56 PM PST by Anti-Bubba182
Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts. Thus ran the headline of a front-page news story whose repercussions have roiled American politics ever since its publication last December 16 in the New York Times. The article, signed by James Risen and Eric Lichtblau, was adapted from Risens then-forthcoming book, State of War.1 In it, the Times reported that shortly after September 11, 2001, President Bush had authorized the National Security Agency [NSA] to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States . . . without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying.
Not since Richard Nixons misuse of the CIA and the IRS in Watergate, perhaps not since Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus, have civil libertarians so hugely cried alarm at a supposed law-breaking action of government. People for the American Way, the Left-liberal interest group, has called the NSA wiretapping arguably the most egregious undermining of our civil liberties in a generation. The American Civil Liberties Union has blasted Bush for violat[ing] our Constitution and our fundamental freedoms........."
(Excerpt) Read more at commentarymagazine.com ...
A long piece with a lot of background on the history of the Espionage Act and how it applies to the NY Times.
I think the New York Times owner and the editorial staff should be in prison for divulging national defense secrets in the middle of a war.
Lets hope so. Based on news reports, their publishing the story has hurt the country.
Course, Sandy Burger stole TS documents and only got a slap on the wrist
How bad can hurting your country cost these days?
Not alot according to the government.
I do know that if promoting socialism was a crime (and it SHOULD be, given its record of destroying wealth, societies, and lives), the NYT would have been banned a long time ago.
"..Although it has gone almost entirely undiscussed, the issue of leaking vital government secrets in wartime remains of exceptional relevance to this entire controversy, as it does to our very security. There is a rich history here that can help shed light on the present situation.
One of the most pertinent precedents is a newspaper story that appeared in the Chicago Tribune on June 7, 1942, immediately following the American victory in the battle of Midway in World War II. In a front-page article under the headline, Navy Had Word of Jap Plan to Strike at Sea, the Tribune disclosed that the strength and disposition of the Japanese fleet had been well known in American naval circles several days before the battle began. The paper then presented an exact description of the imperial armada, complete with the names of specific Japanese ships and the larger assemblies of vessels to which they were deployed. All of this information was attributed to reliable sources in . . . naval intelligence.
The inescapable conclusion to be drawn from the Tribune article was that the United States had broken Japanese naval codes and was reading the enemys encrypted communications. Indeed, cracking JN-25, as it was called, had been one of the major Allied triumphs of the Pacific war, laying bare the operational plans of the Japanese Navy almost in real time and bearing fruit not only at Midwaya great turning point of the warbut in immediately previous confrontations, and promising significant advantages in the terrible struggles that still lay ahead. Its exposure, a devastating breach of security, thus threatened to extend the war indefinitely and cost the lives of thousands of American servicemen.
An uproar ensued in those quarters in Washington that were privy to the highly sensitive nature of the leak. The War Department and the Justice Department raised the question of criminal proceedings against the Tribune under the Espionage Act of 1917. By August 1942, prosecutors brought the paper before a federal grand jury. But fearful of alerting the Japanese, and running up against an early version of what would come to be known as graymail, the government balked at providing jurors with yet more highly secret information that would be necessary to demonstrate the damage done.
Thus, in the end, the Tribune managed to escape criminal prosecution. For their part, the Japanese either never got wind of the story circulating in the United States or were so convinced that their naval codes were unbreakable that they dismissed its significance. In any case, they left them unaltered, and their naval communications continued to be read by U.S. and British cryptographers until the end of the war.4.."
The part I bolded shows that their was little, if any, damage in the Tribune case. I don't think you can say that in the case of the Times, but I doubt if anything is done. The NY Times thinks itself bigger than the law and sadly has managed to make that stick. Their is neither the support or will in Washington to do more than complain.
And when enemies of this country begin quoting dem talking points, you need to seriously think about charging the dems with it as well!
bump for later read
The administration won't do a lot more than complain in any case.
Is the Pope Catholic?
I'm no fan of the NY Times, but it's hard to make the case that the newspaper "divulged national defense secrets" when all they really did was reveal information that had been revealed in open public records -- including at least one media report recently prepared by the U.S. Department of Justice -- on a number of occasions over the years.
Hmmm....very interesting....got any links?
Since the Nam mess and post Nam mess, the rats in DC and in the MSM have viewed what we see as treason as being good Americans.
Hopefully, this is the beginning of the end of this bs.
Thanks for the link. I hope they do have a Grand Jury, but I doubt if they do.
What in the world did you say in post 1?
Inquiring minds want to know...
Same as in 2, but with better spelling.
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.