Lichtblau of 'NYT' Explains Attempt to Halt His Bank Records Scoop

Editior and Publisher ^ | 06/ 23/2006 | Joe Strupp

[airedale]

Eric Lichtblau, one of two New York Times' reporters who broke today's story of a secret government monitoring of private banking records - which the Bush Administration sought to block - said the White House arguments to halt the story were not as strong as those that had kept a previous report on secret wiretapping out of the paper for a year.

"They were similar in terms of the objections raised not to publish," Lichtblau told E&P today. "That the bad guys knew we were listening to them, but they don't know exactly how." But he said the objections "did not rise to as high a level as last time."

"I don't think we could reasonably be accused of moving too quickly," he said. "We waited so long that the competition caught up to us." This comment referred to the Los Angeles Times' posting a story about the bank records program on its Web site last night. That paper said it had also been asked by the administration to hold off.

SNIP

Lichtblau added that the reaction to the wiretapping story, which included both criticism and support for the paper, made it easier to go with this story. He noted that there had been no proof that the previous story had endangered national security.

"Our belief that it did not have any tangible impact has been borne out," he said. "That was in the back of our minds this time." He also said that "the intense public interest in the NSA story showed that this is obviously a matter of intense public interest. We see similar interest in both cases, the pendulum, as far as public disclosure versus national security, has swung in the direction of public disclosure....

[airedale]

They want dead bodies and smoking ruins before they think secrets should be kept. If as a result of their disclosures people die I think these two reporters and Keller, etal should have to individually meet with each of the families and beg their forgives as well as make financial restitution. Then sit in jail for the next 25 years or so.

[Drango]

The fourth estate is a fifth column.

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

The NY Slimes are just fighting the war against the war on terror.

Truth stolen from Scrappleface and Mr. Ott.

[Berlin_Freeper]

"They were similar in terms of the objections raised not to publish," Lichtblau told E&P today. "That the bad guys knew we were listening to them, but they don't know exactly how." But he said the objections "did not rise to as high a level as last time."


It's insane that we have idiot reporters strutting about as if they are the experts over the Bush administration.

And when America gets hit again do you think they will be sorry for aiding the Terrorists, or will they be blaming President Bush with massive hysterics?

[sachem longrifle]

Since when have we had to get permission from the NYT to conduct war?

[Darkwolf377]

"I don't think we could reasonably be accused of moving too quickly," he said. "We waited so long that the competition caught up to us." This comment referred to the Los Angeles Times' posting a story about the bank records program on its Web site last night. That paper said it had also been asked by the administration to hold off.

Al Qaeda intelligence collecting sure us a competitive field.

[AmeriBrit]

"We waited so long that the competition caught up to us"

---

They could care less about compromising National Security. Their only concern is getting the story out before the competition, regardless of the huge problems it could result in and lives that could be put in danger when we lost a way of tracking the terrorists.

[Darkwolf377]

us = is

[Darkwolf377]

But he said the objections "did not rise to as high a level as last time."

And you basically ignored them last time, so why stop now? It's only the war against terrorists, after all.

Do these people just figure that Al Qaeda is goign to hit a Republican-only target next time? You know, something in "flyover" country, which they don't give a damn about?

If it was MoDowd instead of Barbara Olson who died on 9-11, I think we would see a very different press these days.

[tobyhill]

Lichtblau, save your sorry ass excuse for the Grand Jury and your cell mate when he's got you in the hands to ankle position.

[bootless]

There's SO much wrong with this. But two things stand out: their (dwindling) readership interest dictates everything. There is little to none consideration of what the right thing to do is.

Hell, I'd be interested in reading all sorts of stuff, in my more bored moments. But that doesn't mean that should be published! They're treating their (dwindling) readership like the worn-down parent of a spoiled toddler: it whines for something, so they provide it.

Shameful.

[managusta]

"We waited so long that the competition caught up to us." This comment referred to the Los Angeles Times' posting a story about the bank records program on its Web site last night.

This nugget reveals that whoever "leaked" the story had an agenda and had contacted at least two reporters at two newspapers.

This leak has Mary McCarthy's fingerprints all over it.

[tobyhill]

I'm not sure why Gonzales is waiting to get this in front of a Grand Jury and then call these reporters to disclose their source(s) or go to jail?

[wildcatf4f3]

i sure hope no one decides to take the law into their own hands and hangs this man from a lamppost

[airedale]

My guess is a Democrat member of Congress which was my guess in the NSA leak

[ashamedtobefromparkridge]

Do you suppose Eric Lichbinladensyouknowwhat will invite this writer for a threesome?

I heard people were high fiving at the Ny Times on 9/11. Never believed it until today.

[OKIEDOC]

This guy should be stood up, tied to a post and given the option of a blind fold before he hears for the last time the click of triggers being pulled.

[donmeaker]

You said:
"If it was MoDowd instead of Barbara Olson who died on 9-11, I think we would see a very different press these days."




No, these liberals abort their own children, what makes you think that they would be mad if someone removed a bit of the competition?

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

So, we've got Al Qaida in Iraq and now it's confirmed that we have Al Qaida in New York Times. Al Qaida in Washington Post is also coming on strong.