Posted on 06/28/2006 11:45:14 PM PDT by RWR8189
WASHINGTON, June 28 — Ever since President Bush vowed days after the Sept. 11 attacks to "follow the money as a trail to the terrorists," the government has made no secret of its efforts to hunt down the bank accounts of Al Qaeda and its allies.
But that fact has not muted the fury of Mr. Bush, his top aides and many members of Congress at the decision last week by The New York Times and other newspapers to disclose a centerpiece of that hunt: the Treasury Department's search for clues in a vast database of financial transactions maintained by a Belgium-based banking consortium known as Swift.
Speaking at a fund-raising event in St. Louis for Senator Jim Talent, Mr. Bush made the news reports his central theme.
"This program has been a vital tool in the war on terror," Mr. Bush said. "Last week the details of this program appeared in the press."
Mr. Bush received a prolonged, standing ovation from the Republican crowd when he added, "There can be no excuse for anyone entrusted with vital intelligence to leak it — and no excuse for any newspaper to print it."
On Thursday, the House is expected to take up a Republican resolution supporting the tracking of financial transactions and condemning the publication of the existence of the program and details of how it works. The resolution says Congress "expects the cooperation of all news media organizations in protecting the lives of Americans and the capability of the government to identify, disrupt and capture terrorists by not disclosing classified intelligence programs." Democrats are proposing a variant that expresses support for the treasury program but omits the language about the news media.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
..."American" newspapers giving Al Qaeda intel!
They think it's funny.
Then let us see your Justice Dept. prosecute both the leakers and those who conspired to print it Mr. President.
L
Kick their butts. Go to Michelle Malkin--get a list of the paper's major advertisers and let them know that you want them to cut their advertising in the NYT.
bttt
Why we're sitting on our hands is beyond me. And why anyone would buy the NYT is equally baffling.
If he's so damn furious why isn't he prosecuting the Times?
we'll see who has the last laugh
Please don't turn this gross assault on the American public into another Bush bashing episode.
You people cannot believe that you can do anything. You think the only one who has to do something is Pres. Bush.
The only reason anything will get done is if there is a massive outcry from the public - same as the immigration matter.
Otherwise, he can't possibly win and the furor will be used against him and us in the elections.
So, get busy and help and quit complaining about the one man fighting for us.
I am not about to go log into the New York Terrorist News to read this article.
That is what they want.
How is asking the President to do his JOB bashing him? I can't compel the AG to do his job, and the President can! It's not bashing anyone to ask him why he refuses to prosecute treason--it's making it clear he should be doing his job and defending the Constitution from enemies foreign AND domestic, instead of letting the Times get away with this!
It's only a 'gross assault on the American public' if the AG does nothing. Then he's reformed American law, having changed it from banning release of classified info, to turning the other cheek while the Times helps Al Qaeda slap Americans silly.
Why would there be any 'going through records of millions of citizens' here? The issue is not those records, but who it was that leaked the info that we were GOING through those records, quite legally! What whistleblowing has to do with this is beyond me, as there is no question that the whole program was completely legal. What explanation can you give for viewing this through that perspective? And why would even a claim that this was somehow 'whistleblowing' prevent the President from prosecuting the treasonous Times for 'whistleblowing' up a classified but productive method of preventing terrorism?
By the way, you note there are three main reasons for not prosecuting a leak, then you list four. Are there four or did you just make one up on the fly?
You know what I'm talking about. Everytime the dems/media commit some travesty, we have about 10 posts and somehow suddenly everyone is complaining because the president has not done something. Then the whole complaint becomes a battle over what Bush does.
The Times is at fault here and we have to take action. The president is upset and will take action if his team deems it is worth the effort. You know this as well as I do.
A president has to pick his battles and has to weigh the pros/cons and has to come out a winner. So, of course, some battles are bystepped. No use getting mad over it - those are facts.
However, when you trust your leaders you know that they feel as you do and will do all they can - but only if it will be successful and will not damage our ultimate goal of keeping the government in the hands of the GOP.
It helps if he has us creating the environment that shows the public is outraged and calling for change. Nothing gets done if the only change is more complaints about the president.
Translation: It's Bush's fault
"The Times is at fault here and we have to take action. The president is upset and will take action if his team deems it is worth the effort. You know this as well as I do."
Excuse me, but what more 'action' can we take? Not buy Times' copies? Send nasty letters? Boycott the Times' advertisers? Arrange protests in front of the Times? All those things are being done. The environment calling for change is there. It is up to the 'furious' president and his op-ed writing AG to do something about the Times and treason. It is not up to us to prosecute them, since we don't run the government's executive branch. That is the President's job. The Times' quisling reporters and publishers should be charged with treason. If the President doesn't want the complaints to be about him, he should do that, because contrary to your attestations otherwise, it is starting to seem like nothing but tough talk, whether the complaints are 'about the President' or not.
"A president has to pick his battles and has to weigh the pros/cons and has to come out a winner."
He has to uphold the Constitution, and protect it against enemies foreign and domestic, as job one. Allowing treason to persist is not doing his job. If not doing his job makes him a 'winner,' perhaps what you characterize as 'winning' is higher priority for you than it is for me.
It sounds like you're making the NYTimes case for them here. And as far as your 3 reasons for not prosecuting a leak, we do not know that the leaker is not being sought right now--whoever gave the information to the Times may well be prosecuted.
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.