BILL KELLER BELONGS IN JAIL FOR TREASON

To the Point Newsletter ^ | 6.28.06 | Jack Kelly

[Diogenesis]

Best laugh of the night, except it is demeaning to diarrhea
to compare it in the same sentence with Sulzberger, Keller, Lichtblau, Risen or
Anthony Lewis (whose wife is Chief Judge Margaret Marshall(South Africa,Democrat,NewYorkTimes,SJC-Massachusetts)).

[Mo1]

The reason why President Roosevelt dropped his prosecution of Col. McCormick doesn't apply. Al Qaeda can learn nothing more from the publicity of a trial than it knows already

Think again .. all kinds of stuff can come out in a trial

And the NYT knows it too ..

[upchuck]

Here's a link to the "Escapes" article you mentioned.

And here's a link to another article about it.

Disgusting!

[Waco]

Notice how RAT politicians are more concerned about 2nd hand smoke than they are about National security, and American lives?

[fish hawk]

Get real! there will be absolutely NOTHIHNG done about this. It takes balls and the known Republicans in power, including the President, just do not have the balls. If I'm wrong I will eat these words but I doubt that will happen.

[ParityErr]

bump for later

[Fairview]

Doug, the questions and your answers are the funniest part of this very funny "auction." Good on ya.

[doug from upland]

Thanks. No one has even commented yet on the funniest or most ironic thing of all.

[Wolfhound777]

Hell, he needs to swing.

Indeed! So do his sources.

[restornu]

The should be a petition across the US to try this man or anyone ELSE with actions like him for TREASON!

[balch3]

Because the President says it is. That's good enough.

[nopardons]

BTTT

[restornu]

Which said so president Clinton?

[AGreatPer]

I don't see a downside either.

You prosicute and please let the Left Wing try and support it. Every one of them that is against it would be put on the side of the enemy.

[GOPJ]

... journalists don't have much popularity to lose. In a Harris survey in March, only 14 percent of respondents expressed a "great deal" of confidence in the press, while 34 percent had "hardly any."

Man stands up in a bar: "All journalists are a-holes."

Another guy stands up: "I resent that remark.

"Man: "Why, are you a journalist?"

Other guy: "No, I'm an a-hole." -

Borrowed from LS...

[World'sGoneInsane]

Send the Marines...I like that!

[ThePythonicCow]

The financial information in the SWIFT database is not classified, though it is private. That we are using it to track terrorist funding is (was) classified.

[GOPJ]

..would love to see The Prez push for the Times to be prosecuted but, it could be disastrous. He would always be remembered as the President who tried to destroy the First Amendment.

Look, President Bush wouldn't be destroying the First Amendment. No one wants Bush to request "prior restraint". Prior restraint is where the government has a censor in the newsroom to approve copy.

If there was prior restraint during the Clinton years, you never would have heard of the blue dress. It's the opposite of a free press.

Don't want to stop the New York Times from publishing anything. Get that? Nothing. They can print anything -- anything at all. But, and this is a big exception - they must be responsible for their choices.

For instance, lets say Keller wants to steal copywrited material - just wants to print it and doesn't want to pay for it. How do I feel about that? Let him print it. No prior restraint. Period. He has total freedom to print. Now, how do I feel about Keller getting sued for stealing someone's copywrited material? Great. Keller broke the law, and he has to pay the price. It doesn't take away any of his First Amendment rights. None.

It's the same if Keller rips off a freelancer - he can print the material, but a court will make him pay.

He has the right to print National Security classified information. He just doesn't have the right to do it without consequences.

Do you think Keller could blackmail advertisers by printing personal information about them in his paper? Well, he could print personal information about private citizens if he wanted to (I support his right) but the citizens would sue his pants off... and win.

And this situation? He should be arrested and tried in a court of law. We'll find out where the line is. Some editor in the future will know the price he might pay - but he'll still be able to print if his conscience requires. It could be done, but not easily. That's our way. Breaking the law has consequences, as it should.

It's crazy sending people to a newsroom to beg during time of war. Begging an editor not to hurt the war effort is obscene. And it's wrong. Everyone knows it. That's why there's so much anger about this situation. Does this make sense to you?

[Cobra64]

W is incredibly weak in standing up to the liberals. He almost asks for an ass kicking by the dems.

[rawcatslyentist]

The data and database are not classified. The FACT we were USEING the database WAS!

Kinda like the letters in the Jap code book weren't classified, but the FACT we knew the code WAS!

Freedumb of the press is no excuse for giving away national security secrets or procedures, classified or not!