Ann Coulter: MEDIA MOGUL CHARGED WITH FIRST-DEGREE MURDOCH ("rogue employee")

AnnCoulter.Com ^ | July 20, 2011 | Ann Coulter

[Syncro]

MEDIA MOGUL CHARGED WITH FIRST-DEGREE MURDOCH

July 20, 2011

In December 1996, a Florida couple, John and Alice Martin, who sounded suspiciously like union goons, claimed to have inadvertently tapped into a phone conversation between then House Speaker Newt Gingrich and House Republican leadership.

According to these Democratic and union activists, they were just driving around with a police scanner in their car, picked up a random phone conversation and said to themselves, "Wait a minute! I could swear that's Dick Armey's voice!"

Luckily, they also had a tape recorder and cassette in their car, so they proceeded to illegally record the intercepted conversation and then turned the tape over to Democratic Rep. James McDermott -- the top Democrat on the Ethics Committee that was at that very moment investigating Gingrich.

Although they swore they had no idea that what they were doing was a crime, in their cover letter to McDermott, they requested immunity -- just as you probably do whenever you write somebody a letter. (They later pleaded guilty to a crime under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.)

McDermott promptly turned the tape over to The New York Times and other newspapers. The Times' headline on the story, "Gingrich Is Heard Urging Tactics in Ethics Case," might as well have been titled: "Tape Shows Gingrich Conspiring to Act Within the Law."

John Boehner, one of the participants in the Gingrich call, sued McDermott for violating his First Amendment rights, which resulted in a court ordering McDermott to pay Boehner more than $1 million.

And yet, more than a dozen news organizations, many of the same ones demanding the death penalty for Rupert Murdoch right now, filed amicus briefs defending McDermott's distribution of the pirated tape.

Needless to say, the Times ferociously defended its own use of the hacked phone call, arguing that it would be unconstitutional to punish the publication of information, no matter how obtained.

Read More »

[Syncro]

And yet, more than a dozen news organizations, many of the same ones demanding the death penalty for Rupert Murdoch right now, filed amicus briefs defending McDermott's distribution of the pirated tape.

Needless to say, the Times ferociously defended its own use of the hacked phone call, arguing that it would be unconstitutional to punish the publication of information, no matter how obtained.

Read the rest at AnnCoulter.com

[Syncro]

Last paragraph:

But now the rest of us have to watch while the mainstream media pursue their personal grudge against Rupert Murdoch for allowing Fox News to exist. They demand his head for owning a British tabloid where some reporters used illegally obtained information, something The New York Times does defiantly on a regular basis.

COPYRIGHT 2011 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK
1130 Walnut, Kansas City, MO 64106

[CaptainK]

I’m so proud of myself that I thought about the Gingrich hacking along with Ann.

[penelopesire]

Ah...I had forgotten about that! Good thing Ann Coulter has a steel trap mind to remind us....lol. Stupid hypocrites.... the lot of them!

[Karliner]

And the beat goes on, Sonny and Smear

[Realman30]

Historical columns like this is why we adore Ann Coulter.

[a fool in paradise]

I’ve been saying this for several days in my tagline. Hi, Ann!

[Major Matt Mason]

I don't believe that that couple actually recorded that conversation. My thinking is that some government resources were used to do this (it was during the Clinton years, after all). The Dems simply found some party dupes willing to take the fall.

[RonDog]

Here is an "interesting" screen capture of Ann, from her recent appearance on Bill Maher's show:

[CaptainK]

I agree with your assessment

[DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis]

DONATE

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing $10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your buck!
Please Sign up Now!

[slowhandluke]

So if we believe in right and wrong. Then we should demand an investigation, allow Murdoch to clear his and his company’s name or to punish them for breaking the law.

Part of right & wrong in this country is equal protection under the law. If the NYTimes is protected, so is Murdoch.

[MarkL]

Given "Media Matters" declaration on their website that they had declared war on Fox News and wanted to bring down Murdoch, does anybody really think that Soros and his evil minions aren't behind this?

Mark

[MHGinTN]

Enjoy your stay, n00b.

[Twinkie]

Yes. Like Lenny & Squiggy the leftists are BUSY, BUSY, BUSY; BUT Lenny & Squiggy weren’t MALICIOUS BUSY like the leftists are. I’m thankful that Annie recalled these things about the HYPOCRITES.

Let me see; what COULD they really want as an end game to this “scandal”? Is it to get rid of Mr. Murdoch because he tried a bit to be “fair and balanced”? Is it to give total government (Obama) control to the news the American people are “allowed” to hear. (Shudder . .) They’re certainly giving Mr. Murdoch a good old fashioned WHUPPING, aren’t they? After all, he hadn’t been REALLY, REALLY mean to Obama, had he? You see, telling the truth about Obama is VERBOTEN. Maybe Mr. Murdoch had figured that out and thought it not fair and balanced.

These people do not fathom the willingness of the Communists to hang “journalists” first when they succeed in helping the Communists gain totalitarian control.

[Forgiven_Sinner]

Thanks for the original pic! Here's one I haven't seen before:

[fkabuckeyesrule]

Excellent column by Miss Coulter.