Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 12/04/2004 3:03:47 PM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Translation from liberal speak.

"How DARE they hold us accountable. Don't they know we are above the law because..... well because WE say we are."

Bye Bye Dinosaur media, you ARE the weakest link.
2 posted on 12/04/2004 3:06:45 PM PST by MNJohnnie (Next up, US Senate. 60 in 06!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Why is this trash still an issue???
  1. Plame was not a covert operative.
  2. Her husband's speaking engagements and website pictured the family with a caption reading that she was employed by the CIA
  3. Mr. Novak only said he got info from an "adminstration" official--never specified from whom or what agency/administration.

3 posted on 12/04/2004 3:10:43 PM PST by yevgenie (8 bits in a byte; 2 bits to a quarter ($.25) ==> so, 8 bits is a dollar ???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
The Constitution protects Freedom of the Press, that is freedom to publish what you wish. It does not create a privileged class that is exempt from laws that apply to the rest of us.

They must respond to a subpoena, just like anyone else.

4 posted on 12/04/2004 3:36:09 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
This challenge to press freedoms comes courtesy of Patrick Fitzgerald, the United States attorney and special prosecutor

Fitzgerald wants them to testify. Judge Hogan is the one who found cause and ordered them to do so and cited them with contempt when they declined.

Furthermore, appellate courts upheld Judge Hogan's finding.

Sorry NY Times, your disingenousness is blatant. It is not some rogue prosecutor as you wish to convey here in your deceitful little piece.

Isn't it funny that for months the dems were trilling about how fair and impartial Fitzgerald was. That's when they idiotically thought he'd find wrong-doing in the Bush WH.

5 posted on 12/04/2004 3:45:44 PM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
which was of critical importance in exposing the very abuse of governmental power that prompted Mr. Fitzgerald's involvement in the first place.

So the Wilson/dem operative talking points SAY. There is zero evidence of government power having been misused by the Bush WH. There's plenty to indicate the rogues at CIA and other anti-Bush elements conspired to try and bring down President Bush with their concocted yellowcake smears.

6 posted on 12/04/2004 3:49:04 PM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
But the possibility that journalists may be incarcerated merely for acting on principle to preserve press freedom ought to trouble everyone

What troubles me is "journalists" knowingly reporting lies about an administration in an effort to bring it down.

7 posted on 12/04/2004 3:50:35 PM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

Doctors face malpractice suits. So should the liberal press.


8 posted on 12/04/2004 3:52:11 PM PST by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

Unless you want the government licensing journalists, you cannot give reporters a special exemption from testifying. Period.

The Times luminaries clearly haven't thought this one out too well.


9 posted on 12/04/2004 4:44:04 PM PST by The Old Hoosier (Right makes might.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Not really related to this article, but on-topic.

I've sort of been waiting for the San Francisco Chronicle to get in some hot water over the whole steroids and baseball issue. They basically printed the federal grand jury testimony of Jason Giambi and Barry Bonds, which they obtained illegally. I'd love to see those reporters forced to reveal who gave them those grand jury transcripts, and to see what happens if they refuse. Seems to me that the judicial system is in jeopardy if the confidentiality of grand jury testimony disappears.

10 posted on 12/05/2004 2:14:24 PM PST by John R. (Bob) Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson