President Bush said yesterday that it was “disgraceful” that the mainstream media had disclosed a secret CIA-Treasury program to track millions of financial records in search of terrorist suspects. Bush accused The New York Times of breaking a long tradition of keeping wartime secrets.
“The fact that a newspaper disclosed it makes it harder to win this war on terror,” Bush said, leaning forward and jabbing his finger during a brief question-and-answer session with reporters in the Roosevelt Room. I noted that Bush then turned on his heels and departed.
Finally — some “official” and public anger on behalf of this administration with regard to the prodigious leak problems encountered during the second Bush term.
It is this kind of public display of anger that can only help the president rally support against such a contentious and heinous abrogation of the First Amendment as evidenced by the NY Times.
Vice President Cheney said:
The New York Times has now twice — on two separate occasions — disclosed programs; both times they had been asked not to publish those stories by senior administration officials. They went ahead anyway. The leaks to The New York Times and the publishing of those leaks is very damaging.
“Damaging” is being kind; there appears to be, and properly so, a growing swell of those who believe the NY Times and those responsible for the leak and its subsequent publishing should be prosecuted criminally. Count me as one of those persons.
We are at War, plain and simple. An issue such as this should cross all political leanings; we should be unified in our support of the War Against Islamists.
And yet, the NY Times is still playing in the Kiddies Pool by printing, in a puerile fit of pique, what amounts to the entire US intelligence community’s gameplan with regard to tracking money moved by terrorists. They are not stupid; they will now only go deeper and make this same tracking and identification that much more difficult.
We have collectively shot ourselves in the foot so that the DEM can slam our president and sell more papers when they are bleeding readers and cash. Make no mistake: this act by the New York Times was motivated by greed. How callow and craven is this?
This is beyond disgraceful; it requires a full investigation and a prosecution criminally by the US Attorney General and the Department of Justice.
Even John Murtha, yesterday’s Moonbat, urged the Times not to print the information.
That is how far off the reservation the NY Times has strayed.
BZ
This is one issue where I have to say, I am 100% in support of the POTUS…
These assholes at the NYT need to be hung to a pole and horse whipped…
I am 100% behind Bush and Tony Snow and loved how they told off the NYTimes. You go Bush!!!!!!!
TF: Like you, I am an “issue” man with regard to the President. He needs clear support on this and I was glad to see him get pissed; it’s only when he gets pissed that action takes place, and commom sense DEMANDS prosecutorial action on this.
LMC: Tony Snow WAS pretty cool. And here’s the rub: this was the SAME PROGRAM the NY Times said OUGHT to be in effect a few years back — AND the NY Times concluded there was nothing illegal about the current program.
So what the hell? What’s the REMAINING MOTIVATION? And don’t be swayed by the “Well, the WS Journal and LA Times published the same darned story!” argument; it won’t fly. The Journal and the Times ONLY published AFTER the NY Times splashed the info all over the Internet.
BZ
Meaning: the LA Times and Wall Street Journal AGREED to keep silent UNTIL the NY Times pissed themselves to get the story in the public domain.
BZ
The NYT is disgraceful. Their action is putting our troops and our citizens in danger. I hope they can be prosecuted, and if so I hope the White House goes after them
We are paying the price for the leniency this President has shown to Sandy Berger, who did things that any civil servant had done would have been long years and decades in the Federal Penetentiary. By letting a ‘big fish’ go, the little fish do now swarm by… Who leaked the NSA information? We have some good idea who leaked the CIA/European prison red herring, but who leaked the CIA aircarrier story and the attendant details of same? Leak upon leak upon leak.
All leakers should be harshly prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law as they have broken their Oath to the Constitution and this Nation by *not* going through the channels set for them by CONGRESS and upheld by the Executive and affirmed by the Judiciary. I agree with my friend that had been a Marine through Nam and after: big rocks, small rocks, sledgehammer, and they turn the first into the second with the third 8 hours a day.
And by not upholding Justice, the President encourages unjust things to happen. And has done so on many things now, which put the Nation at peril in that abdication. As does Congress for its role in not requiring that accountability be upheld for such.
It is only a system of checks and balances if it is *used* as one. Whent they checks and balances are used only when needed for partisan gain, they system moves into disarray and begins to creak and groan under the strain of imbalance. We the People put up with that at Our collective peril.
AJ: Do I EVER believe that is true regarding Sandy Berger! It appears this admin’s tendency, even beginning with Bill Clinton’s condition of the White House upon the transition, is to overlook the errors and mistakes of others.
And yes, it DOES suggest to and encourages others to conduct themselves in a like fashion — why not, if there is no penalty to pay.
You and I BOTH know that anyone else in the federal government, in a military or law enforcement venue, would find themselves in Leavenworth microseconds after having been found guilty of revealing or releasing materials of a like nature.
BZ