Article

2006-05-27 Home Front: Politix

Recent disclosures of classified information by the press have damaged the national security, several Republican members of the House intelligence committee said today at a hearing on news organizations' legal responsibilities.

The criticism focused on articles in The New York Times concerning a National Security Agency surveillance program and, to a lesser extent, on disclosures in The Washington Post about secret C.I.A. prisons overseas.

Some Republicans on the committee advocated the criminal prosecution of The Times. Their comments partly echoed and partly amplified recent statements by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales that the Justice Department has the authority to prosecute reporters for publishing classified information. "The press is not above the law, including laws regarding unauthorized disclosure and use of classified information," said Peter Hoekstra, Republican of Michigan, the chairman of the committee. But he added that he was "not yet willing" to advocate criminal prosecution of reporters or newspapers.

Some of his colleagues were less reticent. "I believe the attorney general and the president should use all of the power of existing law to bring criminal charges," said Representative Rick Renzi, Republican of Arizona.

Democratic members of the committee, while generally praising the role the press plays informing citizens in a democracy, responded only indirectly to the comments concerning The Times. Representative Jane Harman, Democrat of California, said she was disturbed by Mr. Gonzales's statements. "If anyone here wants to imprison journalists," she said, "I invite them to spend some time in China, Cuba or North Korea and see whether they feel safer."

Nice segue into a non-sequitor.

Several lawmakers in both parties said that too much information is classified and that the disclosure of classified information to the press is commonplace.

Ms. Harman expressed concern about a pending espionage prosecution of two former lobbyists for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee for receiving and passing along classified information. The legal theory used against the lobbyists, Ms. Harman said, could be used to apply not only to routine news reporting by journalists but also to discussion of published information by newspaper readers.

The law professors and journalists who appeared as witnesses had starkly divergent views of the recent disclosures in the press. "We may be living in the golden age of journalism," said Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, who described the revelations as an important public service.

Gabriel Schoenfeld, an editor at Commentary magazine, said the disclosure of the N.S.A. program was a flat violation of a 1950 espionage law. "It compromised a program that allowed us to find al Qaeda terrorists," Mr. Schoenfeld said.

Editors of The Times have disputed that contention, saying the paper published the articles after thorough reporting and careful consultation with the administration. But Mr. Hoekstra said that information about The Times's internal decision-making has not yet been made public. Addressing the witnesses who said they applauded the paper's decision to publish the N.S.A. articles, Mr. Hoekstra said, "You might reach a different conclusion as to whether they actually handled it well" if the paper made additional information available.

Representative Mike Rogers, Republican of Michigan, said The Times and other news organizations should not be allowed to decide for themselves what classified information may be published. "Why should a for-profit corporation be the sole arbiter of what is or is not in the public interest?" he asked.

In an interview, Mr. Freeman said the First Amendment contemplates an independent role for the press. "Allowing government to punish the press for publishing information it legally obtains," he said, "would be an awful and destructive break with tradition."

But publishing classified information is by definition, illegal.

Posted by Dan Darling 2006-05-27 01:25|| || Front Page|| [11129 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 What part of "classified" and "illegally obtained" do the press and their defenders not understand? A lot of them are lawyers so they understand the law quite well. Being the "press" or a "journalist" is not a defense because it's not a first amendment issue by any stretch of the imigination.

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2006-05-27 06:09|| 2006-05-27 06:09|| Front Page Top

#2 Want this nonsense to stop? Send someone to jail. Otherwise those at the NYT will continue their seditious behavior.

Posted by JerseyMike 2006-05-27 06:58|| 2006-05-27 06:58|| Front Page Top

#3 I prefer them hung from the bridge.

Posted by DarthVader 2006-05-27 09:07|| 2006-05-27 09:07|| Front Page Top

#4 What part of "classified" and "illegally obtained" do the press and their defenders not understand?

It goes along with their lack of understanding of 'equal before the law', sort of in their belief that 'four legs good, two legs better'.

Posted by Crineng Gleaper4981 2006-05-27 09:29|| 2006-05-27 09:29|| Front Page Top

#5 The NY Slimes trying to mount a defense for itself in friendly confines.

Shame on the Slimes and WaPo who put American lives in damage while maintaining a sanctimonious posture.

Posted by Captain America 2006-05-27 16:01|| 2006-05-27 16:01|| Front Page Top

#6 Harman has lost her mind.

Posted by Captain America 2006-05-27 16:03|| 2006-05-27 16:03|| Front Page Top

#7 she's a Donk First, Liberal Second and American Security Official Last

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2006-05-27 16:38|| 2006-05-27 16:38|| Front Page Top

07:43 Procopius2k
07:42 BrerRabbit
07:42 Procopius2k
07:39 Procopius2k
07:36 Procopius2k
07:35 Procopius2k
07:34 trailing wife
07:31 Procopius2k
07:30 NN2N1
07:22 NN2N1
07:18 trailing wife
07:14 Richard Aubrey
07:10 NN2N1
07:09 Besoeker
07:03 NN2N1
06:58 NN2N1
06:58 Besoeker
05:28 Whiskey Mike
05:23 Whiskey Mike
05:21 Whiskey Mike
05:18 Whiskey Mike
05:15 Whiskey Mike
05:13 Whiskey Mike
05:08 Whiskey Mike