Thursday, December 22, 2005

Is The New York Times' NSA Story the Next Memogate?

"Just think what you all will be missing...you won't have Dan Rather to kick around anymore..." The MSM is at it again...T
It seems like a common pattern lately. A mainstream media outlet publishes a bombshell story, and within days, the whole thing unravels quicker than a cheap sweater swarmed by kittens. Such is beginning to look like the case for The New York Times' eavesdropping controversy, which is showing a lot of wear and tear for its age.

Wednesday wasn't a very good day for the ongoing health of this story, or for members of the media hoping that the recent revelations concerning National Security Agency espionage tactics could lead to impeachment proceedings against President Bush.

The day started with a former member of the Clinton White House voicing strong words of support for the Bush administration?s behavior. In a Chicago Tribune op-ed entitled "President Had Legal Authority to OK Taps," former associate attorney general John Schmidt refuted media protestations concerning the illegality of the National Security Agency eavesdropping on American citizens who are in contact with known members of al Qaeda without a court order allowing it to do so:

"President Bush's post- Sept. 11, 2001, authorization to the National Security Agency to carry out electronic surveillance into private phone calls and e-mails is consistent with court decisions and with the positions of the Justice Department under prior presidents." Click here for full article

1 Comment:

splugy said...

Lets see... The penalty for treason is hanging, right?

If we strung up the leaker, the leaks would stop. If we strung up the reporter a clear message. The first ammendment doesn't streach to treason. That might shut up some liberals.

The prosecutor should me Mo Lynch.