One of the conceits of the press here in the US is that the First Amendment, which states that “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press” somehow grants them special status and immunities from laws that we plebes have to comply with. Not too surprisingly, the establishment media sees itself as the “Fourth Estate,” Americanized as the fourth branch of government (after the legislative, executive, and judicial branches) entitled to its own kind of sovereign immunity.
They are wrong. If the freedom to publish is restricted only to a certain limited or identifiable class, then it isn’t really a freedom at all, but is a privilege.
One of the more common expressions of the misconception that they belong to a special privileged class is the belief among journalists that they are entitled to defy court orders. Specifically, they believe that the First Amendment somehow guarantees them an immunity against having to identify their sources.
One of the micro-scandals plaguing the Bush administration has been the entirely hoked-up l’affaire Plame. In a nutshell, when former ambassador and Saudi shill Joseph Wilson began lying in public about his fact-finding mission to Africa regarding Saddamite nuclear ambitions, someone in the Bush administration may or may not have “leaked” the fact that his wife works for the CIA and got him the gig. This was scandalous because his wife may or may not have been an “undercover” op, so that leaking her identity may or may not have been against the law. Valerie Plame was so concerned about being outed that she and her husband arranged for a nice photo spread in Vanity Fair.
The scandal was hoked up because the press knew from the get-go who leaked Valerie Plame’s name and identity, but nonetheless went on a rampage about a coverup and the need for a grand jury to investigate the White House for this dreadful breach of national security. In effect, the Washington press was demanding a grand jury to discover what they already knew. This bluff has been called – the grand jury quite logically subpoenaed the testimony of two reporters who had fingered the White House for the leak.
Newly-released court orders show U.S. District Court Chief Judge Thomas F. Hogan two weeks ago ordered Matt Cooper of Time magazine and Tim Russert of NBC to appear before a grand jury and tell whether they knew that White House sources provided the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame to the media.
Cooper still refused to answer questions after Hogan’s July 20 order, and on Aug. 6 Hogan held him in contempt of court and ordered that he go to jail. Cooper has been released on bond pending his emergency appeal to a federal appeals court. Hogan has ordered that Time pay a $1,000 fine for each day Cooper does not appear before the grand jury.
A timely reminder that freedom for all is not a privilege for the few.
For some more fun, I read a long time ago that she might have been outed by Ames or Hanssen in the mid-90s when she started moving from one area to the other, that’s why she moved.
This is going to be fun. Fitzpatrick is one tough non-partisan cookie.
And since it was a well-known secret in DC before she was outed who she worked for….
and Tim has to testify. How the mighty have fallen. Novak, who started the entire tempest in a tea cup didn’t fight the subpoena, did he?
So whats the point of the article from a libertarian point of view? I suppose we are all opposed to journalists being jailed for not revealing sources, or maintaining a right to silence during what is still and investigative process.
So whats the point of the article from a libertarian point of view?
One point might be to imagine a small or no government society and consider how an individual could or should be compelled to answer to a judicature.
Hey, Robert, when are you going to view with alarm the actions of a Republican who leaked classified information to the media?
Oh, since he wasn’t “seen” stuffing transcripts “down his pants”, and he’s a Republican, you’ll maintain a descreet silence, won’t you?
If Shelby was a Democrat, you’d be howling from the rooftops.
But, as he’s a Republican, why, no need to comment about it. Obviously it’s just a misunderstanding.
Hey, Chris what about this?
Unfortunately the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Case in point, during WW2, Bell Labs developed a very simple yet effective way of garbling FDR’s telephone conversations with England. The NYT’s I believe found out about it, reported it down to how it even works. German spies in NYC read the article and forwarded the information to the Nazi’s.
The Nazi’s then devised a way to snoop on the very sensitive conversations b/w Churchill and FDR. One such conversation detailed the invasion of Sicily. The Germans were waiting for us there, and thousands of Allied troops were killed and wounded all because the NYT couldnt keep the lid on something so crucial.
—
The Chicago Trib also did it w/Japan.
And IIRC, didn’t the Administration vow to not give Congress some info around that time because someone had loose lips? But they whined and moaned, so the Administration relented? Maybe it was this, if so, it’s 2 years old.
I don’t give a toss about what the NYT did during WWII.
I’m asking Robert why he hasn’t bloged about Senator Shelby leaking CLASSIFIED information to the press?
Why hasn’t he blogged about this? Because Shelby is a Republican!
Berger is accused of taking PHOTOCOPIES of documents. Not the originals, which are still safe and sound in the National Archives.
Shelby leaked CLASSIFIED information to the medis.
Robert will keep his mouth SHUT about this because Shelby is a Republican.
IOKIYAR!
It’s a surprise anyone wants to work for the Bush Administration anymore, the way they burn undercover operatives (Plame, Khan, etc.) for the most evanescent political purposes.
Still waiting for Robert’s ringing denounciation of Republican Senator Shelby’s laeking of CLASSIFIED reports to the media.
IOKIYAR!, right Robert?
Blech. A journalist chooses as a matter of conscience to take jail over blabbing, and you hate on the journalist? This is the creeping side-effect of Bushism – an attitude which sees the law as the maximum, not minimum set of liberties. And that it’s cool to find any way within any interpretation of the law to stomp the enemies of the Great Leader. Because if you’re not with him you’re with the terrorists.
Damn I hate this so much! Samizdata used to be libertarian before 9/11, but now it seems to be Bush love (and the attendant militarism and Kerry hate and Islam hate). There’s enough libertarian stories and news I keep coming back, but *sigh* if only.
Chris T
First, Sandy Berger stole classified material, photocopied or not, its classified.
Second, I’ve just spent a few seconds looking at your site.
Its crap.
You’re obviously a delusional conspiracy theorist. People tend to stick to facts as far as possible in these here parts so play the game old chap.
Surely the one big thing that the First Amendment (and the Constitution in general) does is to remove privilege from government. The point is to stop legislative or executive power being used to take away basic freedoms ad hoc.
If indeed the press has been demanding a Grand Jury and is hoist by its own petard, that’s one thing, and maybe mildly amusing.
If, however, the Grand Jury is being hijacked as a tool of government to plug leaks without going through the courts proper, and the government seeks to make privileged use of access to supposedly secret evidence, then that’s quite different. It is an abuse of power, which ought to be stopped.
So whats the point of the article from a libertarian point of view?
Professional journalist claims of special privileges under the First Amendment have always bugged me. Special exemptions based on status sit uncomfortably with the rule of law. A journalist doesn’t have any rights that you and I don’t have. If you want to argue that no one should have to answer questions in a criminal inquiry, fine. But it will be hard for even a night watchman state to function in that case.
I’m asking Robert why he hasn’t [sic] bloged about Senator Shelby leaking CLASSIFIED information to the press?
Because I hadn’t noticed it? I don’t blog about every leak of classified info, by the way. Only the ones I find amusing. Sandy Berger “inadvertantly” stuffing documents down his pants several times – that’s comedy gold. Journalists who knew along who leaked Valerie Plame’s name howling for a grand jury investigation, and then crying like babies when they are subpoenaed- c’mon, if you can’t spit on people like that, who would you spit on?
A journalist chooses as a matter of conscience to take jail over blabbing, and you hate on the journalist?
Keep in mind that these same journalists were saying that someone should go to jail for leaking to them, and it gets real hard to have any sympathy or believe this is a matter of conscience or principle.
If, however, the Grand Jury is being hijacked as a tool of government to plug leaks without going through the courts proper, and the government seeks to make privileged use of access to supposedly secret evidence, then that’s quite different. It is an abuse of power, which ought to be stopped.
Is there any indication that this grand jury has been abused? Supposedly, someone in the government committed a crime, and a grand jury has been empanelled to investigate. That sounds like a good thing to me – government accountability and all that. Then someone refuses to cooperate with this exercise in government accountability, and is treated as if he were an ordinary citizen. Where’s the problem, again?
Pete_London, <Cartman>”Suck my balls!”</Cartman>.
Berger did not hand over those photocopies to the media. He returned the photocopies to the Archives. The Justice Department is not particularly exercised over his actions, as evidenced by the 9(?) month long investigation.
Senator Shelby leaked CLASSIFIED information to the Media.
Senator Shelby is a Republican.
Note the deafening silence from Robert and the rest of the Bush ass-kissers here and elsewhere.
Further note the thundering silence regarding the burning of the AQ double agent, Kahn, by the White House.
Remember, Pete, the new motto of Samizdata is: “It’s OK If You’re A Republican!“
Chris, FYI, removal of classified documents is a crime whether or not they’re returned. Period.
People in lower positions than Berger have gone to prison for decades for doing LESS than Berger did.
The concern in the Berger case is to find out if the law is applied equally, or if the Head of National Security (who should damn well know better!) gets a free pass just because of who he is.
This is a separate issue from Senator Shelby, and the presence of the latter case does not excuse the former.
Hey, Chris, the media is reporting that the new CIA Director was an undercover operative before being elected to Congress! Who should go to jail for that trespass against the sanctity of undercover work? Plame wasn’t exactly operating in deepest Afghanistan, here – she is, at best, a desk jockey with a CIA front company who used to run operatives, but whose cover was blown to the intelligence world (ie the people who matter) 15 years ago.
Senator Shelby’s leak didn’t imperil anyone, all it did was embarrass the CIA. Nothing unusual about loose-lipped congresscritters – to be news, it would have to be new, this is “dog bites man”. The Pentagon Papers were classified, too – should those leakers be in jail? Not all leaks are created equal. And not all classified information should be classified. In fact, most shouldn’t. (Berger’s case also applies, here – hence the seeming lack of Justice interest.)
The interest in Berger is mostly driven by the comedy, not the content. That’s why the coverage isn’t hurting Kerry. It is being used as ammo, but it isn’t hitting, so let the R’s shoot away with it. Your guy is being hurt by the fact that he looks like a dorkish Lurch than by loose ties to an incompetent idiot. Hey, the electorate is shallow, get used to it.
I’m not quite sure how Chris extracts “its OK if you’re a Republican” from a post celebrating the fact that a grand jury investigating possible criminal activity in the Bush regime is going to the wall to get some answers.
Mr. Dean, I’m referring to the hipocritical silence on the part of Robert concering the leaking to the media of CLASSIFIED information by Senator Shelby, vs. the offenses of Sandy Berger, who, while he did indeed remove photocopies of TOP SECRET documents from the archives, returned the photocopies and DID NOT leak them to the press, unlike Senator Shelby.
Robert has yet to utter a single uncomplimentary word about the actions of Senator Shelby, actions which are, in my opinion, much worse than those of Berger. Shelby leaked the reports to the press. Berger didn’t release anything to anybody, as far as is known.
IOKIYAR, right, Robert?
If Shelby acts as comically as Berger, and I happen to notice it, trust me, I’ll write it up. You gotta admit, though, the image of rotund Sandy Berger strolling out of the reading room, whistling and trying to be nonchalant, with his pants full of papers, is pretty damn funny.
I do note that a quick Google search shows that, unlike Berger, Shelby maintains his innocence, and that it is by no means settled that he did leak anything.
Thats it. No more troll feeding. You wanna bitch about blogosphere bias, get your own blog and bitch away.
The real burning question that needs to be answered is why is Chris Tucker is such a nut.