The Bush Administration's attack on the U.S. Constitution!

[Vader]

Today I learned that the Bush administration is making a very serious attempt at jailing journalists who report on thier activities. The recent Apex ruling is once such example.

The government can never be allowed to silence the press. The fact that the press has a PROTECTED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to report on whatever the want is paramount. This right, granted to all Americans
by the 1st ammendment of the constitution, is one method of keep the government in check. We cannot afford to allow neo-conservative scumbags like Cheney the opportunity to rob us of our constitutional rights.

If in fact that Bush administration is trying to silence the prerss, it is time for their removal from office. As Americans, we cannot allow the Bush administration, who has already been found guilty of mulitiple violations of the 1st and 4th ammendments by Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, to bypass the constitution whenever the so choose.

Many people have died protecting the freedoms provided to each American citizen under the constitution and the Bush administration is blatently spitting on the graves of those fallen heros.

The route of the problem with the Bush administration is Dick Cheney. Cheney is a known neo-conservative scumback who doesn't believe in freedom. Mr. Cheney believes that businesses should be allowed to abuse their employees without fear of punishment.

There obviously needs to be stronger campaign laws aimed at preventing neo-conservative and/or neo-liberal scum from being allowed to hold public office.

It is time to act! Call your Senators and Congressman and demand that they fight this ABSOLUTE ATTACK on the U.S. Constitution. Remind them that they are elected officials and if they want to continue to receive votes they WILL fight the Apex ruling AND the current Bush administration attempt an end run around the constitution.

:soap

 

[jfuh]

Today I learned that the Bush administration is making a very serious attempt at jailing journalists who report on thier activities. The recent Apex ruling is once such example.

The government can never be allowed to silence the press. The fact that the press has a PROTECTED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to report on whatever the want is paramount. This right, granted to all Americans
by the 1st ammendment of the constitution, is one method of keep the government in check. We cannot afford to allow neo-conservative scumbags like Cheney the opportunity to rob us of our constitutional rights.

If in fact that Bush administration is trying to silence the prerss, it is time for their removal from office. As Americans, we cannot allow the Bush administration, who has already been found guilty of mulitiple violations of the 1st and 4th ammendments by Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, to bypass the constitution whenever the so choose.

Many people have died protecting the freedoms provided to each American citizen under the constitution and the Bush administration is blatently spitting on the graves of those fallen heros.

The route of the problem with the Bush administration is Dick Cheney. Cheney is a known neo-conservative scumback who doesn't believe in freedom. Mr. Cheney believes that businesses should be allowed to abuse their employees without fear of punishment.

There obviously needs to be stronger campaign laws aimed at preventing neo-conservative and/or neo-liberal scum from being allowed to hold public office.

It is time to act! Call your Senators and Congressman and demand that they fight this ABSOLUTE ATTACK on the U.S. Constitution. Remind them that they are elected officials and if they want to continue to receive votes they WILL fight the Apex ruling AND the current Bush administration attempt an end run around the constitution.

:soap

Do you have a source for this? I'd like to follow up on it more.

 

[Vader]

Do you have a source for this? I'd like to follow up on it more.

Here is a transcript of the radio show "Democracy Now" for Aug 18, 2006:

Source and full article:

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/18/1352244#transcript

[SIZE=+1]Can Journalists Be Prosecuted for Receiving Classified Information?[/SIZE]

Last week a federal judge ruled private citizens could be prosecuted if the government decides they have received or disclosed information harmful to national security. The ruling comes in the case against two former employees of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC. They've been charged with passing on classified information to the Israeli government.

• Glenn Greenwald, constitutional law attorney specializing in presidential power and First Amendment issues. He is the author of the new book "How Would a Patriot Act?" and runs the blog Unclaimed Territory.

AMY GOODMAN: Our guest is Glenn Greenwald. His book is called How Would a Patriot Act? He also runs a blog called “Unclaimed Territory.” Glenn, I wanted to ask you about another recent court ruling. Last week, a federal judge ruled private citizens can be prosecuted if the government decides they've received or disclosed information harmful to national security. The ruling comes in the case against two former employees of AIPAC, that’s American Israel Public Affairs Committee. They've been charged with passing on classified information to the Israeli government. Can you talk about the significance of the ruling and the implication for journalists?

GLENN GREENWALD: Sure. One of the things that I focus on in my book, actually, is that the Bush administration is in intent upon shutting down all methods of the American people learning about what the government is doing. And the two principal ways we've learned about what they're doing are whistleblowers, who are under vigorous attack, and the media. The reason we know about warrantless eavesdropping or secret prisons in Eastern Europe or the use of torture is because the media has found out about it and reported it. And this administration is intent upon criminalizing investigative journalism, by creating a way to put journalists in prison, for the first time in a long, long time in our country, who report on what the government is doing in secret.


:doh

 

[akyron]

Today I learned that the Bush administration is making a very serious attempt at jailing journalists who report on thier activities. The recent Apex ruling is once such example.

The government can never be allowed to silence the press. The fact that the press has a PROTECTED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to report on whatever the want is paramount. This right, granted to all Americans
by the 1st ammendment of the constitution, is one method of keep the government in check. We cannot afford to allow neo-conservative scumbags like Cheney the opportunity to rob us of our constitutional rights.

If in fact that Bush administration is trying to silence the prerss, it is time for their removal from office. As Americans, we cannot allow the Bush administration, who has already been found guilty of mulitiple violations of the 1st and 4th ammendments by Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, to bypass the constitution whenever the so choose.

Many people have died protecting the freedoms provided to each American citizen under the constitution and the Bush administration is blatently spitting on the graves of those fallen heros.

The route of the problem with the Bush administration is Dick Cheney. Cheney is a known neo-conservative scumback who doesn't believe in freedom. Mr. Cheney believes that businesses should be allowed to abuse their employees without fear of punishment.

There obviously needs to be stronger campaign laws aimed at preventing neo-conservative and/or neo-liberal scum from being allowed to hold public office.

It is time to act! Call your Senators and Congressman and demand that they fight this ABSOLUTE ATTACK on the U.S. Constitution. Remind them that they are elected officials and if they want to continue to receive votes they WILL fight the Apex ruling AND the current Bush administration attempt an end run around the constitution.

:soap

Thanks for the demnow source. Where can you get that whirly beanie hat that lets you read inner thoughts as well? I checked ebay but they were all out for now.

 

[Vader]

Thanks for the demnow source. Where can you get that whirly beanie hat that lets you read inner thoughts as well? I checked ebay but they were all out for now.

Don't start being a prick just because you don't like the source.

:mrgreen:

 

[Loxd4]

Hey, we only have two more year of bush administration so just chil down...and hope he dosen't do anything stupid!

 

[Patrickt]

"The government can never be allowed to silence the press. The fact that the press has a PROTECTED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to report on whatever the want is paramount."

That "fact" doesn't exist in the Constitution. My beliefs about what should be permitted under free speech and press is quite broad but I recognize some restrictions that have been put in place for both. While I don't agree with the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" example I can see the logic. And, a newspaper printing the plans for D-Day in May would be another example of something properly forbidden.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Patrickt
That "fact" doesn't exist in the Constitution. My beliefs about what should be permitted under free speech and press is quite broad but I recognize some restrictions that have been put in place for both. While I don't agree with the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" example I can see the logic. And, a newspaper printing the plans for D-Day in May would be another example of something properly forbidden.

You can yell "fire" in a crowded theater if, in fact, there happens to be a fire in that crowded theater. If our elected officials do not follow the Supreme Law of our land, then it's a citizens duty to speak out and address their greivances.

 

[Patrickt]

"If our elected officials do not follow the Supreme Law of our land, then it's a citizens duty to speak out and address their greivances."

Citizens have an absolute right to speak out and the Supreme Court has the duty to see that the other two branches of the government follow the Constitution. If you disagree with the Supreme Court, you still have a right to speak out as many people do on the abortion issue.

But, the fact of the matter is that the Constitution does not grant newspapers or any other media to print whatever they want.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Patrickt
But, the fact of the matter is that the Constitution does not grant newspapers or any other media to print whatever they want.

Problem is, most of what they print, is predominately pro-Bush.

 

[Vader]

"The government can never be allowed to silence the press. The fact that the press has a PROTECTED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to report on whatever the want is paramount."

That "fact" doesn't exist in the Constitution. My beliefs about what should be permitted under free speech and press is quite broad but I recognize some restrictions that have been put in place for both. While I don't agree with the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" example I can see the logic. And, a newspaper printing the plans for D-Day in May would be another example of something properly forbidden.

Yes, it does. Freedom of Speech includes the written word; therefore, it is a protected right.

 

[Patrickt]

"Freedom of Speech includes the written word; therefore, it is a protected right."

That I can agree with but the "right" to "report on whatever they want," is a different issue. There are many things which newspaper may not print, or may not print at a certain time. For example, the names of jurors in a high-profile case before the trial has concluded.

 

[akyron]

Don't start being a prick just because you don't like the source.

:mrgreen:

Ill settle for the whirly beanie hat that lets you read thoughts just like whomever wrote that article.

 

[Indy]

Ill settle for the whirly beanie hat that lets you read thoughts just like whomever wrote that article.

Akyron, wtf is your problem? Don't agree with him, fine. But why the sudden need to be an ***? If you feel that inferior why not just go to a midget convention?

 

[jfuh]

The press today are ******s. No one has the guts to go out and really do any true reporting or ask real questions against the government. Why? Because the officals may stop responding to said reporters and they might get fired.
Lame a$$ ******s (no offense to the good ladies of this site, sorry).

 

[akyron]

Akyron, wtf is your problem? Don't agree with him, fine. But why the sudden need to be an ***? If you feel that inferior why not just go to a midget convention?

I was just having fun with your way with words. Dont take it personally. Show me a massive list of all the reporters any administration has successfully jailed for national security reasons or any reason and I will happily sign up to protest.
I would like to actually see some lemmings running towards the cliff before I get all sweaty and waste resources building a fence.


Judith Miller went to jail for contempt of court btw.
And if you are going to charge someone with a crime you should be forced to reveal your source. Facing your accuser and all that. Reporters should not be able to print whatever and then say "cause someone told me". Many if not most states cover this anyway. Just not Washington D.C. for some strange reason.:cheers:



The Jayson Blair Project
"Last week, New York Times reporter Jayson Blair joined Janet Cooke, formerly of the Washington Post, the New Republic's Stephen Glass, the Boston Globe's Patricia Smith, and Jay Forman in Slate as journalists who got caught embellishing, exaggerating, and outright lying in print. "

Checks and balances works both ways.

Reporters should ask hard questions and be willing to back up their ephemeral "facts" with physical facts. And not burned retyped ones either.

 

[Vader]

Ill settle for the whirly beanie hat that lets you read thoughts just like whomever wrote that article.

LOL

Yeah, well, I agree with you there, because of the low class, anti-american people on that show and because they person doing the interview has issues speaking clear english.

 

[Asterix]

I was just having fun with your way with words. Dont take it personally. Show me a massive list of all the reporters any administration has successfully jailed for national security reasons or any reason and I will happily sign up to protest.
I would like to actually see some lemmings running towards the cliff before I get all sweaty and waste resources building a fence."

Or you could try stopping it before it happened.

 

[Indy]

I was just having fun with your way with words. Dont take it personally. Show me a massive list of all the reporters any administration has successfully jailed for national security reasons or any reason and I will happily sign up to protest.
I would like to actually see some lemmings running towards the cliff before I get all sweaty and waste resources building a fence.


Judith Miller went to jail for contempt of court btw.
And if you are going to charge someone with a crime you should be forced to reveal your source. Facing your accuser and all that. Reporters should not be able to print whatever and then say "cause someone told me". Many if not most states cover this anyway. Just not Washington D.C. for some strange reason.:cheers:

The Jayson Blair Project
"Last week, New York Times reporter Jayson Blair joined Janet Cooke, formerly of the Washington Post, the New Republic's Stephen Glass, the Boston Globe's Patricia Smith, and Jay Forman in Slate as journalists who got caught embellishing, exaggerating, and outright lying in print. "

Checks and balances works both ways.

Reporters should ask hard questions and be willing to back up their ephemeral "facts" with physical facts. And not burned retyped ones either.

Oh ok. I totally agree that in the case of revealing a big scandal in the gov't that the sources should be revealed, otherwise its just heresay and slander. I guess I wasn't looking where you were aiming. No hard feelings?

What? How is this message too short to post? 10 more characters eh? Hmm... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10. There hows that?

 

[Muddy Creek]

Thanks for the demnow source. Where can you get that whirly beanie hat that lets you read inner thoughts as well? I checked ebay but they were all out for now.

akyron....for the internet illiterate...

http://www.judgewatch.org/lawsuit-nyt.htm

This has been going on for a while....my stars...you stay on here all day and don't read any of the papers nor watch any of the news on TV? You need to back away from your computer at sometimes, really you do.

 

[Harshaw]

Last week a federal judge ruled private citizens could be prosecuted if the government decides they have received or disclosed information harmful to national security. The ruling comes in the case against two former employees of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC. They've been charged with passing on classified information to the Israeli government.

That example -- and charges -- have nothing to do with the press.

And, not that it matters to this, Anna Diggs Taylor's decision has been roundly and broadly condemned by legal and constitutional scholars as, basically, being pulled out of thin air in contradiction to long-standing precedent. Expect her ruling to be overturned.

Oh, and by the way, interesting that you take one decision by the JUDICIAL branch (Taylor's decision) as bedrock gospel, but another decision of the JUDICIAL branch (that court decision you cite) as an example of EXECUTIVE branch misconduct.

 

[aquapub]

Today I learned that the Bush administration is making a very serious attempt at jailing journalists who report on thier activities. The recent Apex ruling is once such example.

The government can never be allowed to silence the press. The fact that the press has a PROTECTED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to report on whatever the want is paramount. This right, granted to all Americans
by the 1st ammendment of the constitution, is one method of keep the government in check. We cannot afford to allow neo-conservative scumbags like Cheney the opportunity to rob us of our constitutional rights.

If in fact that Bush administration is trying to silence the prerss, it is time for their removal from office. As Americans, we cannot allow the Bush administration, who has already been found guilty of mulitiple violations of the 1st and 4th ammendments by Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, to bypass the constitution whenever the so choose.

Many people have died protecting the freedoms provided to each American citizen under the constitution and the Bush administration is blatently spitting on the graves of those fallen heros.

The route of the problem with the Bush administration is Dick Cheney. Cheney is a known neo-conservative scumback who doesn't believe in freedom. Mr. Cheney believes that businesses should be allowed to abuse their employees without fear of punishment.

There obviously needs to be stronger campaign laws aimed at preventing neo-conservative and/or neo-liberal scum from being allowed to hold public office.

It is time to act! Call your Senators and Congressman and demand that they fight this ABSOLUTE ATTACK on the U.S. Constitution. Remind them that they are elected officials and if they want to continue to receive votes they WILL fight the Apex ruling AND the current Bush administration attempt an end run around the constitution.

:soap

:bs

This is beyond ridiculous.


Show me where in the Constitution it says the President cannot try to interfere with the media needlessly revealing the inner workings of classified, very successful anti-terror programs (yes, the New York Times actually did this).

Show me where it says the press has the right to call up terrorists and let them know the FBI is coming to raid them (yes, this happened 2x at the New York Times).

Yes, us evil neo-cons are so dastardly to be interfering with the press committing blatant treason. :roll:

Yes...Hurry! Contact Congress now! Tell them what a hysterical steaming load this thread is!!! :lol:

 

[jfuh]

Show me where in the Constitution it says the President cannot try to interfere with the media needlessly revealing the inner workings of classified, very successful anti-terror programs (yes, the New York Times actually did this).

Care to proove that it's a "very successful anti-terror program"?
I recall you stating something about you're always backing up your statements with facts and sources.

 

[TurtleDude]

:bs

This is beyond ridiculous.


Show me where in the Constitution it says the President cannot try to interfere with the media needlessly revealing the inner workings of classified, very successful anti-terror programs (yes, the New York Times actually did this).

Show me where it says the press has the right to call up terrorists and let them know the FBI is coming to raid them (yes, this happened 2x at the New York Times).

Yes, us evil neo-cons are so dastardly to be interfering with the press committing blatant treason. :roll:

Yes...Hurry! Contact Congress now! Tell them what a hysterical steaming load this thread is!!! :lol:

good post-if the reactionary statist parasites (I refuse to call the left liberal-its as meaningless as calling homosexuals "gay") are so concerned about constitutional rights-where were those clowns when FDR raped the Tenth and Ninth Amendment and beat the court into allowing the commerce clause to be used as a general carte blanche empowerment device for the federal government? where were these RSP's when Clinton claimed the 4th amendment didn't apply to those in public housing and when he tried to sodomize the second amendment with his idiotic gun bans

THE RSP supports any right that they can use to destabilize america and tear down American tradition-they won't support rights that preserve those things (ie have you ever heard a RSP whine that the government should not tell the Boy Scouts who can be scout leaders or that a men's country club that it has to admit women)

 

[Indy]

good post-if the reactionary statist parasites (I refuse to call the left liberal-its as meaningless as calling homosexuals "gay") are so concerned about constitutional rights-where were those clowns when FDR raped the Tenth and Ninth Amendment and beat the court into allowing the commerce clause to be used as a general carte blanche empowerment device for the federal government? where were these RSP's when Clinton claimed the 4th amendment didn't apply to those in public housing and when he tried to sodomize the second amendment with his idiotic gun bans

THE RSP supports any right that they can use to destabilize america and tear down American tradition-they won't support rights that preserve those things (ie have you ever heard a RSP whine that the government should not tell the Boy Scouts who can be scout leaders or that a men's country club that it has to admit women)

Hmm, do all liberals believe these things?