January 5, 2006


WHISTLE-BLOWER OR LAWBREAKER? (David Reinhard, January 05, 2006, The Oregonian)

S elf-respecting lefties couldn't come right out and say the Justice Department shouldn't open a probe into the disclosure of classified information on the National Security Agency's surveillance program. That would look hypocritical and partisan after spending years baying for the prosecution of anyone who may, or may not, have intentionally leaked the identity of a CIA employee who may, or may not, have been a "covered" agent under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. That would look absurd, because there are actual laws against knowingly disclosing information about the nation's classified "communications intelligence activities."

So last fall's tough-on-leakers crowd had to come up with something last week, when federal officials announced they were looking into -- what did we call it in the Valerie Plame case? -- the "outing" of NSA's top-secret program to The New York Times. [...]

[T]he White House has offered a stout defense of the program from the start. But apparently the republic's Bush bashers missed all this -- and the experts who back up the administration on the program's legality.

"The claims are actually fairly modest, and not unconventional," Cass Sunstein, a University of Chicago law professor and liberal, said of Bush's claims on Hugh Hewitt's radio show.

Of course, never acknowledging this allows critics to claim Bush acted outside the law and Constitution. And if they convince themselves of this, they can cast the leakers as patriots and whistle-blowers. Yet, if the NSA program is not patently illegal, then they're rank lawbreakers who've exposed a critical classified program designed to protect our national security to further what's basically a policy dispute.

Bush critics are entitled to their opinions about the program and leak investigation. But they're not entitled to their own facts.

Given how much the Left's reaction helps the White House isn't it fair to assume Karl Rove is the leaker here too?

Posted by Orrin Judd at January 5, 2006 10:44 AM

Too bad there's no book contest for predicting what Schumer and Kennedy are going to be going after in the Alito hearings.

Posted by: Lou Gots at January 5, 2006 12:29 PM

Sith mind control.

These aren't the facts you're looking for. Move along.

Posted by: Gideon at January 5, 2006 2:49 PM

Got a soliciation for the NYT today.


Think they'll get the message not to waste their money on me?

Did the same w/a Newsweek solicitation, Newseek lied, Americans died.

Posted by: Sandy P at January 5, 2006 3:12 PM

Sandy: I somehow got on the ACLU mailing list (their last envelope screamed "They want to take away our religious freedom!"). I'm more than happy for them to keep wasting their money on me...

Posted by: b at January 5, 2006 3:21 PM

whenever I get the AARP mailing, I always scribble a little note like 'keep up the good work, you pathetic geezers' and don't fill out the form and then drop the postage paid envelope in the mail..

Posted by: JonofAtlanta at January 5, 2006 3:33 PM

And if they include any one of those "Business Reply" envelopes, there's nothing wrong with sealing themup empty and returning them to sender. Ah, the good ol' days whenI was on all sorts of mailing lists. (I noticed in later years they started preprinting my address info on them, so I must not have been the only one.)

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at January 5, 2006 3:48 PM

Ohh, is it true that if you load up the prepaid envelop they'll pay more cos it's heavier?

Posted by: Sandy P at January 5, 2006 4:48 PM


Posted by: Jayson at January 5, 2006 9:49 PM

If it's obvious that you are not using it properly, they can reject receipt of prepaid envelopes. For example, if it's glued to a brick, or is oozing something, it's obvious you aren't signing up for that Lifetime Membership and Free Gift, and so the USPS eats the costs. (It's been a while since investigated the merits for a 501(c)3 for which I was treasurer, but I believe the Post Office won't even bother sending such obvious junk from the originating post office.)

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at January 5, 2006 10:52 PM

Back when I was in college, I went to a few NOW meetings and ended up on their mailing list and on Planned Parenthood. 20 years later, without ever responding to them, I STILL get mail from Planned Parenthood. Shouldn't they cull their lists occasionally?

Posted by: sharon at January 6, 2006 12:03 AM

I still get mail from the Carpenters Fan Club....

Posted by: oj at January 6, 2006 7:57 AM

Not Roberta's?

Posted by: ratbert at January 6, 2006 8:44 AM