Posted by
Richard on Wednesday, September 06, 2006 8:53:06 AM
Judge in Aipac Case Has Pattern On Free Speech
BY JOSH GERSTEIN
Staff Reporter of the Sun
September 6, 2006
"In the coming weeks, Judge Ellis, 66, is expected to preside over the trial of a case that has fit that pattern so far, the prosecution of two pro-Israel lobbyists for obtaining and conveying classified information to journalists and Israeli diplomats...'Common sense and the relevant precedent point persuasively to the conclusion that the government can punish those outside of the government for the unauthorized receipt and deliberate retransmission of information relating to the national defense,' the judge, who sits in Alexandria, Va., wrote...The decision distressed First Amendment advocates, who see little obstacle to similar charges against reporters.'...It is certainly one plausible reading of the law, but reading it as Judge Ellis does, and more importantly, reading it as the Department of Justice does, imperils not just these two former Aipac employees, but every journalist who writes about national security matters,' a First Amendment lawyer in Manhattan, Floyd Abrams, said. 'It's a deeply threatening case.'"
Rest assured that we can expect to see the ACLU involved in this case in very short order. No doubt the legal eagles of the Librocrats will descend upon this case in no time. And once this case gets going it will be MSM news for weeks to come. And as usual the MSN will be bemoaning the fact that it is their first amendment right that is in jeopordy. More to the point it is their selfish self intrest to undermine the current adminstration and the loathing of everything it stands for that is at stake in this case.
I would add here that this is the same MSM had NO PROBLEMS with loyalty and security when it came to the Valerie Plame case, (who at that time was no longer a covert operative, nor a field agent so her "outing" DID NOT put her in any jeopordy) were calling for "Scooter" Libby's head on a silver platter. And finally after months of legalities in an editorial by the Washington Post we find that all the allegations by Joe Wilson et al, were unfounded. All of this translates into:
"We can't make a case and stick this to Bush, therefore there is no case, ergo there is no story here."
However, more importantly what we have here is the implications this has to those nice folks at the NY Times that decided that it was in the "public intrest" to break that story about the NSA. In a commentary I wrote on June 29, 2006, I stated that ALL those responsible for such actions should be punished for said actions.
There is a certainty that the editors and pubishers at the New York Times are extremely interested in this case. I would suggest that they take heed of this warning, as they themselves were pretty much let off with a slap on the wrist. As I recall, even amongst calls of " off with their heads", there was little done to them and eventually the furor died down.