Tuesday, June 27, 2006

Snow: "the word "terrorist" has real meaning"

* via FD:
"So far during the second quarter, the No. 1 cable news channel’s (Fox) primetime schedule has dropped 22% in its core 25-54 demo and 8% in total viewers. The first quarter was even worse."

* from the gaggle:
"Q Back to the banking transactions, how can you assure the American public that this isn't what seems to be a broad net covering all Americans -- you said no, subpoenas are needed, but warrants apparently weren't used, either. Very similar, and apparently this is parallel to the NSA case, which gives the perception, if nothing else, that it's an arrogance of presidential power and --

MR. SNOW: I think what you've done is just reveal the lens through which you're looking at it, which is suspicious, skeptical, and doesn't seem to understand that the word "terrorist" has real meaning, and furthermore, that somebody does have to have stated legal reasons and evidence to support it to enter the database."

* reddhedd:
"I heard, and this is strictly rumor mill in terms of back-up sourcing because I haven’t been able to verify it as yet, but I heard that Cunningham was threatened with having his plea deal revoked if he didn’t start spilling as he agreed to do. And that had an immediate impact on his cooperation. I’ve been trying to find out where this is going to go, though, through the public corruption unit at DoJ — I’ve been hearing rumbles and rumors that Alice Fisher (former DeLay staffer and pal) has been, shall we say, less than enthusiastic about pressing investigations on power players in the GOP. "

* emptywheel: "Anatomy of a White House Smear, 3.6"

* c&l has the vid of Peter King going nuts at the latte-drinking NYT:
"Peter King: Chris, I think the administration acted entirely appropriately. The 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case gives them, to me, the absolute right to do this. They’re in full compliance with all statutes. To me, the real question here is the conduct of the New York Times by disclosing this in time of war, they have compromised America’s anti-terrorist policies. This is a very effective policy. They have compromised it. This is the second time the New York Times has done this. And to me, no one elected the New York Times to do anything. And the New York Times is putting its own arrogant elitist left wing agenda before the interests of the American people, and I’m calling on the Attorney General to begin a criminal investigation and prosecution of the New York Times — its reporters, the editors who worked on this, and the publisher. We’re in a time of war, Chris, and what they’ve done has violated the Espionage Act, the COMINT act. The time has come for the American people to realize, and the New York Times to realize, we’re at war and they can’t be on their own deciding what to declassify, what to release. If Congress wants to work on this privately, that’s one thing. But for them to, on their own, for the editor of the New York Times to say that he decides it’s in the national interest — no one elected them to anything. Remember, this is the newspaper that brought us Jason Blair. Going back a few years ago, they’re the ones who gave Fidel Castro his job in Cuba. They have no right to do this at all. The First Amendment is not absolute, especially when it comes to something like this, which is a clear violation of statutory law.""

No comments: