Reaping And Sowing -- In The Same Field
The mainstream media that has taken to pillorying the departing Karl Rove essentially for playing its own game now decries the natural evolution from its own outrage. A federal judge has ruled that journalists must reveal sources for an article that smeared a government bioterrorism expert and falsely reported him to be the prime suspect in the anthrax attacks -- and this courtroom should provide familiar surroundings (via Michelle Malkin):
Five reporters must reveal their government sources for stories they wrote about Steven J. Hatfill and investigators' suspicions that the former Army scientist was behind the deadly anthrax attacks of 2001, a federal judge ruled yesterday.The decision from U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton is yet another blow to the news industry as it seeks to shield anonymous sources who provide critical information -- especially on the secret inner workings of government. ...
In lengthy depositions in the case, reporters have identified 100 instances when Justice or FBI sources provided them with information about the investigation of Hatfill and the techniques used to probe his possible role in anthrax-laced mailings. But the reporters have refused to name the individuals.
The decision means that five journalists -- Allan Lengel of the Washington Post; Michael Isikoff and Daniel Klaidman, both of Newsweek; Toni Locy, formerly of USA Today; and James Stewart of CBS News -- are under instruction from the court to answer specific questions about who provided them with information about the investigation's focus on Hatfill.
Does the name of the judge sound familiar to CQ readers? It should. He's the same judge who presided over the trial of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby for perjury and obstruction of justice -- in a case based on a leak by government officials. Interestingly enough, the Washington Post report never notes the connection -- and for good reason.
When Robert Novak published Valerie Plame's identity, the media went into moral outrage mode. They screamed about political leaks coming from government officials as if they had never heard of such a thing. The New York Times took the lead in demanding a federal investigation into the matter, and coldly cut their own reporter loose after she refused to name her source for months. Time Magazine overruled their reporter and turned over the requested materials to the independent prosecutor, and national media stars like Chris Matthews ranted about the despicable nature of the leaks -- until everyone discovered that the initial leak didn't come from the White House, but from the State Department's hostile senior staffer, Richard Armitage.
Now, suddenly, the tables have turned. The media has once again offered the "chill winds" defense to an investigation of national-security leaks. Lucy Dalglish warns of "horrifying" repercussions to free speech if reporters have to reveal their leaks or if leakers get punished for speaking to the press. Reggie Walton, once the hero of the media for throwing the book at Scooter Libby, now has become their worst nightmare for essentially applying the law as strictly against their leakers as he did with Libby.
It's a bit of poetic justice, to be sure. The media called down the thunder on leaks and leakers. They perhaps should have considered the wisdom of Proverbs 11:29 -- "He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind." (some links via Memeorandum)
Posted by Ed Morrissey on August 14, 2007 10:22 AM | Comments (12) | TrackBacks (1)
Comments (12)
Posted by GarandFan | August 14, 2007 11:22 AM
Does this mean that Lengel, Isikoff, Klaidman, Locy, and Stewart will be "frog marched" into court?
Posted by msr | August 14, 2007 11:42 AM
Captain,
Finish the quote - "and the fool shall be servant to the wise of heart."
Posted by Barnestormer | August 14, 2007 11:44 AM
First Hogan, now Walton. What's a respectable Beltway reporter to do? Good thing Al Gonzales' DOJ isn't looking to impanel national security leak grand juries. Forum shopping in DC is looking decidedly less spree-worthy. Time for Teddy & Co. to quit chasing (away) windmills in Nantucket Sound and get back to the serious business of a shield law?
Posted by negentropy | August 14, 2007 11:45 AM
looks like the shoe's on the other hand now!
Posted by LarryD | August 14, 2007 11:58 AM
Leaks in DC are politically driven, except when they're personal attacks. Me, I want leakers heads on pikes (metaphorically), especially when they're breaking laws. Which covers all leaks of classified information.
In the cases of the NY Times triple classified program leaks, I also want the reporters and editors hung out to dry. It's past time for the NYT to be forceably reminded that they are not above the law.
Posted by RBMN | August 14, 2007 12:53 PM
Outrage (by the mainstream press) over Plame was a bit like Tony Soprano and Chris Moltisanti complaining about the Danish mob's influence in the New Jersey butter-pastry business. "There's some fruit-filling missing off the truck."
Posted by eaglewings | August 14, 2007 2:41 PM
"He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind....or pass alot of gas at least"
Posted by Howdoyoudo | August 14, 2007 2:42 PM
Well, well, well...Lets see how this plays out for (and in) the left leaning media !!
Posted by Bill M | August 14, 2007 3:21 PM
Can you say "HOIST by their own petard!"?
Posted by daytrader | August 14, 2007 3:23 PM
More food for thought.
Walton now is a member of the FISA court.
Posted by Neo | August 14, 2007 4:17 PM
An interesting take on federal prosecuting reporters and federal “shield-law” legislation.
Posted by Scrapiron | August 14, 2007 8:38 PM
The lefties have a habit of encouraging a lyching and then hanging themselves with their own rope. At least we get a couple of good laughs a day from them. The NYSlimes may as well close up shop and save some embarassment. Once the bull is loose it's hard to round him up and their (democrats) whining has turned a herd of bulls loose. Good on them.