House Republican leaders are expected to introduce a resolution today condemning The New York Times for publishing a story last week that exposed government monitoring of banking records.
The resolution is expected to condemn the leak and publication of classified documents, said one Republican aide with knowledge of the impending legislation.
The resolution comes as Republicans from the president on down condemn media organizations for reporting on the secret government program that tracked financial records overseas through the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT), an international banking cooperative.
Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-Ariz.), working independently from his leadership, began circulating a letter to House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) during a late series of votes yesterday asking his leaders to revoke the Times’s congressional press credentials.
The Standing Committee decides which organizations and reporters can be accredited, according to the rules of both the House and Senate press galleries. Members of that committee are elected by accredited members of those galleries.
“Under no circumstances would we revoke anyone’s credentials simply because a government official is unhappy with what that correspondent’s newspaper has written,” said Susan Milligan, a reporter for the Boston Globe, which is owned by the Times, who also serves the standing chairwoman of the Standing Committee of Correspondents. “The rules say nothing about the stories a newspaper chooses to pursue, or the reaction those stories provoke. The Times clearly meets our standards for credentials.”
The Times, the Los Angeles Times and the Wall Street Journal all reported the existence of the program on their websites last Thursday.
President Bush criticized the reports during a press event Monday, calling the disclosure “disgraceful” and a “great harm” to national security. Vice President Dick Cheney, who voiced support for the program over the weekend, followed Bush’s criticism with harsh words of his own.
In an open letter responding to these criticisms, Times Executive Editor Bill Keller wrote that a free press was the key check on government’s abuse of power.
Translation: Don’t report stories worth telling, newspapers! Only print stories about our pointless and childish attempts at vote-grabbing with non-issues like gay marriage and flag burning! Don’t tell people about our abuses of power, damnit! We might not win elections if people know what self-obsessed megalomanics we are!
July 18, 2006 at 7:25 pm
I’m an infrequent commenter at gods4suckers, and that site became very different for me yesterday. I just want to say that the way you were treated was wholly unfair. Even xian trolls don’t receive that kind of verbal beatdown.
There are posters over there I don’t really like, but I keep it to myself. I have read nothing you have posted that should draw so much ire. I felt that gods4suckers had become very clique-y lately, and the chorus that came up against you proved that to me.
I don’t know how things worked out for everyone yesterday, and I really like the site, but I’m not sure I’m going to keep going back. You were missed by some over there in your absence, and hopefully things worked out so you won’t stay away forever. Although I might.
July 19, 2006 at 6:38 pm
I thank you for your kind words. I was a little surprised at the intensity of his attack, but I wasn’t surprised that it happened. Take from that what you will. (I’m wondering if there’s some choice e-mails waiting for me, but I don’t have access to my web-based e-mail at the moment.)
I saw that the mod who posted the attack on me made it private, and I haven’t been back since. After throwing a temper tantrum and throwing out ultimatums like that and not getting the validation he was after, I can see why he did made it private. Concerning the other posters: no one else acted any different than I expected them too. Those that never liked me said so, those that do (or did) didn’t involve themselves in what was essentially a gigantic ad hom. It didn’t feel like a verbal beatdown to me simply because the mod didn’t get the cheers from the peanut gallery that he was looking for. I didn’t post anything to draw the ire, which is how I know this was a personal issue and not “professional” as claimed. This is clear in the way the mod made the debate all about him, even after the actually insulted party said they weren’t insulted.
That particular mod is evidentally deeply emotionally tied to the blog, and feels that it is his property. He’s clearly happy preaching from a safe, secure pulpit to the agreeable, unchallenging choir. This, coupled with the fact that there’s nothing happening on that blog that isn’t happening on a million others, I see no reason to invade his space. I don’t have the endurance to be a troll.
I don’t know if I actually got banned from the site or not. Honestly, I don’t really care. I’d stopped visiting a month before hand and just sort of wandered in out of bored curiosity. Minus the attack post it’s the same ol’ same ol’ over there. Not missing anything.
Don’t stay away if you enjoyed the site – that sort of personal attack doesn’t happen everyday (at least, that i know of). He did make it private with the explanation that that’s not why people visit the site. A smart move. There used to be some excellent debate on the site and I can’t believe it’s disappeared completely. There are other mods who are wonderfully informative, intersting and engaging (and they have their own blogs so I can visit there).
Again, thank you for the kind words. It’s appreciated.