The House is set to discuss a resolution today that serves to 1) provide legal justifications for the administration’s terrorist financing investigation methods 2) rebuke the New York Times and other newspapers for reporting the bank records (SWIFT) story and 2) legally mute the media from publishing any classified information.
Via the NYT:
The resolution says Congress “expects the cooperation of all news media organizations in protecting the lives of Americans and the capability of the government to identify, disrupt and capture terrorists by not disclosing classified intelligence programs.” Democrats are proposing a variant that expresses support for the treasury program but omits the language about the news media.
It seems to me (IANAL) that such a move would violate the first amendment which guarantees freedom of the press and that passage of such a bill would open up the strong possibility of a legal challenge. Surely no media enterprise, not even FOX, could support such a serious gag law.
(see update below which asserts that the resolution is not legally binding)
The wording of the actual bill extensively lays out legal justifications for the administration’s use of its methods for tracking terrorist financing. One has to wonder why the House would even consider such a bill as being necessary if it so firmly believes in the legality of the program. It’s just another rubber stamp effort by the congress to assert the authority of the president.
The fact that there are anti-espionage laws on the books as well would also seem to preclude the need for such a bill. Thus, the main motive for this resolution is to attack the press. Have congresspeople considered that the Bush administration itself leaks favourable classified information to the press whenever it wants to pump up its war propaganda efforts? Would the media also be blocked from printing those stories? Apparently so.
This is nothing but an attempt by Republicans to bring the hammer down on a media machine that has finally found its spine and has begun doing its job – informing the public of all aspects of the administration’s conduct.
To blight that voice now would be seen as a huge threat to freedom and civil liberties to anyone who actually cares about those quaint aspects of American life anymore and if the American people collectively have any self-respect left, they ought to oppose efforts like this at every turn.
You can watch the debate online this afternoon on C-SPAN’s site.
UPDATE: According to CNN, this resolution will not have any legal force. In other words, it is a purely political move. Haven’t these guys got anything better to do with their time? Wankers.
(crossposted from liberal catnip)
UPDATE: The resolution has passed.
What’s next? A resolution to mute the Supreme Court? They’ve obviously been infiltrated by treasonous traitors who hate America (ie. “libruls”).
The debate’s on right now. (~5:20pm ET)
The Republiwankers (I just made up that word) wouldn’t even allow an amendment. Barney Frank is kicking butt.
One of them had the audacity to ask to shorten the debate. Frank then mentioned that he knew some wanted a shorter debate because of “the baseball game” and offered his substitute amendment to the wankers if they so wanted a unanimous vote. But no… couldn’t have that. Damn Republicans repeating “we’re at war” over and over and then using a baseball game as a fucking excuse to get out of the senate ASAP.
Rep Dingell (D-MI): “This resolution is conceived in sin”.
These clods endlessly debate stuff like a flag-burning amendment, and you ask whether they don’t have better things to do?
That was one of those “rhetorical-like” questions. 😉
It saved me from banging my head against the wall.
Hey catnip,
I am with Omir on this one.
There are good reasons that some folk carpet their walls. For your own safety might I suggest a thick plush. Besides preventing unsightly bruises, it will keep the house warmer during your harsh winters, allow the resident felines a climbing wall, and will add to the effectiveness of duct tape during an emergency.
regards, Hal C.