Time for Gonzales to Act - Part III

Henry Mark Holzer, writes a "indictment" on the times, which just may be a harbringer of things to come. Something to think about. If the DOJ were to prepare indictments (the investigation into press leaks reference, but not limited to the NSA leak is still active), then the press would no doubt challenge the indictments, and push come to shove it would mostly likely culminate at the SCOTUS.

With the current make up of the Court - as close to a Conservative majority as there ever has been, I would bet on the good guys to win in the end.

The call for a probe by Rep. King over the weekend - while being minimized by the press - IS gaining ground on the Hill, so look for a lot more on that later in the week. In fact a preliminary referral I'm told is being drafted. Not much more at this time, bad weather has shut the Capital down.

He's going to have a tough fight on this, but here is his contact info, let him know you support a probe 100 percent:

Rep. Peter King
436 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
202 - 225 - 7896

Remember, "groundswell". This is a Government BY THE people and the people have been endangered by a rogue leftist newpaper intent on damaging our National Security in a time of war. Keep up the heat - it's working.

The Secretary of the Treasury responds to Keller:

"Mr. Bill Keller, Managing Editor
The New York Times
229 West 43rd Street
New York, NY 10036

Dear Mr. Keller:

The New York Times' decision to disclose the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program, a robust and classified effort to map terrorist networks through the use of financial data, was irresponsible and harmful to the security of Americans and freedom-loving people worldwide. In choosing to expose this program, despite repeated pleas from high-level officials on both sides of the aisle, including myself, the Times undermined a highly successful counter-terrorism program and alerted terrorists to the methods and sources used to track their money trails.

Your charge that our efforts to convince The New York Times not to publish were "half-hearted" is incorrect and offensive. Nothing could be further from the truth. Over the past two months, Treasury has engaged in a vigorous dialogue with the Times - from the reporters writing the story to the D.C. Bureau Chief and all the way up to you. It should also be noted that the co-chairmen of the bipartisan 9-11 Commission, Governor Tom Kean and Congressman Lee Hamilton, met in person or placed calls to the very highest levels of the Times urging the paper not to publish the story. Members of Congress, senior U.S. Government officials and well-respected legal authorities from both sides of the aisle also asked the paper not to publish or supported the legality and validity of the program.

Indeed, I invited you to my office for the explicit purpose of talking you out of publishing this story. And there was nothing "half-hearted" about that effort. I told you about the true value of the program in defeating terrorism and sought to impress upon you the harm that would occur from its disclosure. I stressed that the program is grounded on solid legal footing, had many built-in safeguards, and has been extremely valuable in the war against terror. Additionally, Treasury Under Secretary Stuart Levey met with the reporters and your senior editors to answer countless questions, laying out the legal framework and diligently outlining the multiple safeguards and protections that are in place.

You have defended your decision to compromise this program by asserting that "terror financiers know" our methods for tracking their funds and have already moved to other methods to send money. The fact that your editors believe themselves to be qualified to assess how terrorists are moving money betrays a breathtaking arrogance and a deep misunderstanding of this program and how it works. While terrorists are relying more heavily than before on cumbersome methods to move money, such as cash couriers, we have continued to see them using the formal financial system, which has made this particular program incredibly valuable.

Lastly, justifying this disclosure by citing the "public interest" in knowing information about this program means the paper has given itself free license to expose any covert activity that it happens to learn of - even those that are legally grounded, responsibly administered, independently overseen, and highly effective. Indeed, you have done so here.

What you've seemed to overlook is that it is also a matter of public interest that we use all means available - lawfully and responsibly - to help protect the American people from the deadly threats of terrorists. I am deeply disappointed in the New York Times.



John W. Snow, Secretary

U.S. Department of the Treasury

h/t to reader Deb.

UPDATE: My blogger bud AJ Strata notes that even Chicken Little Murtha asked the NY Treason not to publish the story. Dang! Could this be the turning point for Murtha??

Ahh, Maybe NOT!

UPDATE II: Let's not forget that AG Gonzales already told us back his, and the US Government's position on the prosecution of journalist and editors who leak secrets.