If I have to hear that awful, cackling, screeching voice come from that fat ugly face of hers I may vomit all over my tv screen. Let’s hope the American public has enough sense to vote for someone else.

You might also check out what RS Janes over at my site has written about this.

I posted the following over at Misha’s site, but I thought you might like the information here as well.

wherever crossed the line is simply by divulging the FACT that the U.S. Government was engaged in a TACTIC to track terrorist funding.

Yes DJ I know, I know…they ALREADY KNEW that we were …but did they really?

Probably, since the TACTIC (in this case SWIFT) had the audacity to openly blab and brag about these details on their own website, and in far greater detail than the gloss-over the Times et al have done.

Then we have Operation Green Quest which is publically published on the Treasury Department’s own website. An article by Shane Harris in Government Executive interviews Marcy Forman, the Director of Green Quest back in December of 2001, where she details much of what the NYT “dared” to print as a “secret program”. There is more here and here

Even the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) can’t keep from blabbing all about this.

This thread is another shining example of the fact that not only does Dave not get it, he doesn’t want to get it.

Oh, I think I “get it” quite well. You choose to single out a publication that you don’t like and vilify it for a manufactured reason (while completely ignoring the fact that Conservative organs like the WSJ has published the same information over the years).

Just because you are shocked that a paper would dare to print details that you personally didn’t know about doesn’t mean that these details haven’t been publicized by our own government and others for several years now. You only jump on this now because Rover has made it a political issue in an effort to frame things up for the upcoming election.

How can you be so blind? This is a TACTIC—a political one.

I am not sure whether your site handles html or not—if it doesn’t, I apologize.

And on that basis, it is not possible to make a credible claim that the Times revealed any “secret” information about the finance tracking program that would tactically benefit the terrorists.

So, why did the NYT bother publishing it in the first place? Why did both Democrats and Republicans ask the Times not to publish it? Isn’t there a disconnect here?

By all means, come on back any time and embarrass yourself again, Miles.

Yes, you should worry, Keller.

I have done enough “skimming” around the web…caselaw in fact, and will suggest that perhaps given the intentional difficulty for making a case for treason, you get to call the victory for your side. I am happy for you guys-the NYT did not, to the extent they would ever be successfully convicted and held over on SCOTUS appeal, commit treason. And, while your repeated assertions that they did not give any news that was not already out there in the public domain may have merit, they say in their own piece that they were reporting from sources who could not be named on condition of anonymity on facts surrounding the BUSH administration’s use of the SWIFT program. Implicit in that assertion is the notion that “new” information was being brought forward.

Us right wing zealots, like our counterparts on the left, tend to overreact to news if we think it runs counter to our agenda…you guys and us guys are both guilty.

We part in disagreement about whether these types of news outlets and the stories they report are helpful or harmful to the American people, but we can agree they are not treasonous by American Case Law standards…

I still believe it to have been unnecessary, and purely from a paranoid partisan perspective, believe it has the potential of being harmful. But that is just me, and I am a crazy little boy

“Are you telling me that terrorists get teh copy of obscure reports and pore over them for intel?”

Your incredulity does not change the fact that the use of SWIFT data by US intelligence is a fact that has been in the public domain for years, Kender.

Explain to us how the publication of a fact that is in the public domain can be grounds for a charge of treason. Be certain to include references to the appropriate case law.

Pray link us to your archives on the subject.

And don’t worry Flesh…all your traffic will dwindle back to obscurity in no time at all.