Wonder why they aren't piling on the Wall Street Journal? Or why they have never objected to the Valerie Plame outing? Or why they never complained about the NYT reporting all that "curveball" misinformation/propaganda leading up to the invasion of Iraq?

Good analogy re. the umpire call. I was afraid they were backing themselves into a corner with all the rhetoric, and would be forced to do something stupid. Based on Tony Snow's comment yesterday that they won't be revoking the NYT's White House press privileges, I suppose we can assume it was just blustering, and as you say, intimidation.

And the GOP is increasingly starting to look like Joe Mikulik.

video: (link...)
____________________________

"The iPod was not developed by Baptists in Waco." -- G.K.

There was nothing wrong or illegal about the program. So what exactly IS in the public interest in publishing this NSA program ... one that the NYT called for itself in an editorial on 9/24/01?

================
(link...)

One of the New York Times’s justifications for exposing the Bush administration’s post-9/11 scrutiny of international banking transactions via access to Swift, the Belgium-based international banking-information system, is that the American people never gave the feds permission to snoop into banking records—even those of suspected Islamist terrorists. Thus, the Times must save the day by alerting us all. But there’s a flaw in this justification. When the Bush administration did ask the American people for permission to scrutinize banking records for terrorist activity, Congress practically shouted yes, without public objection.

Just six weeks after 9/11, Congress overwhelmingly passed the USA Patriot Act. Among other things, the act vastly increased the Treasury Department’s ability to examine both domestic banking transactions and international ones whose activity touches the U.S. for possible terrorist activity, by expanding longstanding tools to uncover money laundering. Federal law now requires all banks and brokerage firms doing business in the U.S. to keep detailed records of new customers and to report any suspicious clients or transactions to the authorities.

ummmm - people could be up set because people could actually die because of the NYT's posting of classified information?

And regarding an earlier comment - was Val truly outed? Outed from what? There has certainly been a lot of accusations about an outing without an actual determination of such. I guess it is kind of like the SKB outing. Not very pleasant but certainly not any crime...