The Next Bush Veto: Press Shield Law Passed By House Vote Of 398-21

[DeSwiss]

House Easily Passes Shield Law -- Bush Promises Veto

By E&P Staff and The Associated Press
Published: October 16, 2007 10:30 PM ET

WASHINGTON Saying the free flow of information must not be choked off, the House on Tuesday took up a media shield bill to protect the confidentiality of reporters' sources in most federal court cases. The White House, warning that the bill would encourage leaks of classified information, threatened a veto.

The House overwhelmingly approved the bill Tuesday. The measure was passed on a bipartisan vote, 398-21, with 176 Republicans joining virtually all Democrats to support the bill.

The White House issued a statement Tuesday afternoon saying President Bush's advisers would recommend he veto the legislation unless it's changed, claiming the bill is too broad and could harm national security. "It is likely that the legislation will encourage more leaks of classified information by giving leakers such a formidable shield behind which they can hide," the statement read.

Under the bill, reporters could still be forced to disclose information on sources if that information is needed to prevent acts of terrorism or harm to the national security. That wasn't enough for the White House, which said the privileges given to reporters "could severely frustrate — an in some cases completely eviscerate — the ability to investigate acts of terrorism or threats to national security."

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003659071

- "The legislation will encourage more leaks of classified information?"

Oh, I suppose they mean other than when they leak classified information. Like with Valerie. Which is okay....

[Rex]

1. As opposed to George wanting to keep everything his criminal

administration is doing...ultra secret. :eyes:

Hey George, fucking please.

[DeSwiss]

2. He doesn't want reporters to have....

....any insulation from the law for leaking classified information like the kind he's given to his scurrilous little rat-toad underlings.

Reminds me of Nixon who also tried to cover-up his criminality under the National Security rubric. Some things never change....

[madeline_con]

4. Don't you mean rat turd underlings? n/t

[DeSwiss]

6. I started to go with the tried and true.....

....rat-turd moniker, but I thought it was time to start marketing something newer. Everybody uses rat-turd these days.

Boy, the Bush administration has sure put my perjorative labeling abilities to the test.

- Maybe I should have focus-grouped it first.....

[madeline_con]

8. You don't want to get too cliche with these things. n/t

[WillParkinson]

3. You know George has nothing to do with it...

"in some cases completely eviscerate"

Bush us a 4 syllable word? Suuuure.

[DeSwiss]

7. This is so true....

...because 4 syllable words give George a headache. Along with everyone else when he tries to use them....

[simmonsj811]

5. $ame $hit

different day :shrug: :kick:

[DeSwiss]

9. Well, almost the same ol' shit....

The bill wouldn't help most up-and-coming bloggers:

The bill provides journalists with a qualified privilege as to sources and information, while at the same time, recognizing the need for effective law enforcement and robust national security. A blogger who regularly engages in journalistic activities - such as gathering and publishing news and information for dissemination to the public - and does so for a substantial portion of the person's livelihood or for substantial financial gain would be covered by the shield as a journalist.

http://openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1934


Hmmmm.... These old farts still don't get it. Which is not that odd, since many are part of a dying breed as well. But the print media is tanking across the board:

New York Times shares slid 43 cents, or 2.3 percent, to $18.48 at 4:04 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading, the lowest since January 1997. The stock has declined 24 percent this year. Other newspaper stocks, including Gannett Co., owner of USA Today, and McClatchy Co., publisher of the Miami Herald, are also trading at 10-year lows because of the loss of advertising to new media such as the Internet and the decline in classified ads linked to tumbling housing sales.

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aY9iww4X.01g