Liberal Media

The 'Liberal' NYT sat on the domestic spying story for over a year.

The New York Times first debated publishing a story about secret eavesdropping on Americans as early as last fall, before the 2004 presidential election.

But the newspaper held the story for more than a year and only revealed the secret wiretaps last Friday, when it became apparent a book by one of its reporters was about to break the news, according to journalists familiar with the paper's internal discussions.

Imagine that Bush would have been re-elected in the midst of this criminal act? Criminal act?

Yes.

Yes.

Atrios says it all.

So, the decision to publish a story should be dependent, in part, on the volume of partisan criticism you expect to receive. I guess that's how they approach the news now.

Forget that a crime has been committed. We can't do the story because those big bad wingnuts are going to call us 'partisan.' The truth is not partisan. The public's right to know isn't partisan. What a bunch of spineless hacks.

Journalism is dead. The criminal presidency reigns. Ask yourself if any of this could have happened under the watchful eye of a functioning media.

Selling a war with false and misleading information. Check.

Outing a CIA agent for political payback. Check.

Allowing people under investigation for this action to continue to work in your administration when you said you'd fire anyone involved. Check.

Naming your unqualified political sycophant to the Supreme Court. Check.

Torture in secret prisons. Check.

Spying on your own citizens. Check.

Summoning the editor and publisher of the NYT on December 6th to the Oval Office to please please please not tell the American people that their President thinks it is acceptable for a country to spy on its own citizens without judicial oversight. Check.

Liberal Media