Don't Go Into The Light

If you didn't catch it live yesterday (I didn't) this is the must-see video from the weekend. John Hinderaker discusses classified leaks with Lucy Dalglish (Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press) and Michael Isikoff, (reporter for Newsweek) on CNN’s Reliable Sources with Howard Kurtz. The transcript is here.

It's easy to imagine the press component of the discussion believing that they are somehow like narrators in a documentary, unable to have an effect on the events they describe - therefore unaccountable. And it's impossible to miss the contempt shared by all but Hinderaker for the law and the administration. For example, their dismissal of the Espionage Act:

Kurtz (in transcript, not on video):

"But first, it's no secret that the Bush administration is trying to choke off the leaking of secrets to the press. CIA employees are being given lie detector tests, according to "The Washington Post," and the Justice Department is talking about using a

World War I Espionage Act

to prosecute reporters for receiving classified information."

Dalglish:

"And there's a reason why the 1917 Espionage Act has never been used to prosecute journalists. It would be an absolutely ridiculous proposition."

Isikoff:

"And using statutes like the Espionage Act, which is so vague and open for -- you know, the number of investigations that could conceivably flow from this strategy is enormous and, you know, it's hard to see how it could not but have a chilling effect on doing, you know, standard reporting on what the government is up to."

"Just one point on what Mr. Hinderaker just said. He was -- selectively quoted from a portion of the National Defense Act. There's other -- there's other language in there talking about communications relating to national defense which are incredibly vaguely worded, nowhere defined, and can be used to prosecute just about anything."

"One of the recommendations of the September 11th Commission is that there was way too much classification in government, and that was hindering national security."

The inclusion of "1917" and "World War I" as descriptors is telling. The law is old. Antiquated. Obsolete. How arrogant. There are laws against murder, theft, and rape that are much older - should these laws be placed in the same category due to age alone? I guess keeping secrets was somehow more relevant during WWI than it is today.

Another good dodge is the "too much classification" line. Would Mr. Isikoff argue that since a duty roster may have been over-classified as confidential during WWII, the press should have published the attack plans in advance of D-Day?

But the undertone of the conversation is the fear sweeping news offices over this issue. And Lucy Dalglish illustrates nicely the abject terror felt by the MSM during this exchange:

KURTZ: Lucy Dalglish, why should journalists be shielded if it's a crime to leak it, classified information, when they're on the other end of that transaction?

LUCY DALGLISH, REPORTERS COMMITTEE, FREEDOM OF PRESS: Well, you know, I -- theoretically, you know, "The Washington Post" probably this morning in my newspaper broke the law 45 times. I mean, you cannot pick up a newspaper without reading classified information.

KURTZ: In other words, you could find the illegal justification to prosecute reporters every day of the week?

DALGLISH: You could find the -- absolutely you could. And there's a reason why the 1917 Espionage Act has never been used to prosecute journalists. It would be an absolutely ridiculous proposition.

Why, if the government enforced the law, we'd all go to jail! And wouldn't that be silly?

But certainly the threat of prosecution alone wouldn't frighten the stalwart defenders of free speech out of doing their noble duty to the public? John expertly tosses out the bait, but the panel pointedly ignores it:

The NSA program was capturing lots of international terrorist communications. That's dropped off drastically since "The New York Times" published the story. So they've -- they've damaged our security.

Sounds like "aid and comfort" to me. Even more than prosecution, the press fears prosecution using the dreaded "T" word. And that law is old, too, Lucy.

H/T PowerLine.

Added note: Ian at Expose The Left does a terrific job of making these videos available to everyone, if you agree, drop him a note of thanks for the service he provides. A hit to his tip jar wouldn't be unwelcome, either.