Rep. King: "New York Times" = Criminals
To some, the New York Times' newsroom is filled with reporters and editors dedicated to providing readers with the best possible coverage of the events in our world.
But to Rep. Peter King, R-NY, criminals are added into the mix of that same newsroom.
During an interview today on "Fox News Sunday," King called for a criminal investigation into the Times' reporting on the government's secret bank data sifting program.
"To me, the real question here is the conduct of The New York Times," King told Chris Wallace after expressing his support for the administration's handling of the program. "By disclosing this in a time of war, they have compromised America's antiterrorist policies."
"This is a very effective policy. They have compromised it. This is the second time The New York Times has done this," King continued. "And to me, nobody elected The New York Times to do anything. And The New York Times is putting its own arrogant, elitist, left-wing agenda before the interests of the American people."
No problem. King's only filling the airwaves with enough filth to make a landfill look like an operating room.
"And I'm calling on the attorney general to begin a criminal investigation and prosecution of The New York Times, its reporters, the editors that worked on this, and the publisher," King said.
Prosecuting the "Times" for their reporting on such a disgraceful program would be a direct assault on the First Amendment to our Constitution. Because of them and the other papers who ran their own versions of the story, we are reminded once again of the Bush administration's sickening fettish of violating our privacy.
And, excuse me, Rep. King, sir... the "Times" has been elected to do something. Those who subscribe to the print edition or have a free account to read the paper online have chosen the "Times" to inform them on the events going on in their world.
Don't listen to King's far-fetched idea that the "Times is putting its own arrogant, elitist, left-wing agenda before the interests of the American people", either. All they are trying to do, as I'm sure any paper across the country would, is inform their readers that their confidential banking information may be in the wrong hands.
Those who believe otherwise can cancel their subscription or terminate their online account. Or both.
And about the "Times" compromising our "antiterrorist" policies? Give me a break. God forbid we find out that the government, members of the Bush regime of all people, are overstepping their boundaries.
We need the "New York Times." We need the "Washington Post." We need the "Wall Street Journal." We need any paper that exposes the unjust actions of any government.
And we need them now more than ever.