Sent to you by Sean McBride via Google Reader: Is Michael Mukasey
prioritizing the harassment and imprisonment of journalists? via Salon:
Glenn Greenwald by Glenn Greenwald on 2/2/08
(updated below)

Ever since the President's illegal warrantless eavesdropping program
was revealed by the New York Times' Jim Risen and Eric Lichtblau back
in December, 2005, there has been a faction of neoconservatives and
other extremists on the Right calling for the NYT reporters and editors
to be criminally prosecuted -- led by the likes of Bill Kristol (now of
the NYT), Bill Bennett (of CNN), Commentary Magazine and many others.
In May, 2006, Albert Gonzales went on ABC News and revealed that the
DOJ had commenced a criminal investigation into the leak, and
then "raised the possibility [] that New York Times journalists could
be prosecuted for publishing classified information."

That was one of the more revealing steps ever taken by Bush's DOJ under
Gonzales: the administration violated multiple federal laws for years
in spying on Americans, blocked all efforts to investigate what they
did or subject it to the rule of law, but then decided that the only
real criminals were those who alerted the nation to their lawbreaking
-- whistleblowers and journalists alike. Even Gonzales' public musing
about criminal prosecutions could have had a devastating effect -- if
you're a whistleblower or journalist who uncovers secret government
lawbreaking, you're obviously going to think twice (at least) before
bringing it to light, given the public threats by the Attorney General
to criminally prosecute those who do.

Eighteen months have passed since Gonzales' threats, and while there
have been some signs that the investigation continues -- former DOJ
official Jack Goldsmith, for instance, described how he was accosted
and handed a Subpoena by FBI agents in the middle of Harvard Square,
demanding to know what he knew about the NSA leak -- there had no
further public evidence that the DOJ intended to pursue Risen and
Lichtblau. Until now.

Yesterday, the NYT reported that Jim Risen was served with a grand jury
Subpoena, compelling him to disclose the identity of the confidential
source(s) for disclosures in his 2006 book, State of War. The Subpoena
seeks disclosure of Risen's sources not for the NSA program (for which
he and Lichtblau won a Pulitzer Prize), but rather, for Risen's
reporting on CIA efforts to infiltrate Iran's nuclear program.
Nonetheless, Risen's work on State of War is what led to his discovery
that the Bush administration was illegally spying on Americans without
the warrants required by law.

The issuance of a grand jury Subpoena to a reporter seeking the
disclosure of confidential sources is one of the most serious steps the
DOJ can take. If the reporter refuses to disclose his source(s) -- as
reporters feel duty-bound to do, and, independently, as their future
ability to uncover government secrets requires -- the reporter can be
held in contempt and consigned to prison (Risen has indicated he will
not comply). Judy Miller's refusal to disclose her sources in the Libby
case, in response to a grand jury Subpoena, is what led to her
imprisonment for 85 days, until she finally relented and revealed her
sources. Had she not done so, she could have (and likely would have)
remained imprisoned indefinitely.

Risen's book, State of War, was published in early January, 2006 --
more than two years ago. Why is it now, suddenly, that he is being
subpoenaed to reveal his sources?

Issuing a Subpoena to a journalist poses such serious First Amendment
threats that the DOJ has promulgated guidelines for what must occur in
order for that to happen. Pursuant to Section III(A)(2)(l) of those
guidelines -- "Subpoenas to the Media":If the investigation involves
media news gathering functions, the staff should first attempt to
obtain the necessary information from non-media sources before
considering subpoenaing members of the news media. If these attempts
are unsuccessful and news media sources are the only reasonable sources
of the relevant information, the staff should attempt to negotiate with
the news media member or organization to obtain the information
voluntarily. If such negotiations fail, the staff must seek the express
approval of the Attorney General before issuing a subpoena.Although one
can't say for certain, it seems rather likely that what has led to the
issuance of this grand jury Subpoena to Risen is that Michael Mukasey
has apparently decided to make criminal investigations of such leaks
one of his top priorities, and is prepared for a massive First
Amendment fight with Risen and his publisher, Simon & Schuster, which
likely will include a willingness to imprison Risen if he fails to
comply -- just as the Neoconservative Right, still seething over
Risen's role in exposing the President's NSA lawbreaking, has been
demanding for some time.

One of the leading theorists of the "Imprison-the-NYT" movement has
been Gabriel Schoenfeld of Norm Podhoertz's Commentary Magazine. He
wrote a widely-cited article back in March, 2006 arguing that Risen,
Lichtblau and even NYT Editor Bill Keller should all be criminally
prosecuted under the Espionage Act and other statutes for publishing
the NSA story:The real question that an intrepid prosecutor in the
Justice Department should be asking is whether, in the aftermath of
September 11, we as a nation can afford to permit the reporters and
editors of a great newspaper to become the unelected authority that
determines for all of us what is a legitimate secret and what is not.
Like the Constitution itself, the First Amendment's protections of
freedom of the press are not a suicide pact. The laws governing what
the Times has done are perfectly clear; will they be enforced?On his
Commentary blog yesterday, Schoenfeld gloated about the Subpoena to
Risen and suggested a possible connection to not only Risen's work on
the NSA story, but also Schoenfeld's own agitating for the imprisonment
of these journalists. Schoenfeld wrote (referring to himself in the
third person by the name of his blog, "Connecting the Dots"):Finally,
action. A federal prosecutor has issued a subpoena to James Risen of
the New York Times, one of two reporters at the paper who compromised
the National Security Agency's (NSA) Terrorist Surveillance Program in
December 1995 (sic). . . .

Why is this investigation proceeding now? Connecting the Dots has no
inside information. But Connecting the Dots was seated at the same
table as Michael Mukasey and his wife at two dinners in the last three
years, back when the future Attorney General was still a mere federal
judge. The leaks in the New York Times did not come up for discussion,
but Mukasey made plain he was a close reader of COMMENTARY.

Did he read a certain article in COMMENTARY entitled Has the New York
Times Violated the Espionage Act? That's a question James Risen -- and
Bill Keller, too -- should be thinking about.It's entirely unsurprising
that Michael Mukasey sat socially with our nation's most extremist
neoconservatives and declared himself a "close reader of COMMENTARY."
After all, before his nomination was formally announced, the White
House chose Bill Kristol to announce his selection and, in a lengthy
article, to vouch to conservatives for what a fine AG Mukasey would
make.

Mukasey was a long-time supporter of the neocons' favorite candidate,
Rudy Giuliani and, prior to becoming Attorney General, was part of the
Giuliani campaign. And it was Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer --
both with neoconservative leanings (war supporters both, among other
things) -- who jointly enabled Mukasey's confirmation by becoming the
only Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee to vote in his favor.

Although there are still facts missing -- such as whether this Subpoena
was actually approved by Mukasey rather than Gonzales -- it's hard to
avoid the conclusion that the Grand Jury Subpoena was done at least
with Mukasey's assent. It seems rather clearly to signify the intent of
his Justice Department to more aggressively pursue reporters who
disclose information embarrassing to the President.

It's hard to overstate how threatening this behavior is. The Bush
administration has erected an unprecedented wall of secrecy around
everything it does. Beyond illegal spying, if one looks at the
instances where we learned of lawbreaking and other forms of lawless
radicalism -- CIA black sites, rendition programs, torture, Abu Ghraib,
pre-war distortion of intelligence, destruction of CIA torture videos
-- it is, in every case, the by-product of two forces: government
whistleblowers and reporters willing to expose it.

Grand Jury Subpoenas such as the one issued to Risen have as their
principal purpose shutting off that avenue of learning about government
wrongdoing -- the sole remaining avenue for a country plagued by a
supine, slothful, vapid press and an indescribably submissive Congress.
Mukasey has quickly demonstrated that he has no interest in
investigating and pursuing lawbreaking by high government officials,
but now, he (or at least the DOJ he leads) seems to be demonstrating
something even worse: a burgeoning interest in investigating and
pursuing those who expose such governmental lawbreaking and turning
those whistleblowers and investigative journalists into criminals.

UPDATE: An emailer sums up the situation nicely:So, let me see if I get
this straight. The Congress issues subpoenas to former [and current]
Bush officials to testify about administration conduct. Said officials
ignore the subpoenas. Nothing happens.

Administration, via grand jury, issues subpoena, Risen is threatened
with jail.

What's wrong with this picture?That's rather accurate.

One other notable aspect of this is that every time the administration
attacks press freedoms, the newspapers' Editorial Pages are virtually
mute. The only commentary I could find concerning the Risen Subpoena is
this appropriately concise reaction from Spencer Ackerman, writing at
the new online newspaper, Washington Independent. Neither the Post nor
the Times' Editorial Pages has bothered to weigh in.

Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Salon: Glenn Greenwald using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your
favorite sites

Reply via email to