To answer my question, Sen. Joe Lieberman thinks the New York Times (and presumably others) “committed at least an act of bad citizenship” in publishing the WikiLeaks cables. Whether they committed a crime, he thinks, “bears very intensive inquiry by the Justice Department.”

I can’t think of a way that these people can support prosecuting WikiLeaks for espionage and not also wind up prosecuting the New York Times and other “mainstream” news outlets.

Over at Salon, Glenn Greenwald has an excellent rundown of the various anti-WikiLeaks lies and distortions being peddled by the press and the government. There are a lot of them.

Related: Visa has joined MasterCard in blocking payments to WikiLeaks. The WikiLeaks donation page only lists Visa and MasterCard for credit card payments, but you can also donate via bank transfer.

More in NEWS

Local (and not-so-local) news from your favorite writers.

Shelf Life

Scarecrow Video Buyer Mark Steiner Retires After 34 Years

Anthony Hecht is The Stranger's Chief Technology Officer. He owns no monkeys.

18 replies on “Lieberman Suggests Prosecution of New York Times, Too”

  2. I’ll bet Joe Lieberman thought that The Washington Post should have been prosecuted for publishing news about the the Watergate scandal too.

  3. Lieberman can go straight to hell.

    Where were these calls for prosecution when Cheney, Bush, Rove, etc outed a covert CIA operative for political reasons? None of these Dems were opening their mouths at all. But when a journalistic institution re-publishes data that has already been leaked, THEY are attacked.

    Fuck. This. Country.

  4. I just sent a bank transfer to the Icelandic bank listed on the support page. My bank required an address for Sunshine Press Productions which is not listed on the Wikileaks page. I found one by Googling, but I can’t be sure it was right.

    Bank transfers are ridiculously expensive and this is going to put a massive dent in their donations.

  7. I’m right there with ya, 5280. I seriously hope there’s a giant backlash against Visa and Mastercard. What crime have these “criminals” they keep calling “criminals” committed exactly? What gave the Swiss the right to freeze their accounts? & Visa and Mastercard the right to block payments to an organization yet to be convicted of any crime, let alone even charged with one able to stand up in court?

  13. Ooh, I’m so going to start using that, @12:

    “What’s the matter COMTE? You look very irritable today.”

    “Aw, it’s just my Liebermans. They’re burning and itching like CRAZY!”

  14. @ 8 — The NYT case was an issue of prior restraint. More to the point here is Boehner v McDermott, which also operates in NYT’s favor.

Comments are closed.