Are Reporters Above the Law? Bennett v. Safire

Despite cheap digs at Bennett on Meet the Press today, Bill Bennet wades into it with Bill Safire.

MR. BENNETT: Well, we’re still talking about basic right and wrong here. And is there any question that people—I think I’m the only one here who signed a nondisclosure agreement when I was—when I was director of national drug control policy, maybe some of you have—it’s a pretty serious matter. People who signed those agreements in government have violated the law, they have violated their oath, they have done so by talking to Dana Priest, talking to Risen and talking to Lichtblau.

MS. MITCHELL: Let, let me...

MR. BENNETT: We need to get after those people, and one way to get after those people is to talk to the reporters who—with whom they spoke.

MR. SAFIRE: Oh, you’re saying “get after them.” That means threatening reporters, and threaten them with contempt and put them in jail.

MR. BENNETT: Absolutely, absolutely.

MR. SAFIRE: And that’s wrong.

MS. MITCHELL: Bill, what, what...(unintelligible)...let me ask, Bill...

MR. BENNETT: Why is that wrong, Bill? Why are they above the law?

MR. SAFIRE: Because they’re affected...

MR. HARWOOD: Because it’s a big step toward tyranny, which is what we’re supposed to be withholding.

MR. BENNETT: It isn’t a step toward tyranny. And what about the AIPAC, guys? Is that a step toward tyranny? They’re being prosecuted under the Espionage Act. Isn’t that more a step toward tyranny?

(Emphasis mine.) Unfortunately, he doesn't get to finish, as John Harwood of the Wall Street Journal interrupted. Safire's answer would be more intersting.

They do return to it briefly at the end of the program.

MS. MITCHELL: The last word to you, Bennett. We only have about 15, 30 seconds.

MR. BENNETT: Yeah, I agree with Bill Safire. It’s in Congress’ court now, and they need to act on it. But I don’t agree with Bill Safire that the press has a right not to give testimony in a criminal trial. They are not above the law. And when you show your Pentagon Papers case, please read Black—Justice Blackman’s decision. He said, “No prior restraint. But if people get hurt, if people get killed as a result of this, the press is responsible.”

MS. MITCHELL: So the issue is whether people are hurt by something that had arguably been previously disclosed.

MR. BENNETT: That’s correct.

MR. SAFIRE: I disagree completely.

MR. BENNETT: You’re not above the law.

MR. SAFIRE: I will respect...(unintelligible).

But it doesn't get us any further to understanding Safire's argument. As it stands then, it looks like he is claiming reporters ought to be above the law in these matters.

Read the rest. (Begin roundtable transcript here, scroll to bottom of page.)