This might be a bit of inside baseball, but I think it's going to be very interesting to see how
this eventually pans out.
You have Pulitzer Prize-winning reporters receiving criminally leaked information for their stories. Basically, newspapers are relying on people breaking the law. This is an untenable situation, obviously, especially during a time of war. It's going to be interesting how the newspapers react to this. One the one, more predictable, hand it's easy to imagine them opposing these investigations on free speech grounds. They'll whine and howl about how this is another example of Chimpy McHitler crushing their dissent. But on the other hand, they've largely brought this on themselves. They've taken great pains to attempt to damage the gov't by blowing up ludicrous non-stories (NSA program, Valerie Plame investigation, Gitmo, etc.) to the point that gullible senators believe these are impeachable offenses.
Newspapers need to start being much more responsible about their sources. This is the bottom line. I think many people have forgotten about Jayson Blair already, and how that kerfuffle really began the modern debate about anonymous sourcing. When they rely on anonymous sources betraying illegal information, especially information that is largely politically motivated and of dubious veracity, they damage only their own credibility.
Ha.