Thankfully some editors ignore his attempts at blocking the truth. The
threat is the one's that don't like Fox News. Hopefully Bill O'Reilly and
Sean Hannity face the same end as Joseph Goebbels, suicide.

Bush Presses Editors on Security

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, December 26, 2005; C01

President Bush has been summoning newspaper editors lately in an effort to
prevent publication of stories he considers damaging to national security.

The efforts have failed, but the rare White House sessions with the
executive editors of The Washington Post and New York Times are an
indication of how seriously the president takes the recent reporting that
has raised questions about the administration's anti-terror tactics.

Leonard Downie Jr., The Post's executive editor, would not confirm the
meeting with Bush before publishing reporter Dana Priest's Nov. 2 article
disclosing the existence of secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe used to
interrogate terror suspects. Bill Keller, executive editor of the Times,
would not confirm that he, publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. and Washington
bureau chief Philip Taubman had an Oval Office sit-down with the president
on Dec. 5, 11 days before reporters James Risen and Eric Lichtblau revealed
that Bush had authorized eavesdropping on Americans and others within the
United States without court orders.

But the meetings were confirmed by sources who have been briefed on them but
are not authorized to comment because both sides had agreed to keep the
sessions off the record. The White House had no comment.

"When senior administration officials raised national security questions
about details in Dana's story during her reporting, at their request we met
with them on more than one occasion," Downie says. "The meetings were off
the record for the purpose of discussing national security issues in her
story." At least one of the meetings involved John Negroponte, the director
of national intelligence, and CIA Director Porter Goss, the sources said.

"This was a matter of concern for intelligence officials, and they sought to
address their concerns," an intelligence official said. Some liberals
criticized The Post for withholding the location of the prisons at the
administration's request.

After Bush's meeting with the Times executives, first reported by Newsweek's
Jonathan Alter, the president assailed the paper's piece on domestic spying,
calling the leak of classified information "shameful." Some liberals,
meanwhile, attacked the paper for holding the story for more than a year
after earlier meetings with administration officials.

"The decision to hold the story last year was mine," Keller says. "The
decision to run the story last week was mine. I'm comfortable with both
decisions. Beyond that, there's just no way to have a full discussion of the
internal procedural twists that media writers find so fascinating without
talking about what we knew, when, and how -- and that I can't do."

Some Times staffers say the story was revived in part because of concerns
that Risen is publishing a book on the CIA next month that will include the
disclosures. But Keller told the Los Angeles Times: "The publication was not
timed to the Iraqi election, the Patriot Act debate, Jim's forthcoming book
or any other event."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/25/AR2005122500665_
pf.html