Interesting scenario outlined by Dennis Persica of The Times-Picayune. A few years ago it probably would have seemed far-fetched, even for Bush. Today, it seems rather plausible, maybe even likely.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/06/28/when_the_fbi_raids_the_times.phpWhat if the U.S. Attorney’s office in New York—bolstered by a cadre of federal marshals or FBI agents—entered the offices of The New York Times, looking to rummage through the paper’s files and computers either to find the source of the leaks for the banking story or to make sure the Times isn’t about to publish another story allegedly damaging to national security?
In raising this possibility, I am not suggesting the administration would do this to shut down all news media and establish an authoritarian regime. Let’s just assume the government has good intentions—guarding the nation’s security—when it orders the raid. But historians and polemicists of all political stripes know that since the dawn of humanity the road to catastrophe has often been paved with good intentions.
< snip >
Consider the implications of this hypothetical scenario: Agents search the files inside The New York Times building. Perhaps some of those files are carted out; maybe even computer drives are taken. Such a scenario would make the Pentagon Papers dispute look like a minor disagreement among gentlemen. In that case, the government tried to stop the Times and other newspapers from printing a particular story. A raid, on the other hand, would shut down the entire paper. If it wanted to get really tough, the government could treat the Times as an enemy collaborator, seal off its headquarters and move toward seizing its assets.
Meanwhile, the administration could count on a portion of the blogosphere—as well as talk radio and cable TV personalities—to cheer on the raid.