The New York Times has rather decisively broken with the Obama administration:

[KittyWampus]

57. Too bad I've totally debunked your OP's thread title.

I'd repost the editorial on the NSA Leaks but I'm sure it'd probably be called spamming. See post #52

Here are two more recent Editorials from Editorial Board. The second one highlights my mistake in this thread regarding the Obama Administration's behavior with journalists. It doesn't hurt to admit when I am mistaken. Maybe you can try it:

EDITORIAL
Pardon Rates Remain Low
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Published: August 21, 2013 103 Comments

Attorney General Eric Holder said many encouraging things in his important speech on the future of sentencing reform, but the most striking thing may have been what he did not say. In all his 4,000 words on America’s “broken” legal system — and particularly on its outlandishly harsh and ineffective sentencing laws — there was not one mention of executive clemency.
Today's Editorials

That power, which the Constitution explicitly grants to the president, has always served as an indispensable check on the injustices of the legal system and as a means of demonstrating forgiveness where it is called for. It was once used freely; presidents issued more than 10,000 grants of clemency between 1885 and 1930 alone. But mercy is a four-letter word in an era when politicians have competed to see who can be toughest on crime.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/22/opinion/what-happened-to-clemency.html

…………………………...


Another Chilling Leak Investigation
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Published: May 21, 2013

With the decision to label a Fox News television reporter a possible “co-conspirator” in a criminal investigation of a news leak, the Obama administration has moved beyond protecting government secrets to threatening fundamental freedoms of the press to gather news.

The latest reported episode involves James Rosen, the chief Washington correspondent for Fox News. In 2009, Mr. Rosen reported on FoxNews.com that North Korea planned to launch a missile in response to the condemnation of its nuclear tests by the United Nations Security Council. The Justice Department investigated the source of the article and later indicted Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, a State Department security adviser, on charges of leaking classified information. Mr. Kim pleaded not guilty.

Normally, the inquiry would have ended with Mr. Kim — leak investigations usually focus on the source, not the reporter. But, in this case, federal prosecutors also asked a federal judge for permission to examine Mr. Rosen’s personal e-mails, arguing that “there is probable cause to believe” Mr. Rosen is “an aider and abettor and/or co-