Skip to main content

View Diary: Report: Holder approved search warrant labeling reporter as a co-conspirator (356 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  *gasp* Activist journalism! I'm shocked!! (5+ / 0-)

    Wait, no I'm not. Why would reporters care so much about uncovering wrongdoing if they didn't think it'd have any impact?

    And no shit it was “CLASSIFIED.” It's not illegal to publish classified information, only ever to divulge it.

    Code Monkey like freedom / Code Monkey like peace and justice too
    Code Monkey very nerdy man / With big warm fuzzy bleeding heart
    Code Monkey like you!

    Formerly known as Jyrinx.

    by Code Monkey on Fri May 24, 2013 at 08:45:09 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Well, actually, (7+ / 0-)

      the Espionage Act does specify that publishing classified information is also illegal, and the Supreme Court has upheld the ability of the government to prosecute the press, or anyone else, for publishing or even receiving classified information (Gorin v United States, NY Times v United States, etc)

      There's a reason many spy-handlers have diplomatic covers--- to render them immune from this kind of prosecution. (They just get persona non grata'd out of the country.

      The government will often let the press off the hook as a courtesy, especially if the leak is not too severe.  But if it, say, tips of the North Koreans to the kind of information our spies are accessing, which undoubtedly led to the capture of our informants (as easily as Rosen's informant was caught)... well, that might be too severe a leak.  Especially since the leak served no public purpose--- the journalist was explicit that his goal was to scoop his competition.

      Conservatives need to realize that their Silent Moral Majority is neither silent, nor moral, nor a majority.

      by nominalize on Fri May 24, 2013 at 08:58:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So why did Ellsburg walk? (7+ / 0-)

        Or the people who reported on Bush's domestic spying?

        Or the seven zillionth reporter to be briefed on how awesomely we're doing fighting our secret wars?

        Newspapers publish classified information all the time. There's no possible way it's simply illegal to do so.

        (And BTW, Obama's DoJ has started twice as many Espionage Act prosecutions of journalists as all other Presidents combined. You're telling me it's only because people are leaking more?)

        Code Monkey like freedom / Code Monkey like peace and justice too
        Code Monkey very nerdy man / With big warm fuzzy bleeding heart
        Code Monkey like you!

        Formerly known as Jyrinx.

        by Code Monkey on Fri May 24, 2013 at 09:03:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Ellsburg walked as a courtesy from Richard Nixon. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Code Monkey, Indiana Bob

          Or so we hear from some quarters.

          A slower bleed-out is not a sustainable value.

          by MrJayTee on Fri May 24, 2013 at 09:09:08 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Ellsburg (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KayCeSF, deep info

          was not a reporter.

          He was not contacted by a report who cajoled him into leaking evidence to "force the government's hand".

          He leaked the information.

          Apparently the Supreme Court found that printing the information was protected.

          Also, the Pentagon Papers were embarrassing and showed that the Pentagon knew the war was not winnable and that the administration lied.

          In this instance, the leak revealed that a bomb had been intercepted and put people lives in direct danger in real time.

          Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

          by delphine on Fri May 24, 2013 at 09:29:09 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Er, right. Still. The NYT walked. (5+ / 0-)

            And it's not like investigative journalists just sit back and wait for envelopes to appear on their desks. Soliciting classified documents — cajoling, even — is part of the job.

            And the harm from the leaks goes to the criminality of the leaker, not the reporter. There's no national security clause in the First Amendment.

            Finally, Rosen's motivations are irrelevant. There's no way American courts should be adjudicating journalistic ethics.

            Code Monkey like freedom / Code Monkey like peace and justice too
            Code Monkey very nerdy man / With big warm fuzzy bleeding heart
            Code Monkey like you!

            Formerly known as Jyrinx.

            by Code Monkey on Fri May 24, 2013 at 09:34:53 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  BS, it was reported 17 days (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            3goldens

            after they had the devise and 'perps' in their hands. You actually think the spook's save lives and keep us safe?  right. As far as Rosen's big leak about NK being a threat to security, hahahaha. As Jon Stewart said North Korea answers everything with nuclear tests, they have a nuclear test based economy.

            http://www.thedailyshow.com/...
             

        •  Great questions! (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KayCeSF

          1) Ellsberg got a mistrial due to sloppy investigations.  Might as well ask why OJ walked.  

          2) The NY Times case was about censoring the publication of the papers, not the legality of the leak and the solicitation thereof.  

          3) How do we know that the reporters during the Bush administration didn't have their phones tapped and e-mails searched?  Remember: we don't really need warrants anymore, thanks to FISA.  

          4) Obama has always made it clear that he is cracking down on leaks, and the Congress has long been in full-throated support.  Me too, for that matter.  

          5) You point out that a mere handful of reporters have gotten their records searched over the last 4+ years, while the bulk of reporters working with leaks have not, and yet you're actually worried about a chilling effect?  

          Conservatives need to realize that their Silent Moral Majority is neither silent, nor moral, nor a majority.

          by nominalize on Fri May 24, 2013 at 10:15:12 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Obama's DoJ is pursuing more Esionage Act (6+ / 0-)

            cases than all other administrations combined — twice. You're telling me that won't have a chilling effect?

            They only need to go after a few. The rest will get the hint.

            Finally, are you saying that even Nixon didn't argue that what the reporters did in soliciting the Pentagon Papers was illegal?

            Code Monkey like freedom / Code Monkey like peace and justice too
            Code Monkey very nerdy man / With big warm fuzzy bleeding heart
            Code Monkey like you!

            Formerly known as Jyrinx.

            by Code Monkey on Fri May 24, 2013 at 10:21:13 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The Rosen case was in 2009 (0+ / 0-)

              and that slowed down exactly, nobody.  

              Conservatives need to realize that their Silent Moral Majority is neither silent, nor moral, nor a majority.

              by nominalize on Fri May 24, 2013 at 10:39:44 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  If we only find out now, (0+ / 0-)

                how can it have had its chilling effect already?

                And how the fuck can we be sure that secrets didn't get published that would have been?

                Code Monkey like freedom / Code Monkey like peace and justice too
                Code Monkey very nerdy man / With big warm fuzzy bleeding heart
                Code Monkey like you!

                Formerly known as Jyrinx.

                by Code Monkey on Fri May 24, 2013 at 11:25:08 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  the affidavit was unsealed in 2011 (0+ / 0-)

                  and journalists have been talking about "chilling effects" for decades.  Always about "it could happen."  Yeah, and universal background checks "could lead" to a tyrannical gun grab.  

                  Leaks will still happen if there's something big to leak (like, say, the Pentagon Papers).  Ordinary intel on North Korean nuclear tests is not the same thing, and isn't worth breaking the law for.  If journalists don't work as much getting leaks, then a) policy wonks in DC won't have as much to read, boo hoo, and b) they'll have to use other methods of investigative journalism.  It's not like there was no such thing as journalism before leaks.  

                  Conservatives need to realize that their Silent Moral Majority is neither silent, nor moral, nor a majority.

                  by nominalize on Fri May 24, 2013 at 01:48:20 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  You fully support crack downs on leaks (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            aliasalias, 3goldens

            Just what is it you are so afraid to know?   That you no longer live in a free country?

      •  Espionage Act was unconstitutional from the start (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dallasdoc, 3goldens

        People forget that it was passed because Woodrow Wilson wanted to suppress anti-war activists.  It's a disgrace that it's still on the books.

    •  read the affidavit (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      oregonrick, KayCeSF, Tony Situ

      delineating facts supporting probable cause, which a Reagan-appointed judge agreed with

      My heroes have the heart to live the life I want to live.

      by JLFinch on Fri May 24, 2013 at 09:00:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  So, what wrongdoing was Rosen uncovering? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tony Situ

      "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." - Eleanor Roosevelt

      by eden4barack08 on Fri May 24, 2013 at 11:13:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site