Skip to main content

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

Comment Preferences

  •  The issue isn't the warrant per se. (5+ / 0-)

    It's the legal theory under which the warrant was sought and obtained — a theory that says that a reporter who solicits classified information is a conspirator. This theory would make meaningful investigative journalism impossible to do legally.

    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 08:50:39 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  By the letter of the Espionage Act, (2+ / 0-)

      it is illegal to solicit classified information. It's also illegal, once you've got classified information you're not supposed to have, to keep it instead of turning it over immediately.

      The issue is that the press have to some extent (not 100%) been granted the privilege of immunity from prosecution under this act.  You and I don't get that privilege.  And it's why foreign spy handlers are always here on diplomatic passports, which grant them diplomatic immunity from prosecution for doing precisely this.    

      But they are co-conspirators, in any sense of the term, to an illegal act.  

      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 09:47:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The affidavit doesn't allege (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        aliasalias

        that Rosen wasn't being a journalist. It merely describes the process of obtaining the information and then publishing it. Rosen's status as “privileged,” or his lack thereof, is never considered at all.

        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 10:02:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Exactly. As the law prescribes. (0+ / 0-)

          Prosecutors have discretion in determining whether to pursue someone for violations of a law, and generally prosecutors will lay off journalists, if for no other reason than shitstorms like this, where it gets bad PR from other journalists.

          This time, the prosecutor didn't, and that's what the rest of the journalism world is up in arms about.    

          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 10:22:06 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  So the BUSH Justice Department (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            greenbell, deep info

            didn't go after the domestic spying reporters even though they could have under the law? Are you seriously telling me that Ashcroft had too much respect for journalism??

            I simply cannot believe that the entire basis of the freedom of the press to report on secret government doings is prosecutorial discretion on the part of the government. If that were true, we'd never learn anything the government doesn't want us to.

            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 10:26:30 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Let's not run away with implications, here (0+ / 0-)
              Are you seriously telling me that Ashcroft had too much respect for journalism??
              I'm seriously telling you that we don't know if the Bush administration checked the records of journalists because they didn't need a public warrant to do so.  The rest is speculation.  I will note that the administration itself did quite a bit of leaking, and I'm sure they didn't investigate those leaks too carefully.
              I simply cannot believe that the entire basis of the freedom of the press to report on secret government doings is prosecutorial discretion on the part of the government.
              It's not the entire basis!  There are also judicial decisions, which rests on the discretion of judges, who are... also part of the government.  

              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 10:30:59 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  But judges are a separate branch. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                deep info

                Your claim, that prosecutorial discretion is the reason people don't always go to jail for publishing classified information, implies that the executive is entirely self-policing. Much as Cheney was a fan of the idea and Obama doesn't seem to hate it either, it's not a fact.

                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 10:33:39 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Prosecutorial discretion is the reason (0+ / 0-)

                  a lot of people don't go to jail despite violating laws.  Just look at all the "accidental gun deaths" that are caused by leaving loaded guns around in violation of the law.  Then the prosecutor says "they've suffered enough" and boom!  off the hook.

                  But to get to the meat, we have judges on the one hand, the executive on the other, and of course the legislature who passed the Espionage Act in the first place and could write in press protections if it wanted to.  Is that not checks and balances?  

                  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 10:39:10 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  No. It's not. (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    greenbell, deep info, aliasalias

                    All those checks and balances are meaningless without representative government, which we can't have without a free press. The three branches could all agree tomorrow that socialism is illegal and that wouldn't make it right.

                    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 11:28:33 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

      •  The Espionage Act of 1917 is unconstitutional (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        aliasalias

        It has always been unconstitutional.  Large portions of it have already been invalidated and struck down.  Obama is abusing some of the remaining bits.  These haven't been invalidated and struck down because since Woodrow Wilson, very few Presidents have ever dared to use them.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (153)
  • Community (73)
  • 2016 (52)
  • Elections (50)
  • Bernie Sanders (45)
  • Environment (38)
  • Climate Change (37)
  • Culture (36)
  • Hillary Clinton (34)
  • Republicans (33)
  • Science (31)
  • Education (30)
  • Media (30)
  • Civil Rights (29)
  • Barack Obama (28)
  • Law (24)
  • Labor (22)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (22)
  • Economy (21)
  • Congress (21)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site