Fox learned about the subpoena nearly three years ago (updated)

[dumbcat]

85. Thank you for that cite. But

That section of the US Code does not pertain to anything to do with the case at hand. It pertains to espionage of National Defense information, and mostly code and crypto systems (the field in which I used to work.) The Rosen case pertains to the State Dept.

(a) Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting
the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the
information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to
the advantage of any foreign nation, goes upon, enters, flies over,
or otherwise obtains information concerning any vessel, aircraft,
work of defense, navy yard, naval station, submarine base, fueling
station, fort, battery, torpedo station, dockyard, canal, railroad,
arsenal, camp, factory, mine, telegraph, telephone, wireless, or
signal station, building, office, research laboratory or station or
other place connected with the national defense owned or
constructed, or in progress of construction by the United States or
under the control of the United States, or of any of its officers,
departments, or agencies, or within the exclusive jurisdiction of
the United States, or any place in which any vessel, aircraft,
arms, munitions, or other materials or instruments for use in time
of war are being made, prepared, repaired, stored, or are the
subject of research or development, under any contract or agreement
with the United States, or any department or agency thereof, or
with any person on behalf of the United States, or otherwise on
behalf of the United States, or any prohibited place so designated
by the President by proclamation in time of war or in case of
national emergency in which anything for the use of the Army, Navy,
or Air Force is being prepared or constructed or stored,
information as to which prohibited place the President has
determined would be prejudicial to the national defense;

"There are thousands, if not tens of thousands, of persons doing time in federal prisons for conspiring, or aiding and abetting, crimes they did not themselves commit."

While prosecutions appear to be on the rise, leaks of classified information to the press have relatively infrequently been punished as crimes, and we are aware of no case in which a publisher of information obtained through unauthorized disclosure by a government employee has been prosecuted for publishing it."[4] The legislative and executive branches of government, including US presidents, have frequently leaked classified information to journalists.[5][6][7][8] Congress has repeatedly resisted or failed to pass a law that generally outlaws disclosing classified information. Most espionage law only criminalizes national defense information; only a jury can decide if a given document meets that criteria, and judges have repeatedly said that being "classified" does not necessarily make information become related to the "national defense".[9][10] Furthermore, by law, information may not be classified merely because it would be embarrassing or to cover illegal activity; information may only be classified to protect national security objectives.[11]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information_in_the_United_States

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/R41404.pdf

But thank you for taking the time to try.