Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
23. As my username clearly indicates, I am no dude. And I do get it--you don't have a cogent legal
Wed Aug 28, 2013, 07:52 AM
Aug 2013

argument why Judith Miller goes to jail, but James Risen, doesn't.

Don't worry....James Risen's highly-paid D.C. law firm doesn't have a cogent legal argument, either, as is apparent from the court record.

Arguably, outing one CIA operative is on a lesser scale than letting the Iranians know the details of our attempts to interdict their nuclear program. Personally, I think that when you have to resort to an equivalency argument, you have already lost the legal point and are now just trying to mitigate the penalty.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Oh fuck that freedom of the press stuff. progressoid Aug 2013 #1
I thought secrets were bad? Recursion Aug 2013 #2
Protecting Whistleblowers Aren't the Secrets I'm Worried About HumansAndResources Aug 2013 #7
Remember how DU lined up to support Judy Miller geek tragedy Aug 2013 #3
Actually, I didn't support that either Hydra Aug 2013 #5
Well, you are more consistent than most then. nt geek tragedy Aug 2013 #6
DU was opposed to Judith Miller for reasons that everything to do with lying. Bonobo Aug 2013 #8
Right...kindly point to the DU thread that denounced Patrick Fitzgerald msanthrope Aug 2013 #12
No, YOU point me to the thread where Bush was defended for forcing a reporter Bonobo Aug 2013 #14
You are the one making the fantastical claim that Judith Miller was forced to give over Scooter msanthrope Aug 2013 #16
Huh? I never said anything of the sort. Bonobo Aug 2013 #18
Wait a second--that's priceless. Because Judith Miller was 'disliked' she should be subject to laws msanthrope Aug 2013 #21
No, dude, you still don't get it. Bonobo Aug 2013 #22
As my username clearly indicates, I am no dude. And I do get it--you don't have a cogent legal msanthrope Aug 2013 #23
"The process of news gathering is being criminalized." woo me with science Aug 2013 #4
^ Wilms Aug 2013 #9
Reporters have to testify when they witness a crime treestar Aug 2013 #10
Good luck enforcing that law davidn3600 Aug 2013 #11
Actions have consequences. nt msanthrope Aug 2013 #13
That's always a possibility treestar Aug 2013 #20
Branzburg v. Hayes 408 US 665 (1972) struggle4progress Aug 2013 #15
Not a single poster on DU has ever been able to make a convincing argument why reporters should have msanthrope Aug 2013 #17
Me too. nt kelliekat44 Aug 2013 #19
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Obama Administration Rema...»Reply #23