General Discussion

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)

171. No--it's not. Federal juries are generally smart enough to make inferences from testimony--and lack

Thu Jan 29, 2015, 02:35 PM

Jan 2015

of testimony.

You mistake the motion fight---the government did not object to Risen being called to the stand, at all. They wanted it. They objected to the transcript of the hearing being used.

And I don't think Risen's appearance in front of the jury would have been in Sterling's favor---you mistake me. THAT'S why his defense fought so hard to have Risen's transcript....and not Risen's live testimony.

You know....you seem to think that Risen would have been allowed to testify to the "truth" of the merits of Operation Merlin. I can assure you--the federal judge in question, not to mention the prosecutor would never have allowed such tangential shit to cloud the courtroom....

There was no danger to the government having Risen testify. None.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

263 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This Is How A Police State Protects �Secrets� - Marcy Wheeler/Salon [View all] WillyT Jan 2015 OP

If this were a police state, you would not have the freedom to post what you just did Glassunion Jan 2015 #1

After reading your headline, I was about to go off on you . . . markpkessinger Jan 2015 #13

I know you are being sarcastic, but I wish to remind DU of Hannah Arendt's observation that KingCharlemagne Jan 2015 #127

+1 Scuba Jan 2015 #172

Thanks.... daleanime Jan 2015 #201

Probably also with the "encouragement" of the populace to visit taboo places erronis Jan 2015 #221

My sarcasm was not a jab at the state of things, but one at those who say they have Glassunion Jan 2015 #224

Yeah, I got that. I wished to underline the serious point I thought (correctly) you were KingCharlemagne Jan 2015 #226

+ 1,000,000,000 WillyT Jan 2015 #236

My head hurts. nt Mnemosyne Jan 2015 #2

No secret ... GeorgeGist Jan 2015 #3

+1 Rex Jan 2015 #17

Great article. Really spells it all out. Thanks for this Willy! K&R nt riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #4

You Are Quite Welcome... WillyT Jan 2015 #14

KICK AND REC AND BOOKMARK FOR FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY AND THE NATION. Octafish Jan 2015 #5

How can anyone defend this miscarriage of justice? elias49 Jan 2015 #6

Well, except for that pesky trial and the jury and the judge and stuff. randome Jan 2015 #7

You're talking about an outdated Espionage Act passed during the red scare JonLP24 Jan 2015 #8

randome may be conflicted when it comes to the law of the land. Octafish Jan 2015 #11

He is concerned about the 1st Amendment? News to me. Rex Jan 2015 #18

The Constitution is not immutable. And Sterling's case has nothing to do with it. randome Jan 2015 #21

It's got everything to do with the Constitution. Octafish Jan 2015 #25

'Embarrassed'? So you don't care about the agent who was outed? randome Jan 2015 #26

What's the name of that agent? riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #79

No idea. What difference does the name make? randome Jan 2015 #81

Uhm you're the one who said Sterling outed his own agent. riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #86

'Outing' an agent means giving the name to someone who is not authorized to know it. randome Jan 2015 #101

Provide me with the facts that back you up riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #111

I may not have everything right, no problem admitting that. randome Jan 2015 #113

In the indictment, Sterling's book proposal is detailed. Some posters here are msanthrope Jan 2015 #114

Thank you. It's helpful to know my confusion is not completely without merit. randome Jan 2015 #117

Well... OP article is a lesson to those who would quote such a sloppy source.... msanthrope Jan 2015 #122

She did. Read the article. Luminous Animal Jan 2015 #195

But she only discussed 7 counts--ignoring the other 2, and thus, from this thread, it's pretty msanthrope Jan 2015 #199

sterling doesn't have a book. ND-Dem Jan 2015 #115

Sterling has a book proposal only. Risen has the published book riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #120

By specifying how the agent delivered secret messages, Sterling in effect outed him/her. randome Jan 2015 #126

Oh FFS, now you're just making shit up. riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #129

Now I remember where I found that: in the article linked to by the OP. randome Jan 2015 #203

'Google is surprisingly unhelpful in putting it all together comprehensively.' Rex Jan 2015 #220

I probably understand it as well as anyone who is not an attorney. randome Jan 2015 #223

When did outing an agent become illegal? When Plame was outed by Novak, it took the prosecutor hughee99 Jan 2015 #143

Novak was a journalist and so was given 'extra-special-super-duper' consideration. randome Jan 2015 #144

Gone to jail too? The leaker didn't even go to jail! hughee99 Jan 2015 #158

He should have gone to jail like Sterling. randome Jan 2015 #160

They can't even back up that charge riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #149

From the indictment. randome Jan 2015 #155

so the 'Human Asset' was the Russian? bigtree Jan 2015 #165

Compromising an identity is not 'greivous harm' but it is potentially dangerous. randome Jan 2015 #166

most crimes require some proof of harm actually done bigtree Jan 2015 #169

I see nothing there that Sterling outed an agent. riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #170

we're making the assumption, for the sake of argument bigtree Jan 2015 #175

I understand. I'm just attacking even that base premise nt riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #178

Assumption? He was convicted. You may make an assumption, but understand something..... msanthrope Jan 2015 #182

It's also circumstantial to see someone holding a smoking gun but without seeing the gun fired. randome Jan 2015 #180

interesting bigtree Jan 2015 #190

Interesting it has been. randome Jan 2015 #192

Congress said "meh" Kelvin Mace Jan 2015 #88

What war crimes are implied by Sterling? None that I'm aware of. randome Jan 2015 #98

Sorry, you are correct, digging into the facts Kelvin Mace Jan 2015 #105

Hence, the conviction. Octafish Jan 2015 #119

I'm on your side Kelvin Mace Jan 2015 #124

The only ones who don't recognize this as a vicious vindictive act riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #132

Yep. Kelvin Mace Jan 2015 #151

And they seem to be the ones that defend the NSA/CIA with unusual vigor Rex Jan 2015 #222

No, I'm talking about a national security agent giving away national security secrets. randome Jan 2015 #20

You said except for the law, jury, judge, etc its a police state JonLP24 Jan 2015 #23

He was also punished for outing an agent. randome Jan 2015 #28

80 Years ??? - How... Reasonable Of You... WillyT Jan 2015 #30

Don't expect me to support that kind of sentencing. I don't. randome Jan 2015 #32

You Don't See Something Wrong With The System ??? WillyT Jan 2015 #36

Juries -both on DU and in the judicial system- are not perfect. randome Jan 2015 #42

Even If That Information Was Publicly Available ??? And How Come The FBI... WillyT Jan 2015 #46

The government pressed Risen to reveal his sources. When he refused, they basically gave up. randome Jan 2015 #48

And Maybe... Just Maybe... The Reason Some Will "willingly obfuscate and deflect." WillyT Jan 2015 #50

Tell us how interdicting Iran's nuclear capacity is un-American? nt msanthrope Jan 2015 #59

Interdicting AMERICA'S Nuclear Program May Be Un-American... Iran Has It's Own Sovereignty... WillyT Jan 2015 #237

I certainly wouldn't want Congress to decide what's good for the American people JonLP24 Jan 2015 #39

I don't think we had whistleblower protections back then, did we? randome Jan 2015 #40

We have far less than we did then as evidenced by this thread JonLP24 Jan 2015 #43

Thank You For That !!! WillyT Jan 2015 #238

Huh? Kelvin Mace Jan 2015 #89

His book that he was trying to sell. randome Jan 2015 #94

But there is no mention of "selling" secrets in the indictment or conviction Kelvin Mace Jan 2015 #97

Yes, it is. Using classified intel as a means to gain money is the same, IMO. randome Jan 2015 #99

To clarify: My question was whether he Kelvin Mace Jan 2015 #103

My arguments are NOT based on strict readings of the law since I'm not an attorney. randome Jan 2015 #104

Well, that was going to be my next question Kelvin Mace Jan 2015 #109

His book was his memoirs that the CIA refused to give him permission to publish. randome Jan 2015 #210

Actually...Sterling's attempt to publish is in the indictment...there's also msanthrope Jan 2015 #118

Thanks, I guess I will have to plow Kelvin Mace Jan 2015 #121

I blame Wheeler on this one..she should have disclosed to her msanthrope Jan 2015 #125

Thank you for the link Kelvin Mace Jan 2015 #148

Msanthrope did not read the article. Wheeler does indeed, at the beginning of the article Luminous Animal Jan 2015 #198

But it's apparent from this thread that Wheeler is unclear--and I blame Wheeler, rather than DUers msanthrope Jan 2015 #207

No, it is clear that people are discussing the Espionage Act charges. The focus of Wheeler's article Luminous Animal Jan 2015 #217

Thank you for admitting that Wheeler is selectively discussing the charges. And I think that proves msanthrope Jan 2015 #219

Quoting inaccurately and making false statements in order to further her agenda? bvar22 Jan 2015 #228

LOL !!! WillyT Jan 2015 #239

Randome is a master of Aerows Jan 2015 #206

I am a 'master' at nothing other than my ability to look at all the fine print. randome Jan 2015 #211

There is a difference Aerows Jan 2015 #215

Their goal is not to convince anyone of anything. bvar22 Jan 2015 #230

Just thought I'd point it out Aerows Jan 2015 #234

Gotta Agree... WillyT Jan 2015 #240

Let me see if I can figure out what you are saying here. Aerows Jan 2015 #153

Is it difficult to admit it's possible that Congress blew him off because there was nothing illegal? randome Jan 2015 #157

LOL Aerows Jan 2015 #161

I have never defended torture. randome Jan 2015 #164

Anyone that ardently defends Aerows Jan 2015 #202

But we DO know that people were tortured in our name. Much to our shame. randome Jan 2015 #204

You are doing it again. Aerows Jan 2015 #214

Virtually no one is talking about torture today. randome Jan 2015 #218

Did you see the date on those 2 Aerows Jan 2015 #225

Nobody Wants To Talk About Their Pedophile Uncle Either... Doesn't Mean They Shouldn't Be In Jail... WillyT Jan 2015 #242

I am loving the post hoc defense of Judith Miller and Scooter Libby, myself. nt msanthrope Jan 2015 #12

My problem with Judith Miller involves making shit up for front page stories JonLP24 Jan 2015 #15

I was disgusted when James Risen made shit up about Wen Ho Lee. Why else do you msanthrope Jan 2015 #16

My position is more about "state secrets" being used to cover things up JonLP24 Jan 2015 #22

What was covered up here? Every trial document is available online. Merlin wasn't an msanthrope Jan 2015 #24

They absolutely can JonLP24 Jan 2015 #33

The emails, phone calls, and meetings between the two were fabricated? msanthrope Jan 2015 #38

No JonLP24 Jan 2015 #41

Um, no...that's not the only evidence. What say you as to the evidence presented with msanthrope Jan 2015 #44

I don't know, was it his name? JonLP24 Jan 2015 #45

Well...there was his motive. As prosecutors pointed out, once Merlin was msanthrope Jan 2015 #55

What's the name of Human Asset #1? riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #80

Have you stopped to consider that Human Asset #1 is an actual person? msanthrope Jan 2015 #95

Nope. You're claiming this is just like Judith Miller and Valerie Plame riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #108

Um....I don't have to back it up...it's the charge on the indictment he was msanthrope Jan 2015 #112

Yes I know. I'm focusing on your persistent charge that Sterling outed an agent riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #141

First and foremost....I've already given the indictment link. I can't make you msanthrope Jan 2015 #177

I've read it. It does not say Sterling gave Risen the guy's name. riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #186

And So Is Every Person Who Believed In The American Myths We Were Told As Children... WillyT Jan 2015 #243

by that standard of yours bigtree Jan 2015 #83

Again...you make the mistake Wheeler did. You focus on the 'leak' but not on the msanthrope Jan 2015 #102

the Russian engineer, Merlin? bigtree Jan 2015 #123

You don't seem to understand that the Wheeler article is only talking about 7 of the 9 msanthrope Jan 2015 #128

show me the charge you're referring to bigtree Jan 2015 #133

I've already put the link to the indictment in the thread. I can't MAKE msanthrope Jan 2015 #137

no, not a document dump bigtree Jan 2015 #139

Okay--I can't physically make you read the charges in the indictment. That's true. msanthrope Jan 2015 #185

Have You Ever Served On A Jury ??? WillyT Jan 2015 #244

Willy...I'm an attorney. I pick juries. Federal grand juries are not msanthrope Jan 2015 #259

You never mention that article's co-author, NYT reporter Jeff Gerth, msanthrope. Why? Octafish Jan 2015 #27

Because Jeffy wasn't part of the legal cases in the 4th involving either Miller or Risen? msanthrope Jan 2015 #34

Because it may be Gerth who deserves your wrath, scorn, whatever for Wen Ho Lee, not Risen. Octafish Jan 2015 #47

Apologia for Mr. Risen, who was a Whitewater RW writer in his own right msanthrope Jan 2015 #49

Ah... Thanks For The Insight... WillyT Jan 2015 #51

Satire is getting harder to separate from a JAG rerun. Octafish Jan 2015 #52

Well, I'm really glad you have respect for the rule of law. How do you feel about the Government sabrina 1 Jan 2015 #106

Do police violate someone's rights when they shoot an armed suspect? randome Jan 2015 #110

Well, I have never seen any evidence that those Americans were guilty of anything. A teenager going sabrina 1 Jan 2015 #135

Espionage Act JonLP24 Jan 2015 #9

Traitors walk free. Whistleblowers get prison. Octafish Jan 2015 #10

I agree 100% JonLP24 Jan 2015 #19

How was this "whistleblowing?" Adrahil Jan 2015 #56

No, it's Congress' job. No. Wait. It's Sterling's job. No, no, still not right. Risen's? randome Jan 2015 #65

Seeing how Sterling went to Congress to express his concerns... Octafish Jan 2015 #67

more likely someone there was the source bigtree Jan 2015 #72

Without Risen on the stand, the Defense never had a chance. Octafish Jan 2015 #75

the government fought to keep him off the stand to limit his testimony about lies and deceptions bigtree Jan 2015 #78

As I understand it, the government fought to keep Risen's testimony out of the transcript. randome Jan 2015 #82

that's just speculation bigtree Jan 2015 #85

Risen would have been jailed if he refused to testify in a criminal matter. randome Jan 2015 #107

still just speculation on your part bigtree Jan 2015 #130

Okay, so they did. But didn't the judge then rule that only Risen's transcript would be redacted? randome Jan 2015 #136

The truth would negatively impact the Government's case against Sterling, so... Octafish Jan 2015 #84

The defense could have called Risen. There was no bar to that. The government's msanthrope Jan 2015 #134

it's still a strawman bigtree Jan 2015 #142

No--it's not. Federal juries are generally smart enough to make inferences from testimony--and lack msanthrope Jan 2015 #171

Risen already said he wasn't going to testify for anyone riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #146

Nonsense--the 4th circuit's denial of appeal CLEARLY stated that he was compelled to testify. The msanthrope Jan 2015 #168

Risen was prepared to go to jail. riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #176

He should have gone to jail, just like Miller if he was going to let Sterling go to prison falsely. msanthrope Jan 2015 #179

I am not James Risen. Why don't you ask him? riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #188

Testify during the appeal? OMFG. msanthrope Jan 2015 #191

Risen was willing to go to jail. The Government apparently, especially after the show in France sabrina 1 Jan 2015 #227

No--Risen was not willing to go to jail, which is why he appealed over and over. As to the rest, msanthrope Jan 2015 #229

Of course he appealed it. Why was he even threatened with jail in a country that puts on such a sabrina 1 Jan 2015 #231

Since When ??? WillyT Jan 2015 #246

LOL.... Ok, Mr. Pollyanna.... Adrahil Jan 2015 #247

So... Say It Out Loud... Let The World Know... We Have Their Backs... We ARE The World's Police... WillyT Jan 2015 #248

You don't have to be the World Police.... Adrahil Jan 2015 #249

Why... The Rest Of The World Would Have Been Better Off If We Didn't Have One... WillyT Jan 2015 #251

in this case, the CIA was fabricating evidence of Iran's nuclear ambitions bigtree Jan 2015 #250

I haven't seen that allegation with regard to this case... Adrahil Jan 2015 #253

recap from above bigtree Jan 2015 #254

I think that's a misreading of what happened.... Adrahil Jan 2015 #255

only if you take the government's prosecution at face value, which you apparently do bigtree Jan 2015 #256

I'll look into it some more.... But the story doesn't make much sense to me. n/t Adrahil Jan 2015 #257

Risen's book outlines a pattern of deception by the U.S. intelligence agencies bigtree Jan 2015 #258

The big question is: why is Obama doing this? Maedhros Jan 2015 #29

Because He Knows The American Electorate... And His Underwear Is Wet Too... WillyT Jan 2015 #31

It was misused from the get go JonLP24 Jan 2015 #35

'Leaker' and 'whistleblower' are two different classifications. randome Jan 2015 #37

was Daniel Ellsberg a 'whistleblower' for leaking the Pentagon Papers? bigtree Jan 2015 #90

No doubt Ellsberg was a whistleblower. His actions saved lives. Sterling's actions endangered lives. randome Jan 2015 #93

actually, the government's actions endangered lives bigtree Jan 2015 #116

So Sterling outed an agent because Operation Merlin wasn't as flawless as he would have liked? randome Jan 2015 #131

first of all, the subject we were discussing was his intial report to Congress bigtree Jan 2015 #138

There was enough circumstantial evidence to convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt. randome Jan 2015 #150

answered in #116 bigtree Jan 2015 #156

'Dubious'. Right. Not illegal, just Sterling's desire to protect us years after the fact. randome Jan 2015 #159

you completely ignored the essence of Ellsberg's own efforts bigtree Jan 2015 #162

Actually Obama has gone after leakers and whistleblowers.. Feron Jan 2015 #92

Sorry, an article that equates Snowden with a whistleblower is blatantly biased. randome Jan 2015 #96

Having read the article..... blackspade Jan 2015 #53

It's not ridiculous. It's a mistake of law and fact to presume that circumstantial msanthrope Jan 2015 #54

Oh yeah? What do you know about law? Orrex Jan 2015 #57

I'm gonna ask Skittles to schedule you for an 'intervention.' msanthrope Jan 2015 #58

Sadly Orrex Jan 2015 #60

It's the new Libertarian streak at DU...the law simply doesn't apply to msanthrope Jan 2015 #61

and here your posts and a few others have me thinking of a different 'streak' at DU bigtree Jan 2015 #63

No! Not the dreaded 'A' word! randome Jan 2015 #64

apt response to the 'L' word bigtree Jan 2015 #71

Grok: Little Sister - the antidote to Big Brother Octafish Jan 2015 #77

excellent quote, thanks nt grasswire Jan 2015 #205

..... blackspade Jan 2015 #232

k&r bigtree Jan 2015 #62

K&R Thank you. woo me with science Jan 2015 #66

Propaganda Machine... Check Out The "Lawyers" At DU... WillyT Jan 2015 #68

Neither you nor I are biologists or medical professionals. randome Jan 2015 #69

Well... I'm So Very Happy For Your Not Being "Bitter"... WillyT Jan 2015 #70

There is the the law and their is justice Kelvin Mace Jan 2015 #91

Hey willy...you wanna bring racial bona fides into this? msanthrope Jan 2015 #100

is there a link to that particular show somewhere on DU? nt grasswire Jan 2015 #140

Here---- msanthrope Jan 2015 #174

okay bigtree Jan 2015 #181

You know....you seem to be suggesting that Risen's lack of testimony let an innocent man go to msanthrope Jan 2015 #183

done bigtree Jan 2015 #184

Well--it's the obvious conclusion of what you write. You suggest that Risen's lack of testimony msanthrope Jan 2015 #187

Sterling and Risen are friends. Do you think Sterling wanted his friend in jail? riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #189

Would you face an 80 year jail term for a friend? Look--of course Risen could have forecasted this msanthrope Jan 2015 #193

Sorry my bad riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #194

No--you misunderstand....the defense had no bar, at all, to Risen being called to the stand. msanthrope Jan 2015 #197

Do-over! randome Jan 2015 #196

Prescisely!!! nt msanthrope Jan 2015 #216

"Would you face an 80 year jail term for a friend?" WillyT Jan 2015 #252

you're claiming that show as a cred... grasswire Jan 2015 #208

I ain't your monkey. msanthrope Jan 2015 #209

Uhm, you could be anyone pretending. riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #145

Look--I've said this before to posters....if you think I'm lying about being an Obama campaign msanthrope Jan 2015 #173

Some of the responses to the OP are hilarious..... marmar Jan 2015 #73

Word !!! WillyT Jan 2015 #74

Some of the associations going back to Smirko Madministration become clear, as well. Octafish Jan 2015 #76

Investigation of Sterling began under Bush. ND-Dem Jan 2015 #147

He was charged December 2010. This is all on Obama riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #152

he filed a racial discrimination suit in 2000. That's when it began. ND-Dem Jan 2015 #154

It was the Obama Admin that decided to charge him in 2010 riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #167

Don't you miss Hannah Bell on these threads? nt msanthrope Jan 2015 #200

Even with you reminding us, yes. Octafish Jan 2015 #212

Hannah Bell is a banned troll..and you are missing the joke in the thread. nt msanthrope Jan 2015 #213

"it's a continuation" = exactly my point ND-Dem Jan 2015 #241

Nice to see you again. nt msanthrope Jan 2015 #260

Oh, I see this all the time Kelvin Mace Jan 2015 #87

Cognitive Dissonance Writ Large.... KoKo Jan 2015 #245

Dealing nuclear blueprints to the Iranians is illegal WDIM Jan 2015 #163

+ Infinity Octafish Jan 2015 #233

+ 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!! WillyT Jan 2015 #235

kick woo me with science Feb 2015 #261

kick woo me with science Feb 2015 #262

kick woo me with science Feb 2015 #263