The reason why the Plame investigation is NOT a 1st amend. issue
I'm no consitutional scholar. I haven't even read the first amendment of the BOR. But I do believe that the rights and priveleges embodied therein were meant to protect people conducting lawful activities.
How can the reporters claim 1st amendment rights when the underlying act was a criminal act? Wouldn't that be against public policy? Does that not harm all of us collectively.
I am all for freedom of the press and freedom of speech. But I don't think this case warrants those protections.
What pisses me off is that they are going after reporters from Time and MSNBC to see "what they know", when we KNOW FOR A FACT that Novak knows exactly who the leakers were. Why not harass him and leave these real journalists alone?
if he is a target of the investigation. Also, these investigations generally start with the peripheral players, looking for detail which can be used to judge/guide the later testimony of those more central to the matter.
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.