General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWell well well, Fox News was a co-conspirator in leaking classified docs...
"According to the Post, a federal judge found probable cause that Fox News Chief Washington Correspondent James Rosen solicited a top-secret CIA report on North Korea from government adviser Stephen Jin-Woo Kim in 2009. The report concluded that additional United Nations sanctions would only push North Korea to conduct more nuclear tests. Rosen published details about the report the same day it was made available to Kim and a small number of others in the intelligence community."
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/20/federal-judge-finds-probable-cause-fox-news-reporter-helped-leak-classified-docs/
So they leaked then the GOP demands to know where the leaks are coming from? Sounds like another set up....
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)SummerSnow
(12,608 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)dorkzilla
(5,141 posts)Edited to add - thanks SummerSnow!!!!
SummerSnow
(12,608 posts)Zen Democrat
(5,901 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)When we attribute "duty" to little more than how we achieve our paycheck, I'm compelled to believe we don't fully understand "duty".
dorkzilla
(5,141 posts)The First Amendment doesn't cover criminal activity.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)What else?
Privately, he tells Rosen that things would have worked out better if he had been handling the British phone bugging.
spanone
(135,838 posts)Cha
(297,261 posts)dorkzilla
(5,141 posts)The next couple of days should be really interesting!
snooper2
(30,151 posts)dorkzilla
(5,141 posts)The problem with that argument? They're NOT the press, they're a lie aggregator!!!!!!
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"So they leaked then the GOP demands to know where the leaks are coming from? Sounds like another set up...."
...are complicit. A lot more information in this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022871121
dorkzilla
(5,141 posts)I'm reading all the links now...verrrrrrry interesting! Thanks for pulling it all together!
freshwest
(53,661 posts)pennylane100
(3,425 posts)He apparently leaked classified material to a fox news reporter. However I do not know the law enough to know if it is a crime to publish classified material. I know that there is protection in come cases under the first amendment but I am not sure about how it will affect the fox reporter, because he solicited this particular classified material
Maybe a great DU legal mind could fill me it. I so want the fox guy to be in big trouble.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)1. Insider has classified information, goes to press with it, press prints it.
2. Insider has classified information, press solicits it from him for publication, he provides it, press prints it.
In situation 2, the criminal act was solicited by the press. In situation 1, it wasn't.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)And would depend on the specific conversations held and the totality of the facts.
At what point can police arrest the driver of a car who:
Slows down to look at a street prostitute,
Makes a U-turn at the next block and comes back,
Stops his car and waits for her to come over,
Strikes up a conversation about she'd "like a date..."
And so on. It really doesn't get down to solicitation until the driver has expressly stated that he would like to have a sexual encounter for money.
okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)process and so on. Also, this again outed a spy. Apparently we had a double agent inside N Korea.. Do you know how hard that is? Yep, fox said that the info came from inside N Korea. I'm sure there were a bunch of people who were dead soon thereafter. Just like outing the British spy in the ap scandal (not that the worthless reporters are telling that part).
Also, you know what, I don't agree with a reporter turning out an informant the way we do with spies. Mr. Kim has said, he was totally played and used. He knows it now. Journalism in the past has been having info revealed. also, the intent here wasn't journalism. There was no public benefit, only profit for Rosen. Screw him. We need those sources inside N Korea more than we need this guy.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Another way of looking at it: news media have a limited immunity from prosecution for conspiracy "after the fact", but not those committed before. Nonetheless, there is a risk to the reporter when receiving multiple documents from a source over a period of time. There's the risk the reporter may be accused of cooperating with the source in taking unlawful possession of each new piece of classified material. Deep Throat might be in deep shit, today, as would Woodward & Bernstein.
sheshe2
(83,773 posts)Thanks dorkzilla!
dorkzilla
(5,141 posts)And while you're at it, take old Fatty Roger too!
sheshe!
Turbineguy
(37,334 posts)it's no problem. They've taken the place of the Soviet Union.
watoos
(7,142 posts)declare them enemy combatants and give them all expense paid vacations.
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)is a full blown war against investigative journalism as it relates to government malfeasance. Whether Rosen, Assange or Manning, or any other journalist or individual, it's the same suppression of the 1st Amendment rights of a free press. The next step will be to crush reporting of corporate malfeasance and then that of wealthy individuals. The fact that Rosen works for FOX does not diminish or negate the threat.
markpkessinger
(8,401 posts)Despite the fact that it is Fox News that is the subject here, this is NOT something we should be cheering.
pennylane100
(3,425 posts)when it is investigating wrong doing by the government but I do not understand what the government did so wrong that needed to be printed before the fact which possibly endangering lives of those who are doing the informing or our own CIA agents. How do you see this scenario as fitting into those catagories.
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)the 1st Amendment has been interpreted to ensure that once the press has information of any kind, acquired by any means, the only tool the government has to suppress it going public is persuasion or judicial ruling. The same interpretation honors a journalists right not to reveal the source of such information although the government contests it. That's how I understand it, more or less.
Initech
(100,079 posts)Let's see how well it works against them!
BVictor1
(229 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)to continue to damage America? There better be some legal action over this, otherwise we live in a country ruled by the M$M.
RunInCircles
(122 posts)The ability of the Government to make up a national security excuse and then go look at all records of the press is over the top. Want to stop something embarrassing from coming out? Make up a national security excuse. Want to prevent the story about your mistress being printed? Etc. Etc. This is a very slippery slope.
The over eager zeal to get every leaker and snoop on reporters is not conducive to freedom. What happens to our freedoms next while many stand and cheer because they don't like that guy.
Be careful how much executive over reach you are willing to applaud. If we believe that whistle blowers have contributed to exposing malfeasance and can be a good thing we must be very careful before allowing reporters to be subjected to government snooping.
Where we draw the line needs to be very carefully thought through.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Foxnews does not run the country and they should face criminal charges for breaking the law. Or do you think the press is above the law? I sure don't.
It is ironic that Foxnews pushed and got GWB selected to office in 2000 and the powers bestowed upon him after 9/11 are these exact same powers you are complaining about. Did you complain about them during 2000-2008? Did Foxnews?
RunInCircles
(122 posts)Your Title is insulting! If you want an example of how totalitarian governments get started look in your mirror.
pennylane100
(3,425 posts)Is it possible that Fox news was the one that made up stuff. That seems to be their forte.
totodeinhere
(13,058 posts)I have a lot of respect for Greewald and he certainly is no conservative or bagger. But he is a former constitutional lawyer and he also had this to say.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/20/james-rosen-justice-department-co-conspirator-obama_n_3305857.html?utm_hp_ref=media
Personally I think however well intentioned the DOJ went too far in this case and they are setting a dangerous precedent.
okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)telling someone how to steal secrets, or being on the phone with them while they do it. In this case there was no benefit to the American people. It outed a N Korean spy period. That's it. Please read all the emails and look at all the info before you decide. This was nothing like b asic reporting. Rosen also admitted his intention was to beat his competition to the story. In other words, to make money. He told Kim what he wanted and specifically told him state dept secrets. Is that normal journalism?
markpkessinger
(8,401 posts). . . you might consider what is really going on here. It is NOT a crime for a reporter to report classified information. And the DOJ's attempt to portray it as such has a potentially chilling effect upon ALL news organizations of ANY political stripe. It has the potential of destroying ANY reporter's ability to use confidential sources within the government. If you want to make it impossible for a future Woodward & Bernstein to expose some future, Watergate-level government scandal, then go right ahead and keep cheering. But in doing so, you might spare a tear or two for the quaint notion of a free press. This is profoundly disturbing stuff!
dorkzilla
(5,141 posts)However, and I am admitting that this is very juvenile of me, but it's FOX. Do they qualify as a legitimate news organization? Apparently Canada doesn't think so. Think about all the blatant lies churning out of the network and the shit they get away with on a daily basis. They're a hateful bunch of people, and I doubt any of them qualify as "journalist". What I am saying is after all the absolute hateful lying shit they pass off I want something to finally trip them up, even if its on a technicality. Lying scumbags.
tiny elvis
(979 posts)and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat?
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)Half the crowd here is just anti-republican, any other concern is secondary to that.
aquart
(69,014 posts)dorkzilla
(5,141 posts)I just find it hysterical that when I point out Fox lies, my Fox-watching family/friends always say "but..but they're #1! They couldn't get that big telling lies, you silly librul..."