General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSupreme Court Reject Appeal from NYT Reporter over Refusal to ID source...
The courts one-line order gave no reasons but effectively sided with the government in a confrontation between what prosecutors said was an imperative to secure evidence in a national security prosecution and what journalists said was an intolerable infringement of press freedom.
The case arose from a subpoena to Mr. Risen seeking information about his source for a chapter of his 2006 book, State of War. Prosecutors say they need Mr. Risens testimony to prove that the source was Jeffrey Sterling, a former C.I.A. official.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in Richmond, Va., ordered Mr. Risen to comply with the subpoena. Mr. Risen has said he will refuse.
I will continue to fight, Mr. Risen said Monday.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/03/us/james-risen-faces-jail-time-for-refusing-to-identify-a-confidential-source.html?_r=0
This ought to burn your ass So, not only does the SCOTUS refuse to hear Mr. Rosen's case, but their message to the American people is "To HELL with protecting you journalist's right to keep sources confidential!"
Where are we going, America? They don't even provide a reason why they don't want to hear it Gee, I wonder if there is a Constitutional Lawyer from Chicago who might recognize a reporter's privilege who's President now?
Hello???
Mnemosyne
(21,363 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Thanks for the KnR. I saw this sinking earlier and thought
(sigh)
Mnemosyne
(21,363 posts)Thanks for trying, MrMickeysMom!
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)Is it me, or is the right to have a secret limited to the Government?
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Oh, definitely
. It's YOU!
And, don't you DARE complain when, as an employee, you find out that your HR records have not been protected because of it's secondary status. After employee information has been hacked into and the over-hanging threat of identity theft is a done deal, don't complain when your tax return check has been stolen. Don't expect that to be reimbursed as compensation. You won't get back a damned thing. However, you WILL have to sign up for the "free" protection that only guards over your identity theft for ONE YEAR.
Oh
sorry
I was reliving some personal hell with my employer, who doesn't pay any property taxes as a health care giant.
We can get back to ignoring anything that protects the sources of who covers anyone's hell in the media.
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)From hence forth it shall be known as Freedom of the Press (to report what we think they should, and if they say anything we don't like they had better tell us who told them).
About a year ago, a neighbor's boy I talked to many times came to me and asked me if I thought he should join the Army. I told him no. There was no honor in it. Defending the nation, defending the Constitution is certainly honorable, but not the way it's being done now. I told him of the many objections I had to the Government of today, and how I felt that one day, he would be ashamed to have served the military that protected those abuses. We talked for a very long time.
He went to school to become a Diesel mechanic instead, and is making pretty good money already, with a skill that is unlikely to go anywhere in the foreseeable future. I am proud of the choice he made, and perhaps a little proud that he respected me enough to seek my opinion and value my input. Every time I see him, he waves at me, and we occasionally talk of many subjects.
I mention this because if I had been in the Military, and saw that Freedom of the Press had become Freedom to do what you're told, I would want to throw up. Who am I kidding, I want to throw up now. By the way, I sent a link to that news story to my young friend.
librechik
(30,663 posts)Wakeup America--your chance to rein in the plutocrats is disappearing.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)for splashing cold water in the eyes of the sleeping
But, I'll settle for your signature gif
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Amazing what news gets reaction here.
Maybe I should continue this conversation with myself until it fizzles out for good, huh?
- "wake up!"
Leme
(1,092 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)I'm sure you have some thoughts on it. Thank you for posting, meanwhile...
Leme
(1,092 posts)a "need for security" issue vs "need to have public aware". Security is winning . Secrecy is winning.
------------
but just a snap thinking
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)
but it's up to the concerned people who inhabit this country to keep to what was promised under law.
People are forgetting. Secrecy (a.k.a. security-speak) should never WIN over civil rights.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)if you handle a high-profile or controversial confidential source with legit info, you'd better be prepared to go to prison for contempt if/when the subpoena comes down...It's part of the assumed risk and one of the journalist's "codes" to live by...
This happens more often than people think; so I'm not understanding the shock after reading the legal brief...
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)There is no legal privilege for journalists. If you want to talk to someone and have it be privileged, your choices are Doctor, Lawyer or your spouse.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Apparently was all fine well and good when Judith Miller was put in jail for contempt of court......
But when the Obama DOJ tries to do the exact same thing suddenly it's bad.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Those words don't include "security"...
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)If we go the way of other fascist regimes and the little "d" fails here, it's basically over.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)FUCK the National Security State! Fuck 'em!
It's all bullshit. It's about controlling US, We the People. It's about protecting the Owner Class and their war profits and contractor profits and multinational corporate profits and Financial Sector profits and fucking over everything decent and humane and life-sustaining in this world.
IT IS NOT ABOUT PROTECTING US!
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)The problem is that we are loosing ground on who is aware of news to account what is rapidly happening to us. Right before our eyes
a diminishing the role of participatory government. It's happening - but you see it in an obscure news item on A- 4 or 5
It gets buried in about 5 inches of one column. Unless there is commentary in the Op/Ed, the Editorial is more concerned with sexier commentary, and not civil liberties. You have to get some broadsheet peace-nic newspaper to emphasize what changes occur in domestic policy to know anything...
Till you know nothing at all
and THEN you believe all the bullshit about protecting "us".
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)This time, dedicating what I feel where most of America's arrived
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Mean Gene
(65 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)same thing? Or was that Fitzmas?
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)It burns my ass when we have suppression of a fair and balanced press. Judith Miller lived by the same rules, with the exception that her efforts with her colleagues failed to shed much of anything over the lies of Bush and company. Some homework, regardless of protecting sources! Meanwhile, Plame was outed because her husband dared to cross a line in sharing what he learned about yellow cake.
There sure were a lot of dead Iraqis and American soldiers over the lies of Bush/Cheney, weren't there?
And when that administration stepped into a getaway inauguration day, our new president and House majority leader weren't interested to use the DOJ and look into anyone's sources.
Fitzmas-Shitzmas!
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)you certainly do.