but the Obama DOJ is wrong??!!

Sterling leaked nuclear proliferation info regarding Iran while in the midst of an employee dispute. Risen reported on it...he has no legal grounds to evade the criminal subpoena which compels his testimony.

administration.

Bush's DOJ didn't pursue this--perhaps because Risen went to go work for Fox News.

But Mr. Sterling compromised a Human Asset, and I suspect that once the adults were back in charge at the DOJ, career prosecutors brought forth the information.

According to the government, Risen reported what a CIA guy told him. That should not be a crime.

PS: Don't get mad at me. I'm not a lawyer. I'm an ex-reporter who believes the Bill of Rights trumps secret government and secret wars for profit.

"The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.

http://www.michaeljournal.org/kennedy.htm

-Laelth

if they had charged Sterling properly under the Espionage Act, it would have begged the question why weren't the people involved in Plame also charged under that Act.

Sterling skated in the Bush DOJ because of the Plame nonsense. He didn't skate in the Obama DOJ, because he compromised a Human Asset, and because he made nuclear interdiction in Iran more difficult.

Now, Risen is not charged with a crime. Nor is it a crime to report what he did. He, however, like you and me and every other citizen, cannot evade a criminal subpoena.

Hell.....even Nixon tried to evade, and could not--

http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1974/1974_73_1766

You do not have a First Amendment right to avoid testifying. You never had.

I would be most interested if someone could post a link to the statute that protects journalists against federal prosecution for refusal to reveal their sources. I'm not sure where this assumed right is thought to have originated.

for following the very inconvenient strictures of the law. You know--when he doesn't use his bully pulpit and his Executive Orders, and instead, actually follows the law, as written.

Seriously....there's been some kicking around of federal shield laws for some time. And I am sympathetic to the idea that reporters should not have to reveal their sources in civil cases. But as a defense attorney, I dislike the idea of not being able to confront witnesses.

Again, you've stated it very nicely (you should do this for a living!)

I like the idea of protected confidentiality, and (I may be wrong, but) it was my understanding that some states already offer such protection, while federal law does not.

Your point about Obama following the law is right on the money.

Seriously, I wish this counted as billable hours, because I am in my typical summer employment lull.

Yes--some jurisdictions offer varying levels of journalistic shield--remember, the Constitution is a floor, only, when it comes to civil rights. The states may and can grant their citizens greater protections. This is why it is so important for people to vote in very single election--those most responsible for your rights are often your local electors.

We have protected confidentiality--spouses (to a limit) clergy, doctors, shrinks, and of course, attorneys. Personally, I think extending that type of confidentiality to reporters is bad news because of the fluid medium of journalism.

Obama can't fucking win. He just can't with either the far left, or the far right.

"OFFS, really?"

SOD bypasses the Constitution

Even beyond the larger systemic problem of insulating NSA surveillance from judicial review, criminal defendants whose arrest or case is built upon FISA evidence are now deprived of their right to examine and challenge the evidence used against them.

Taken together, the Fifth and Sixth Amendments guarantee a criminal defendant a meaningful opportunity to present a defense and challenge the government's case. But this intelligence laundering deprives defendants of these important constitutional protections. It makes it harder for prosecutors to comply with their ethical obligation under Brady v. Maryland to disclose any exculpatory or favorable evidence to the defense—an obligation that extends to disclosing evidence bearing on the reliability of a government witness. Hiding the source of information used by the government to initiate an investigation or make an arrest means defendants are deprived of the opportunity to challenge the accuracy or veracity of the government's investigation, let alone seek out favorable evidence in the government's possession.

Courts must have all the facts

The third major legal problem is that the practice suggests DEA agents are misleading the courts. Wiretaps, search warrants, and other forms of surveillance authorizations require law enforcement to go to a judge and lay out the facts that support the request. The court's function is to scrutinize the facts to determine the appropriate legal standard has been met based on truthful, reliable evidence. So, for example, if the government is using evidence gathered from an informant to support its request for a search warrant, it has to establish to the court that the informant is reliable and trustworthy so that the court can be convinced there is probable cause to support the search. But when law enforcement omits integral facts—like the source of a tip used to make an arrest—the court is deprived of the opportunity to fulfill its traditional role and searches are signed off without the full knowledge of the court.

Bush and his stooges outted CIA officer, Valerie Plame, and her secret operation, Brewster Jennings & Associates, in order to denigrate her husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, and prevent others in government from coming forward in opposition to a war based on lies.

Which is why what you wrote is so puzzling. If Obama goes after Risen now, why doesn't Obama go after Bush and company for lying America into war?

It's beyond me. But, now that I think about it, maybe you should be on the Supreme Court. I think you'd fit right in.

Act should have been used, liberally. But Fitzgerald did what he could.

As for going after Bush, I agree completely--if there's a case, it should be made. But in the 13 years I've been on this site, I've yet to have a single poster come up with an actual federal indictment, or a cognizable charge. What would you charge him with?

Ultimately, and unfortunately, the case against Bush will be made in history. Sic semper tyrannis.

Guy got thousands of service men and women killed for no good reason.

have been stronger institutionally to withstand the Cheney onslaught from the OSP.

And indeed, the OSP was instituted because the CIA, the DIA, and heck, even the NSA weren't giving the neo-cons what they wanted. Transparency of those executive agencies would have helped, how?

bush should be prosecuted for holding an American citizen nearly 5 years w/o charges and torturing him in the process to the point he refused to cooperate in his own defense


and before you start in saying i personally have to show how this can be done, i would think most 4th graders that have had a civics class could understand why this is wrong

Prosecute him for that.

Also prosecute him for a war of aggression, also a crime under the Geneva Conventions.

if the Obama DOJ was justified in reviving the Sterling allegations, should they not, in the interest of consistency and fairness also reopened the Plame affair? There seems to be a double standard at work here. The full weight of the law is brought to bear against lower level leakers, but we're all about looking forward when high officials are involved. It smells bad.

covert status....which was an essential element to prosecution. Who else do you prosecute? Cheney? You'd have to show an evidence trail.

these days! On both sides of the aisle, well for the past few years. We USED to have an opposition party airc, or thought we did.

I'll take the Bill of Rights, no matter how quaint, any day over anything I've seen in recent years regarding the rights of the people to a free and open press.

just not that well. I sort of moved on. Hopeful that this would get better.
-
For the first time in the 9 or 10 presidential elections that I have voted, I was on the winning side. I thought the winning side would not continue so many actions and policies such as this. Sadly this one continues.

I forgot.. I voted McGovern absentee.
-
My state was never that close. I sort of regret I didn't vote Jimmy Carter...... but was not that close in my state anyways. The option in 04, 08 left little choice for me.
-
I am glad of how I voted, it could have been much worse. Some same, same. but could be worse. o well

And if it was that is worse than if he had been given the talk after he was elected...
But in any case it shows that what Jimmy Carter said was true when he said he was surprised how little power the president has.
We have shadow government and it is not by and for the people.

Okay, I will grant that in the case of being secretly occupied by a technologically advanced species from either another planet or dimension that will destroy the world or humanity for failure to comply with such directives then I'd give the matter a pass but as I'm forced not to lay too much on that bet and have to say if we are to be self governed then there cannot be secret laws, execution without even a charge, much less trial, and shadow courts without redress or oversight.

Oh it makes me so sick!

goes far deeper than any single administration. Kind of makes you wonder what new presidents learn after taking office that they obviously didn't know before and aren't telling/can't tell us.

All the more reason for the rest of us to fight back.

Coming tomorrow - check it out: one device, one website at a time, since that's apparently what it's going to take -

https://www.resetthenet.org/?r=aclu

what new presidents learn after taking office that they obviously didn't know before and aren't telling/can't tell us

But, alas, we have the Safari Club. Along those, ah, lines...

(and Danny Casolaro, too.)

Interesting in clicking on your old link, Octafish, to note how the sockpuppet input is much lower. Things have definitely gotten worse.

As far as I'm concerned there is no justification for extending journalists the privilege to keep their sources secret when the sources in question committed undeniable crimes in providing whatever information they did. That is in effect a blank check to violate the law at will and then snub your nose at it saying "nyah nyah I'm a journalist, can't do anything about it"


Whoever leaked that info to Risen wasn't whistleblowing on some illegal activity... they were exposing the fine details of a legitimate espionage effort directed at a legitimate target. That should land them in a cell, and there should be no excuses for anyone trying to shield them from those consequences.

[center]






[/center]

This is our EyeOpener Report by James Corbett, presenting the documented but under-reported facts and intrigues on AQ Khan’s nuclear network, the CIA’s knowledge and surveillance of the network from its very inception, and the collaborative efforts by the CIA and certain US politicians to fund, protect and further the network’s nuclear black-market activities and expansion.

There's a great video at link:

http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2011/10/19/the-eyeopener-cia-the-nuclear-black-market-a-case-study/

I am sick and tired of having to defend this administration's continued attacks on Constitutional rights.

-Laelth

but exceptional and all that

We are only number 42 and keep dropping

http://rsf.org/index2014/en-index2014.php

USA, USA, USA!!!!

He SHOULD go to jail, he will become a hero and draw attention to the abysmal state of this democracy. But we must support him loudly and publicly if he does, and not allow them to hide this from the public. This IS an opportunity to expose the state of our sad excuse for a democracy.

And the message I get from all this is that it should STAY that way. Since I assume the CIA has completely gone rogue, I declare that There IS no first amendment… only part of the second remains… the BAD part!

there is "investigative reporting"....except it is done by hackers and other governments. : (
-
it really does sadden me.