Do you think the Wall Street Journal will be charged with jury tampering?

sasquatch

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Apr-05-04 10:45 PM
Original message

Poll question: Do you think the Wall Street Journal will be charged with jury tampering?

I think it's time the New York DA does some investigating on the Whore Street Journal.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Dookus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Apr-05-04 10:47 PM
Response to Original message

1. No

if you're referring to the Tyco trial, NO!!

We should NEVER punish journalists for publishing the truth. EVER!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

PsN2Wind

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Apr-05-04 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #1

2. Does that include

Novak? I haven't heard anyone accuse him of lying about Valerie Plame.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Dookus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Apr-05-04 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #2

3. it absolutely applies to Novak

He broke NO law whatsoever, and I would adamantly oppose any effort to prosecute him.

Check the law. Journalists are not responsible for keeping the government's secrets - the government is.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

sasquatch

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Apr-05-04 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #1

4. They didn't tell the truth though

The guy that drew the pic of the woman giving the OK sign to the defense attorneys, didn't see it in person and just used "witnesses" description. I think they wanted their boys in TYCO aquited.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Dookus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Apr-05-04 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #4

5. The OK signal did not lead to a mistrial

it was, evidently, threatening communications to "juror #4" (I read her name earlier today, but I forget it.)

Seriously... think about it - do you want to live in a country in which journalists are prosecuted by the government for what they write? You have NO evidence that the OK signal was a lie by the WSJ - you only know that it wasn't seen by the reporter.

How on earth do you prosecute reporters for reporting what witnesses tell them? Must every reporter witness every event himself before he can write about it? That would be absurd.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Dookus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Apr-06-04 12:37 AM
Response to Original message

6. kick

I want a discussion about a free press and the real implications thereof.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Muddleoftheroad

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Apr-06-04 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #6

7. I am always for that discussion

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Fri May 03rd 2024, 03:08 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

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.