Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

alp227

(32,006 posts)
Wed Jun 5, 2013, 01:24 PM Jun 2013

Brian Williams Makes the Case for Putting NBC on Trial

...giving classified information to the public is something that news outlets–including NBC News–routinely do, and each time they do it they too could be accused of "aiding the enemy." For example, NBC's Michael Isikoff reported on February 4 that a "confidential memo" produced by the Justice Department held that "the U.S. government can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be 'senior operational leaders' of Al-Qaeda or 'an associated force'–even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the U.S."

full article with links: http://www.fair.org/blog/2013/06/05/brian-williams-makes-the-case-for-putting-nbc-on-trial/

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Brian Williams Makes the Case for Putting NBC on Trial (Original Post) alp227 Jun 2013 OP
has he done as much on the air? tk2kewl Jun 2013 #1
Apparently, Brian Williams is a dumbass. jeff47 Jun 2013 #2
Exactly on point … 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2013 #3
 

tk2kewl

(18,133 posts)
1. has he done as much on the air?
Wed Jun 5, 2013, 01:30 PM
Jun 2013

i mostly ignore teevee nooz, but caught his report on manning the other day and he spewed the government's line

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
2. Apparently, Brian Williams is a dumbass.
Wed Jun 5, 2013, 03:33 PM
Jun 2013

Everyone has first amendment rights. Those rights mean you can discuss any classified information you'd like. And you can publish any classified information you'd like.

In order to get a security clearance, one has to sign away their first amendment rights in regards to classified information. Which means people with security clearances can't discuss classified information anywhere, nor can they publish it. But that only applies to people with security clearances.

Let's say "John Smith" has a security clearance, and gives classified information to Brian Williams. Brian Williams publishes it.

Brian Williams can't be charged with a crime. He never waived his first amendment rights.
John Smith can be charged with a crime. He waived his first amendment rights to get his security clearance.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
3. Exactly on point …
Wed Jun 5, 2013, 09:21 PM
Jun 2013

With one addition … where “journalists” get caught up is ... it is, also, unlawful to knowingly solicit, then publish (disclose), classified information.

And when one thinks about it, that makes a lot of sense. If not, what would stop a foreign government from having its “spies”, all work for Spies-R-Us journalist and Media Outlet; and rather than report back to a "handler", simply publish the classified information to their website?

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Brian Williams Makes the ...