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
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Pulitzer Prize-winner James Risen threatened with jail time re: confidential sources [View all]msanthrope
(37,549 posts)18. It's basic criminal procedure....when you carve out a privilege, it generally fetters the rights of
Last edited Thu May 8, 2014, 11:56 AM - Edit history (1)
someone else--in this case, the accused.
I respect that there are privileges accorded to certain persons with regard to testimony.
You seem to be arguing for a new privilege for reporters, but have not offered a reason why the First Amendment privilege sought should constrain the 6th amendment right of the accused. I suggest that this is because you have not considered the case beyond its connection to the Administration.
Although--here's Sterling's indictment.
http://cryptome.org/0003/sterling/sterling-001.pdf
Kindly make a case as to why he should not be prosecuted, based on his activity?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
90 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Pulitzer Prize-winner James Risen threatened with jail time re: confidential sources [View all]
marmar
May 2014
OP
So tell us why Judith Miller shouldn't have gone to jail? We should be consistent on DU. nt
msanthrope
May 2014
#4
Why should Judith Miller and James Risen not be compelled to testify against criminals? nt
msanthrope
May 2014
#5
That was Miller's argument, trying to shield Scooter Libby...and doesn't answer my
msanthrope
May 2014
#7
It's not about shielding the criminal it's about protecting the free press's ability to investigate.
Scuba
May 2014
#8
1st, you are arguing for a 1stA right that doesn't exist. 2nd, you are arguing against the 6thA
msanthrope
May 2014
#9
I didn't argue either of the things you claimed I did. Take your strawman elsewhere.
Scuba
May 2014
#12
Actually, that is precisely the point of the cite you used. Risen is arguing
msanthrope
May 2014
#14
It's basic criminal procedure....when you carve out a privilege, it generally fetters the rights of
msanthrope
May 2014
#18
So, your argument in defense of reporter's privilege is not based on the 1st amendment?
malthaussen
May 2014
#61
When you accused me of a strawman, as opposed to agreeing that I had correctly
msanthrope
May 2014
#71
Is your argument the first amendment? If it is, then I didn't raise a strawman, but correctly
msanthrope
May 2014
#73
I have no clue why you think the "anti-confrontation clause" would have any relavence. Anything ...
Scuba
May 2014
#77
Well, I grant that you may be unfamiliar with the interplay of rights and privileges with regard to
msanthrope
May 2014
#87
What? How does the 6th amendment not apply in the criminal case against Sterling? nt
msanthrope
May 2014
#15
There is no shield law. The extant case is a criminal one, US v. Sterling in which Mr. Risen
msanthrope
May 2014
#20
My alternative is to leave the law as it is, as I take a dim view on privilege. Yeah--I'm satisfied
msanthrope
May 2014
#39
I don't worry about this one, because although we don't have it, it doesn't stop the flow
msanthrope
May 2014
#56
Indeed--it's an interesting day when the "true" progressives are backing a Fox reporter who wishes
msanthrope
May 2014
#52
How is Jeffrey Sterling a whistleblower? He didn't reveal any abuse of power, or anything else.
msanthrope
May 2014
#25
Another attack on journalists and whistle blowers. And why would this democratic administration
sabrina 1
May 2014
#21
Jeffrey Sterling is not a whistleblower. In fact, here's his indictment--tell us all what
msanthrope
May 2014
#26
“News is what somebody somewhere wants to suppress; all the rest is advertising.” Lord Northcliff
Tierra_y_Libertad
May 2014
#23
This is what we get for backing a smooth-talking, glass-ceiling-breaking, guy-who-can-win
FiveGoodMen
May 2014
#27
Kindly read Mr. Sterling's indictment, and tell us all why he should not be prosecuted.
msanthrope
May 2014
#29
I'm still waiting for someone to read Sterling's indictment and tell me the whistleblowing activity.
msanthrope
May 2014
#31
Sadly I do not. Don't you have some kale to attend to? Thank you for calling my an angel though
uppityperson
May 2014
#37
Since she talked to me, does that mean I am an angel? Maybe you'll get a chance to be talked to to.
uppityperson
May 2014
#38
back to talking to the angels again, ms vermin (to copy/paste from your deleted post)
uppityperson
May 2014
#82
I am enjoying being able to welcome newbies, being just a general DUer again.
uppityperson
May 2014
#53
do you think he helped with a crime? serious question, as i have not followed this case.
dionysus
May 2014
#67
He defintely helped Sterling commit crime. What he did not do, however was commit a crime for
msanthrope
May 2014
#74
Given the hatchet job he did against Wen Ho Lee, and his subsequent employment at Fox, he's pretty
msanthrope
May 2014
#88
The point is he did read the details...and some of us remember the hatchet job this Fox reporter
msanthrope
May 2014
#89
It's the only move consistent with the law. The Bush DOJ kicked the can down the road, and
msanthrope
May 2014
#68