Skip to comments.Deputy AG Won’t Rule Out Considering Publishing of Classified Information a Crime for Journalists
Posted on 08/07/2017 3:37:35 PM PDT by ForYourChildren
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein would not rule out the possibility that a reporter publishing classified information could be considered a crime.
Speaking to Fox News Sunday, Rosenstein told host Chris Wallace that generally speaking, reporters who publish information are not committing a crime, but there might be a circumstance where they do.
You know, I havent seen any of those today, but I wouldnt rule it out in the event that there were a case where a reporter was purposely violating the law, then they might be a suspect as well, but thats not our goal here. Our goal is to prevent the leaks, and so, thats what were after here. We havent revised a policy with regard to reporters, he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
Rosenstein can’t make something a crime or not. He can only prosecute or not.
Guy thinks he’s king.
Are reporters smart enough to read that as a veiled threat? Because that’s what I heard.
Dear NYT & WaPo....Don’t do the crime, if you are not willing to do the time.
Law abiding citizen.
Yeah, Rosenstein, we wouldn’t want to actually stop the leaks. We’d rather pretend that we’re doing something about it.
Not a threat. He is warning his media associates that he may not have any leeway to cover for them in the future.
“Are reporters smart enough to read that as a veiled threat? Because thats what I heard.”
I don’t think so. This was a head fake to Trump. The whole thing was a CYA. Wallace never asked what he thought of Mueller obvious conflict or the fact Mueller has filled his staff with Rat Mercenaries. Rosenstein said oh yeah Meuller has limits which is BS. Rosenstein should be fired. Period.
If somebody purposely violates the law, Rosenstein thinks the law breaker "might be a suspect"?
Rosenstein is NOT the right person for the job.
a reporter writes.
a publisher publishes.
Serve a warrant and search the places for weeks on end with all who work there excluded from the premises
I dont get the point of this whole ####ing article.
IT IS A CRIME AND PUT THEM IN JAIL!!
Uh, most current journalists and news organizations are part of an active collusion and conspiracy to destroy the US gov’t via Trump. send them a message.
The anecdote that free speech ends when shouting “fire” in a crowded theatre seems to not take hold with the MSM. If a paper publishes troop movements or other state secrets, especially to simply embarrass the current occupant of the White Crib, should be the equivalent of shouting “fire” in a crowded theatre.
Rosenstein and Sessions are going to talk us to death if they’re not careful.
The SCOTUS already ruled on this issue. That’s why Daniel Ellsberg went to Federal prison, but none of the journalists involved kept him company.
In the Landmark New York Times vs United States in 1971, the USSC ruled that PRIOR RESTRAINT (the prevention of publication) was forbidden by the Constitution.
It was silent on the matter of whether the NYT or Wapo could be charged under the Espionage Act (section 973 if I remember correctly) for publishing the classified info.
The Nixon admin declined to bring charges.
“The SCOTUS already ruled on this issue.”
No, they haven’t. See my above post.
They have only ruled on the issue of Prior Restraint, and the ruling was silent on whether publication could be a crime.
The fact you can’t understand the law and/or simple logic is your problem, not mine. It’s logically and legally impossible for that which the First Amendment defines as rightful to also be criminal after the fact. Exercising a right — especially one explicitly enumerated in the Constitution — can never be criminal after the fact. Otherwise, it would have to be the case that the government could convict you of murder, but not stop the murder before it was committed.
The freedom to publish but still be criminally convicted for having published is logically absurd. It would make the First Amendment completely meaningless. If your interpretation were correct, then all speech could be criminalized, but not prevented in advance.
Isn’t it already a crime?
Let’s say a bank robber happens to turn over his cash to someone else not connected with the robbery. Does that person get to keep the cash? I want some legal mind to explain the difference.
Leaking classified info is a crime but publishing is not
Makes no sense
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.