Does the New York times inform the government of what they were about to leak before hand so as not to create a dangerous situation for innocent individuals ? In other words make sure they do not violate personal privacy and national security issues ?
I’ll answer that.
Yes they do they discuss this amongst themselves and talk to government officials and private companies to make sure what they are getting is correct and so they don’t do a needed harm .
Assange is not a God unto himself
And the New York time is still debating whether what they’re doing is kosher.
Last edited by pgardn; 11-17-2018 at 11:02 AM.
They can find out what laws when his indictment is unsealed. Though the WAPo clearly states violation of the Espionage act was discussed.
And I will compare this to Erin Snowden. What Snowden did was very useful but very illegal. He knew what he was taking on and he made himself the man. That’s not the way it’s done in a democracy . So next time you go to the ballot box vote for someone who has thought about whistleblower laws and has good ideas on how to inform government officials about possibly illegal government activities
And I will compare this to Erin Snowden. What Snowden did was very useful but very illegal. He knew what he was taking on and he made himself the man. That’s not the way it’s done in a democracy . So next time you go to the ballot box vote for someone who has thought about whistleblower laws and has good ideas on how to inform government officials about possibly illegal government activities
We don’t need self designated all knowing individuals unelected and acting without any discussion or guidance of the bigger picture thinking they are Jesus .
I understand haters view because the New York Times is just an arm of the CIA, so he has a legitimate concern in his ghost filled world.
is there a legal requirement that journalists do so?
again, if the alleged illegality is a matter of the provenance of classified materials, I don't see how the activities of the NYT can be meaningfully distinguished from those of Assange.
because Assange is a grandiose jerk who ignores ethical and professional norms, he should be thrown in prison.
what would be the legal pretext for doing so, in your opinion?
not a card carrying member, but in general I'm a fan of the ACLU.
if you check my history of posting here, you'll find more than a few ACLU reposts related to freedom of speech and domestic surveillance.
Last edited by Winehole23; 11-17-2018 at 11:22 AM.
Theres a difference between disagreeing with Assange or NYT reporting than having them thrown in jail
These idiots dont understand that once there is legal precedent no organization not the NYT not wapo not CNN will dare report anymore
If you're so confident he's protected by the Cons ution you should welcome the precedent.
Theres a difference between disagreeing with Assange or NYT reporting than having them thrown in jail
These idiots dont understand that once there is legal precedent no organization not the NYT not walk nit CNN will dare report anymore
In a court of law it might be tough.
But if you don’t see the difference between the New York Times and Julian Assange...
I’m sure there are lawyers who could figure out an argument from my case.
so, you're aware of no legal basis for prosecuting Julian Assange, but are determined to see him behind bars.
good to know.
None that I know of.
But we clearly need to look for some new laws for whistleblowers as I already stated.
Because these guys are dangerous we already saw this from crazy lady can’t remember her name who just randomly released information .
NATSEC hysteria trumps the Cons ution. We've known this for awhile.
Obama tried to prosecute leakers as spies, only a matter of time until DJT tries too.
The Justice Department is aware. That’s what counts
Maybe this whole thing will allow us to make some laws because people like this can’t act on their own in such a whimsical Manner. You understand my argument in a democracy where information is so easily exchanged.
The Justice Dept is aware. Doesn’t matter what trolls think.
There can be only 1 precedent in the Virginia Eastern court. Hundreds of years in prison
Read up on Virginia Eastern court tbqh. Not 1 expneration. Most eligible jurors are family of Intllifence officers and the judges dont allow any defense
In a world where information is not so easily exchanged we might never have learned about domestic surveillance by the NSA and others, US war crimes, torture, contractor fraud, a raft of official lies to the press -- and even Russian cyberattacks on US elections.
Remember Reality Winner?
Things like this need to be discussed because this is how new laws are made. Cases like this arises in-laws change. I don’t particularly like the timing with the orange man trying to control the department of justice but I can see far enough ahead that this is something that needs to be addressed.
We cannot have individuals stealing information and deciding what is proper to release in a democracy in which sensitive information is so easily exchanged. This is a problem .
True. And there are laws. At the same time while we know Assange is charged we will have to see what he is charged with.
Some ppl here want to make 1984 a reality
Pretty sad
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
sure