With shout-outs to ourselves and our buds at The Atlantic, GQ, and more. Awesome read, once you get past the snarky hed. (Hey, man, we’re here for the community karma, not the subscriptions. We’ve got folks who make up card mailers for that sorta thing.)
Boom, baby. Perhaps it’s time to let our id show a little more. Thoreau, I’m sure, would be proud. - JK
“I am going to fight this subpoena. I will always protect my sources, and I think this is a fight about the First Amendment and the freedom of the press.”—
New York Times reporter JAMES RISEN, who has been subpoenaed by federal prosecutors; they are looking for him “to testify at a criminal trial about who leaked information to him about a C.I.A. effort to sabotage the Iranian nuclear program at the end of the Clinton administration.”
According to the Justice Department, the First Amendment does not give Risen “the right to avoid testifying about his confidential sources in a criminal proceeding.”
I wonder if New York has the same quality of shield laws as California. Here—at least as I recall from my media law class—he wouldn’t have to divulge his source information unless it were a grand jury subpoena or the information was vital to giving a fair trial and could not be found elsewhere (which they argue is the case). If he received the information as a mere citizen—meaning he witnessed it while not on the job—he would not be protected. However, even though that information was not published he was gathering that information with the intention of publication, thus he should be covered. I hope this subpoena is quashed like the previous one.
I’m also rather curious about why there have been so many prosecutions for leaking information during this presidency. Is it due to a more paranoid administration or an actual increase in the amount of leaking?
Suppose we’re classifying the controversial Bush administration “harsh interrogation” practices at Guantanamo as “torture.” Now: what if that torture led to the U.S. finding Osama bin Laden and taking him out of the picture forever? Given the news that the crucial information on bin Laden’s courier—the man who unwittingly led the U.S. to bin Laden’s compound—came from Guantanamo Bay detainees, commentators at home and abroad are revisiting the Guantanamo debate. Does the extra-legal detention now look like a good idea? How about the waterboarding? Here are the details of the case, and how they can be used to support arguments in both directions.