$5.00
$15.00
$20.00
$30.00
Drew
United States
North Dakota
flag msg tools
Thanks for the rent-free space in your head. Would have been nice if you'd cleaned it up a bit before you rented it out, though.
badge
I control your mind.
mbmbmbmbmb
I think the message here is a warning to citizens: "Do not look at the Wikileaks e-mails!" but you can trust the media to tell you the truth about what's in them, of course.

Sez CNN:

Quote:
"Remember, it’s illegal to possess these stolen documents. It’s different for the media. So everything you learn about this, you’re learning from us.”[/b]



Ah, isn’t it lovely to be so special, so specially immune from the law? Except it’s not at all different for the media. The First Amendment offers the same protection to the media as to the rest of us, including when it comes to possessing or distributing illegally obtained material (so long as you weren’t involved in the original illegal hack or interception or leak). Indeed, in the 2001 Bartnicki v. Vopper decision, the Supreme Court rejected even civil liability for distributing illegally intercepted cellphone calls, and expressly refused to distinguish the media from others:

Quote:
The . . . question is whether the application of these statutes [that purport to ban distributing illegally obtained material, even when one wasn’t involved in the distribution,] in such circumstances violates the First Amendment. [Footnote: In answering this question, we draw no distinction between the media respondents and Yocum.]


And the Bartnicki Court cited New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 265-266 (1964) — the case treated the media and non-media speakers equally, and a passage on those pages stressed the rights of “persons who do not themselves have access to publishing facilities” — and First Nat. Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, 435 U.S. 765, 777 (1978), which is a passage that stresses the rights of all speakers to speak.

Now, while knowingly possessing tangible stolen property would often be a crime for both the media and others, possessing copies of illegally leaked materials is generally not treated the same way. See Pearson v. Dodd, 410 F.2d 701 (D.C. Cir. 1969). But in any event, remember that, whatever First Amendment rules may apply, the media has no more First Amendment rights than the rest of us.


Does CNN only hire dumb people? Geez.

Anyway, Chris, while I'm sure you'd love to be able to tell us that these e-mails are all about yoga and wedding dresses, we'll read them for ourselves, thanks.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Binkowski
United States
Rochester
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
"We're a nation of laws!!"

But Americans pretty much scoff at silly, restrictive laws anyways. Prohibition? Anyone? Anyone?


And now: wait for it!

"But what about sensitive information that could be released to the public?"

Don't you DARE play THAT card in light of hillary's improprieties!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J
United States
Lexington
Kentucky
flag msg tools
admin
mbmbmbmbmb
Don't look at leaked classified docs if you need a security clearance.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Seguin
United States
Cleveland
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
jmilum wrote:
Don't look at leaked classified docs if you need a security clearance.


That's sort of what Drew is saying.

Either EVERYONE gets to see the leaked materials, or NO ONE can see them.

But for some in the media to claim that only they get to see them smacks of "we know better" - which they usually don't.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
mb
Whilst being within "S2" of the Army, then 'moi' "vetted" anybody for their particular "security clearance(s)" so, THAT placed myself OVERSEER in them regards.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Drew
United States
North Dakota
flag msg tools
Thanks for the rent-free space in your head. Would have been nice if you'd cleaned it up a bit before you rented it out, though.
badge
I control your mind.
mbmbmbmbmb
The media thinks that, like the Democrats for whom they cover, they too are above the law.

Remember this incident of media law-breaking:


Quote:
In a nearly forgotten controversy David Gregory, then host of NBC’s “Meet the Press,” appeared on TV waving a 30-round ammunition magazine from the network’s District of Columbia studio.

Gregory was aggressively interviewing the National Rifle Association’s Wayne LaPierre in December 2012, asking if it might be a good idea to ban the high-capacity magazines.

His prop, ironically, violated a District of Columbia law making it illegal to possess an ammunition magazine - even an empty one - that holds more than 10 bullets.

Gregory was never arrested or charged with the crime, which carries up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $1,000, but an affidavit released Friday shows that’s exactly what local police recommended.

Wayne Gerrish, a Washington Metropolitan Police Department detective, wrote in the affidavit the snafu was no accident, and requested an arrest warrant.

NBC staff contacted police before the episode aired to share their plans and ask about the legality of showing the magazine, the affidavit says. Two emailed responses explained doing so would violate the law. One of the emails suggested using a photo instead.

Many gun rights advocates were giddy to learn Gregory had violated the District's gun laws. Though some salivated at the prospect of a suspected gun control sympathizer heading to jail for violating gun control laws, others said he should not be prosecuted.

In January 2013 the District’s attorney general, Irvin Nathan, decided not to bring charges against Gregory, despite what he called “the gravity of the illegal conduct in this matter.” At the time city officials would not say if detectives had endorsed bringing charges.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Keiser

Waunakee
Wisconsin
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Drew1365 wrote:
The media thinks that, like the Democrats for whom they cover, they too are above the law.

Remember this incident of media law-breaking:


Quote:
In a nearly forgotten controversy David Gregory, then host of NBC’s “Meet the Press,” appeared on TV waving a 30-round ammunition magazine from the network’s District of Columbia studio.

Gregory was aggressively interviewing the National Rifle Association’s Wayne LaPierre in December 2012, asking if it might be a good idea to ban the high-capacity magazines.

His prop, ironically, violated a District of Columbia law making it illegal to possess an ammunition magazine - even an empty one - that holds more than 10 bullets.

Gregory was never arrested or charged with the crime, which carries up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $1,000, but an affidavit released Friday shows that’s exactly what local police recommended.

Wayne Gerrish, a Washington Metropolitan Police Department detective, wrote in the affidavit the snafu was no accident, and requested an arrest warrant.

NBC staff contacted police before the episode aired to share their plans and ask about the legality of showing the magazine, the affidavit says. Two emailed responses explained doing so would violate the law. One of the emails suggested using a photo instead.

Many gun rights advocates were giddy to learn Gregory had violated the District's gun laws. Though some salivated at the prospect of a suspected gun control sympathizer heading to jail for violating gun control laws, others said he should not be prosecuted.

In January 2013 the District’s attorney general, Irvin Nathan, decided not to bring charges against Gregory, despite what he called “the gravity of the illegal conduct in this matter.” At the time city officials would not say if detectives had endorsed bringing charges.



Poor Drewber... just picking up scraps of used toilet paper and try to assemble a respectable suit of clothing from them.

Is this what the next EIGHT years is going to be like for you?

PS... Where in the grieving process are you at with Trump's L?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J.D. Hall
msg tools
Cuomo is typical of today's lightweights passing themselves off as journalists. People should understand that instead of what Cuomo said (relying on a highly technical reading of the law) that journalists have exactly the same rights as individual citizens, no more, no less. If someone leaks classified documents or government e-mails, the citizens have just as much right to read them as journalists -- or what passes for journalists these days. The Pentagon Papers pretty well reinforced all of that.

Unfortunately for the Clinton haters, what is coming out right now is merely inner circle communications between people discussing options, politics, etc. Not exactly a smoking gun. But Cuomo is dead wrong, and if they fire Billy Bush for whatever reason at NBC, they should fire Cuomo.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.