Something new for Leftforge to pretend is perfectly acceptable.

[yt=DOJ targeting Fox News reporters]yM_hezVWJHY[/yt]

This is cool, too, right?

Fox News is the enemy so it is okay in their world.......

From the article I read in the Wall Street Journal, it appears that Rosen might have committed a crime. Are journalists now to share the same immunities as diplomats? Well then, lets send Rosen back to wherever he came from. Oh, wait....

Which crime would that be, and according to whom did he commit it?

Ah, so I've found out which crime it was: The "crime" of doing his job.

A crime?

So someone leaks info to a reporter and the reporter has now committed a criminal act?

Because that's what you're saying.

The reporter didn't break into any building or file. He encouraged his source to give him more info so he could report on it.

Just like every reporter in America does.

Reporters can not be arrested for printing classified information that is given to them. That along with the other First Amendment protections protects reporters bringing the public information about what the government is doing.

But now it seems as if Obama's DOJ wants to do a end run around that by claiming that by asking a source for classified info is "solicitation" and is itself a crime. That would criminalize every reporter in Washington DC at the minimum and every reporter in the world whoever asked a source for info that is classified.

You might want to think of the Pandora's Box that will open before you gleefully jump up and down that a Fox News reporter is in the crosshairs of the government for what the reporter reported on.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/20/obama-doj-james-rosen-criminality

Of course. But I'm also not going to Chicken Little it.

Wow. Wow. This is some flatly and openly authoritarian shit going on, and you really are going to pretend it's hunky-dory, aren'tcha.

You claim everything is flatly and openly authoritarian shit. Nothing you say can be taken seriously at this point.

Only the shit that is. What's disturbing is that you're perfectly okay with all of it.

Substitute "crimes" with "sedition" and we got ourselves an old-timey Chavez thread.

If it were Bush doing it to CNN...

...Castle wouldn't make a peep.

And Leftforge would be screaming how evul Bush is and demand his impeachment.

There's no way to know, since as stupid, inept and corrupt as Bush was, he wasn't this stupid, inept or corrupt.

Hm. Have to check with security. I know it's a crime for me to provide classified information to someone, but I don't know if it's a crime for someone to encourage me to do so. It may be considered espionage.

Wow... down the memory hole, huh?

When you drag the right/left thing into it, you ignore half of the problem.

Not according to the precedent set by New York Times Co. v. United States.

Our company is more focused on foreign powers acquiring military secrets. Here's our security dept's definition of espionage:

What is Espionage?

• Act or practice of spying
• Use of spies by a government to discover military and political secrets of other nations
• Unlawful or clandestine targeting or acquisition of sensitive financial, trade, or economic information or critical technology

This MIGHT fall under the last definition...

For all this "scary corruption", it's stunning how nothing actually got done.

If they're going to take off the gloves, and be evil, come on, destroy Fox News, destroy the Tea Party.

This goes back to my point in the gun thread, if you're going to be authoritarian assbags anyway, get something out of it.

Nope, some people get harrassed, it gets found out, apologies are made, what a bunch of pussies.

The left just can't do corruption right.
They shouldn't even try.

"Unlawful" would be the sticking point. As far as I know, it might be unlawful for you to provide the information to a journalist -- that part I'm not clear on and less concerned with anyway -- but it isn't unlawful for them to ask for it, to receive it or to publish it. The First Amendment provides some pretty serious protection for journalists in that regard.

Yeah... Like I said. And just because Bush did it too doesn't make it ok for Obama to do it. Though he said he was going to be more "transparent" and different from Bush. (whom I never liked either) Instead there's no change. Just the same 'ol, same 'ol. It should'nt be right vs left but right vs wrong.

It is emphatically not ok.

It is kind of ironic, given Fox News' stance on government intrusions into individual rights, and especially privacy, in the name of national security, in a hundred other instances leading up to this one. But that doesn't make it right.

It is also highly dubious, given Fox News' track record of telling lies, lies, and more lies. And that might make it right, but only if the truth is different than what is stated.

Choose whether to believe him or not....

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...litano_no_crime_committed_by_james_rosen.html

On the surface, this is unacceptable. Simply asking questions shouldn't be grounds for charges to be filed.

We'll see if there's any more to it.

And it never went anywhere and the Attorney General and President Bush got hammered over it.

However there is also another difference. One that many won't understand or care about.

Back then they didn't follow the reporter and gather up his records in secret. In this case they were spying on the reporter in order to find out who his source was so they would know who was leaking. That didn't happen under Bush. Under Bush the NYT printed the material and then it was said they could possibly be prosecuted for publishing it.

And you are a fucking liar yourself since Fox News doesn't have a track record of lies.

It's obvious that you're a stupid leftist whose never even watched Fox News.

Stop!! Stop!! My ribs!! I can't take it!!