Posted on 10/10/2018 10:12:06 AM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
In a motion to dismiss a new lawsuit accusing President Donald Trump’s campaign team of illegally conspiring with Russian agents to disseminate stolen emails during the election, Trump campaign lawyers have tried out a new defense: free speech.
The lawsuit, filed last month by two donors and one former employee of the Democratic National Committee, alleges that the Trump campaign, along with former Trump adviser Roger Stone, worked with Russia and WikiLeaks to publish hacked DNC emails, thereby violating their privacy.
But the Trump campaign—represented by Jeffrey Baltruzak, Michael A. Carvin, Nikki L. McArthur, and Vivek Suri, all of the law firm Jones Day—responded in a brief filed Tuesday that the campaign can’t be held legally responsible for WikiLeaks’s publication of the DNC emails.
Furthermore, the Trump lawyers argued, the First Amendment protects the campaign’s “right to disclose information—even stolen information—so long as (1) the speaker did not participate in the theft and (2) the information deals with matters of public concern.”....
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
In my view, although he has done a good job with NK overall, this is not the only time Pompeo has opened his mouth when he should have said less.
“Trump campaign lawyers have tried out a new defense: free speech.”
It’s not a new defense at all. It’s the exact same defense the New York Times or any other newspaper uses when they publish leaked documents, even classified ones.
Daniel Ellsberg.
But they were all for Daniel Ellsburg stealing the Pentagon Papers and the New York Slimes publishing them.
Yes. It will be difficult for the sockpuppet media to claim this position without making it certain that they have an anti-bill-of-rights double standard. But that also goes for members of congress from both parties.
I suppose paying Russian agents to produce fake documents to provide and pressure the FBI and Attorney General with, to spy on and investigate, in order to smear, your political opponent in, and with the help of, the media, during a Presidential Election Campaign is “Free Speech”.
*WORST SENTENCE EVER* (High-Five Myself!)
But it is a crime against democrats if someone promotes a media story that exposes their illegal, unethical and corrupt behavior.
The problem with Wikileaks is, it cuts both ways. Do you really want information that can get American soldiers and citizens killed being put out by a group that has no more loyaly to the US than to China or Iran?
You may not like it but Pompeo’s description was exactly right.
Soooooo, emails are private and one shouldn’t make them public?
Hey low-T Atlantic journalists, do da phrase “Trump tax returns” ring your cheap plastic bell?
If journalists did not have double standards, they’d have no standards at all.
The sheer audacity of this move is almost admirable.
A campaign that used our own Justice Department to bug, surveille and recycle a bogus fabrication to provide it a cover of legitimacy now attacks it’s target for violating privacy of communications that they themselves revealed through their own ineptitude.
The doxxing if ICE employees by somebody at wikileaks was despicable and certainly involved criminal activity (antifa and others). Plus wikileaks should have taken action against anyone in their organization who participated in, or approved the release. AFAIK they have not taken any actions to do so, and for that reason, I agree with you about the current wikileaks org.
But Pompeo made that statement a year before the doxxing. Is he clairvoyant?
...the Trump campaign—represented by Jeffrey Baltruzak, Michael A. Carvin, Nikki L. McArthur, and Vivek Suri, all of the law firm Jones Day—responded in a brief filed Tuesday that the campaign can’t be held legally responsible for WikiLeaks’s publication of the DNC emails. Furthermore, the Trump lawyers argued, the First Amendment protects the campaign’s “right to disclose information—even stolen information—so long as (1) the speaker did not participate in the theft and (2) the information deals with matters of public concern.”...
It’s not to far off the mark. The person stealing them might no have the right of free speech but having them sent to you then yes it would be free speech. Like the Pentagon papers et al.
in a brief filed Tuesday that the campaign can’t be held legally responsible for WikiLeaks’s publication of the DNC emails.
Furthermore, the Trump lawyers argued, the First Amendment protects the campaign’s “right to disclose information—even stolen information—so long as (1) the speaker did not participate in the theft and (2) the information deals with matters of public concern.”....
————
End of story
ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
Furthermore, the Trump lawyers argued, the First Amendment protects the campaign’s “right to disclose information—even stolen information—so long as (1) the speaker did not participate in the theft and (2) the information deals with matters of public concern.”....
Did the News Misleadia publish a single hacked email?
Oh, they did? Dozens or more of them?
Then they shed crocodile tears.
Even worse, the very News Misleadia propagandists now shedding crocodile tears over this, are the very ones that published dozens or more of these emails.
"It's GREAT when we do it. It's AWFUL when you do it."
You sure he wasn’t referring to the FBI/DOJ?
Exactly. Publishing material that has be obtained illegally is still protected speech.
If it’s a barf article, why post it?
BTW, this is not mentioned in the article, but if you applied the same argument to google/twitter/facebook, that would make it a lot harder to expose those entities' skullduggery.
And, IIRC, the Supreme Court has already ruled that publication of stolen documents is “protected speech” in the case of “The Pentagon Papers”.
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.