Replies

Let's say I work with someone that I suspect is doing something illegal but I don't have any proof. I decide to break into their office and hack their computer to get the goods on them. I then turn that information over to the press (not the police or my employer) but the press. The evidence gathering doesn't justify my breaking and entering.

That doesn't make the person that is doing something illegal - innocent or should the evidence found be ignored, but it does seem to me that I should be held accountable for breaking and entering.

Except that the computers weren't hacked; they were on a common server (thanks to Leahy). It's not the staffer's fault that the memos were stored in public for all to see (which is why they knew of their existence). It would have been different if they indeed did "hack" into protected servers to get the info, but that is not what happened here.

Plus, congress is considered a "single entity" by its own rules.

Therefore, it was absolutely correct to "blow the wistle" on this corruption; the people at large (we the people) have a string interest in knowing if their elected officials are abusing their offices.