Why is Matt Drudge in trouble?
Because the Leftists need a scapegoat to draw attention away from the Leftists who made the original call for assassins. That's just how the Leftist media works: can't take the heat for their own stupidity, so they finger Drudge, Fox News, and/or Free Republic as the "real" culprits.
Yeah, I don't get that either. Drudge was reporting the story because of how outrageous it was...(alerted to it by a Freeper I'm sure!)....not to boost circulation of the story.
Apparently this attorney thinks that by Drudge displaying the Guardian assassination headline front and center, it's going to serve as a call to arms to various nutjobs out there...
maybe its illegal to reprint a threat to the POTUS
I like Drudge but I do think he edged a little too close to the "line" on this. It is like yelling fire in a movie theater. Drudge just did it as a surrogate for the bonehead who originated the idea. He will probably just get a explanation as to why this can be dangerous and maybe a warning
Have you ever watched "The State." It was a hilarious skit show on MTV in the mid-nineties. One of the episodes had a running joke that carried through all of the skits, all funny on their own. Anyhow, the joke was abut the dangers of saying "I'm going to kill the President" on television. I don't know if any real event spurred this joke, but every time a character would say those words the "Secret Service" would take them and everything else away.
Funny, but the point is not. To simply say it publicly is like yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater. In this case, yelling "Fire" in a crowd of would be assassins. Actually intending for it to happen or not doesn't matter. In Drudge's case, I think the problem is headlining it, thus giving it the appearence of a call to arms, though I'm sure it's not what he intended. He probably won't be in any ctual trouble so long as he removes the headline.
"Citing federal statute 18 USC 879, Florida attorney John B. Thompson, called in the Secret Service Protective Intelligence Unit. "Please do whatever is necessary to punish the UK Guardian and to educate Matt Drudge on the meaning and scope of statute 18," Thompson wrote in a letter faxed to the SS on Saturday."
Wanna take a guess at the political affiliations of one FL attorney John Thompson? Seems this mouthpiece wants to spread the guilt around and smear Drudge. Later on, if it sticks, this can be spun to sound like a 'rightwing' sin to paste onto conservative media. Turn a liability into an asset - remember Clinton accusing everyone of exactly what he was doing? "The politics of personal destruction" means destroying those that uncover the truth about RATs.
I'm not a lawyer, but -- I don't think Drudge should be in any trouble about it. The remark had already been published in a big circulation newspaper/website. Drudge is well within his rights to criticize/comment on such a remark once it is published. He has a first amendment right to do so, as long as he isn't endorsing or encouraging the implied threat to POTUS. It would probably be smart of Drudge in the future to use wording that indicates that he condemns the remark.
Drudge brought it out for all to see how crazy the story really was. I'm sure he's not in trouble. Probably got a pat on the back for exposing this threat.
I think more than two lawyers in any Country constitutes a terrorist organization. How about they get some heat too?
Read up on Thompson's history on this site, and you'll understand. ;-)
They would love to take one of the NM conservative sites and discredit it.
The old misdirection ploy.
Thats all it is.
Because his website is so popular, and could have been read by some wacko who would feel the need to carry out that psycho Brit's wishes. It was irresponsible on Drudges part.