Is it Time to Hold Journalists in Contempt of Court for National Security Reasons?

Armstrong Economics ^ | May 29, 2017 | Martin Armstrong

[HarleyLady27]

On Tuesday U.S. officials, under the guise of anonymity, leaked the name of the suicide bomber responsible for the attack at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester before the British police had officially named him causing greater skepticism for allies sharing intelligence with the United States. There is something seriously wrong in the intelligence community and it borders on TREASON.

American journalists published the name before the British journalists. The British police had not confirmed the identity of the attacker, Salman Abedi. Since it was an ongoing investigation, the British government had indicated it may not release the name at all and then the American press reported the name.

The case of Judith Miller, the New York Times journalist at the time, became embroiled in controversy after her coverage of Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction program both before and after the 2003 invasion. The New York Times later determined Miller’s stories published in the paper were inaccurate. She acknowledged in The Wall Street Journal on April 4, 2015 that some of her Times coverage was inaccurate, although she had relied on sources she had used numerous times in the past, and had won a Pulitzer Prize. Miller further stated that policymakers and intelligence analysts had relied on the same sources claiming that Iraq had huge stockpiles of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Some argue that it was her stories in the New York Times that supported the entire invasion of Iraq.

[HarleyLady27]

Ping...

[Fhios]

That’s all fine and dandy but you’re skipping the part where somebody actually legally compel them to testify.

[Mr.Unique]

No.

[Roccus]

.

I've viewed "journalists" with contempt for most of my adult life.

.

[HarleyLady27]

I see you didn’t take the time to read the article or you wouldn’t have said that...reading headlines is not know completely what is going on...

[Mr.Unique]

I see you didn’t take the time to read the article...

You don't know how fast I read. Or if I had read it before (which I did).

...or you wouldn’t have said that...

If you thought you knew the answer, why did you ask?

[DoughtyOne]

FReepers, it's time to get serious about retiring this FReep-a-thon.


President Donald J. Trump and the Free Republic of the United States of America

Ramirez political cartoon: the Price of Freedom LARGE VERSION 05/28/2017: LINK  LINK to regular sized versions of his political cartoons (archive).

Please join the monthlies, an automated way to help support Free Republic.

If you are not opting to join the automated monthly support program, please consider joining the One One Done project.  LINK

FReepers, 65.35% of the Second Quarter FReep-a-thon goal has been met.  Click above and pencil in your donation now.  Please folks, lets end this FReepathon.  Thank you!
...this is a general all-purpose message, and should not be seen as targeting any individual I am responding to...

Just $571.00 to 66.00%

[Chewbarkah]

OK, I’m all for waterboarding leakers. But there could not be a lamer instance to whine about than identifying Salman Abedi before Brits had time to pretend he was an Amish gas leak.
What possible harm did giving out his name accurately do to their “investigation”? Any jihadis with knowledge of the bombing, or who aided and abetted it, knew Adebi was the bomber BEFORE THE FACT. They didn’t wait for a news report before destroying evidence and taking off. Or is the concern that the mass murderer’s ISIS-daddy and ISIS-bro’s hadn’t been officially notified, leaving them to learn of his martyrdom through the news? Boo hoo.

[HarleyLady27]

Well P.M. Theresa May was mighty hot about ‘leaks’ coming from Manchester to the New York papers...something must have happened...

[RedStateRocker]

Dumb and dangerous beyond the power of words to describe. Anyone suggesting this is a despicable moron. Both in general principle and the fact that it WILL come back to bite the very fascist idiots who suggest it.

The *ONLY* legitimate constraint on the press is libel.

[Mr.Unique]

Both in general principle and the fact that it WILL come back to bite the very fascist idiots who suggest it.

What you said.

[Nero Germanicus]

It literally takes years from the time of a leak until there is a ruling of contempt.
Judith Miller’s New York Times article appeared on September 7, 2002 and she was held in CIVIL contempt on October 1, 2004; she appealed and the conviction was upheld and she went to jail in July, 2005.

[DesertRhino]

Wrong. The treason was not publishing his name. It was the Brits trying to hide that information. They were hiding it to conceal that he was an Islamic terrorist.
They also needed it concealed that he was a recent migrant, and had been brought in 5 times for questioning.
They needed to conceal it that the FBI told MI-5 about it and they deep 6ed it because in January of 2017, they thought he wanted to assassinate someone.

The whore’s concert caught them by surprise, they were counting on him to assassinate a political leader. Any ideas who was trending in the news along about January of 2017?

[DesertRhino]

He was supposed to be Lee Harvey Abedi.

The Brits intended to conceal his name for a long time. Also coincidently, concealing that they knew all about him and funded him, made excuses for him, and unleashed him on that concert.

[Chewbarkah]

Possibly, The Leak Community wanted to create division and force May to slap Trump down publicly. Not sure why Trump allow this to continue.

[trebb]

Detain them until they reveal the sources of the treason - if they refuse, let them serve the sentence for the crime.

Will stop a huge amount of the leaks when those treasonous rats don't have a protective layer of "the Press" to insulate them from their crimes.