Are you arguing the standard in this country isn't supposed to be reasonable doubt?
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel @JGamblin
Or are you arguing, we need a head and Sterling is the most likely one so chop that one off?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
I think we both know when you are given access to classified materials you give up some of the freedoms your fellow citizens have.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JGamblin
That's a straw man. You don't give up the freedom to have non-classified conversations.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @emptywheel
You dont, but if a reporter you are having non-classified conversations with writes a book with classified information you are screwed.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JGamblin
Yes. This establishes standard that providing unclassified tips is sufficient to send you to prison. I find that utterly objectionable.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @JGamblin
Then you should be offended that those 3 charges were upheld. I might support the other ones (for the book). But not the unwritten NYT story
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
Going forward anyone with clearance talking to anyone in the press is taking a huge risk of this happening to them.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JGamblin
Yeah. I don't think that's a good thing. I get unclassified tips all the time that lead me to unclassified docs that substantiate class info
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
This will also prevent people from giving reporters tips on things they can FOIA.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.