59millionmorons
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-29-03 11:36 AM
Original message |
Dana Milbank " it may be illegal for a reporter to give name of CIA agent" |
htuttle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-29-03 11:39 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Ironically, it was George Bush Sr. who backed a law making it illegal, primarily in an effort to shut up Phil Agee.
This one is coming right home to roost!
|
FDRrocks
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-29-03 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. and add in 'undercover' before CIA agent n/t |
Rose Siding
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-29-03 11:43 AM
Response to Original message |
|
If he prints what he hears, and hasn't taken any security oath himself, he seems as in the clear as all the others writing about it now. Like we are just now.
Wilson, I noted, spoke in hypotheticals- "IF it were true that my wife is a covert operative, and I'm not verifying that- probably because he *has* taken such an oath at his clearence level.
|
Padraig18
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-29-03 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
7. It's called "misprison of a felony" |
|
Since 'ignorance of the law' is no excuse, Novak is presumed to know that revealing the identity of a covert agent is a Federal offense. "Misprison of a felony" is a crime in the District of Columbia, as well as in most states, and simply stated it means that it is a crime to fail to inform law-enforcement of a crime that one would reasonably know or suspect is a felony.
Novak is NOT shielded by the First Amendment on this, any more than he would be had he published a battle plan, nuclear secrets, etc.
|
mandyky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-29-03 11:45 AM
Response to Original message |
4. Bob Novak will be retiring by the end of Oct., |
|
if not sooner. Oh good lord, who will they replace him with on Crossfire?
|
Stuckinthebush
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-29-03 11:48 AM
Response to Original message |
|
but I could be wrong.
I think if a reporter gets a leak and has a story, he/she is safe in printing the story.
Novak - although nasty - was probably totally within his limits by printing this story.
|
roguevalley
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Sep-29-03 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
6. He can be subpeoned by a judge to disclose and end up in jail. |
|
reporters go to jail all along and since this is a treasonable offense and he's not a beginner, he could end up in jail until he talks or someone else who didn't print, and is therefore in the clear, discloses under oath.
This isn't some prank. Novak doesn't have the right to break the law and hide behind privilege. Reporters often spend long times in jail if they don't disclose. This is tantamount to treason and if an independent counsel is in charge, and it appears that the network of this woman was put to death, there will be no nancing around.
We've been made just that much more unsafe today because of that rodent, Novak. Say what you will about the CIA. We are now more unsafe.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri May 10th 2024, 05:39 PM
Response to Original message |