- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Board Attorneys: Legal Question regarding NYT Anon
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:26 am to upgrayedd
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:26 am to upgrayedd
quote:
This is an article in a newspaper, not a tria
it's an attempt to delegitimize a sitting president which included discussion of invoking the 25th ammendment, and to me the article is the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater....
quote:
What papers were stolen?
Read the article, allegedly multiple policy papers awaiting the CiC signature....
2
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:27 am to TerryDawg03
quote:
I agree that the press should remain free. They should also act responsibly.
If the NYT had published anything critical of Obama whatsoever, people might not be scrutinizing the legitimacy of this Op-Ed so heavily.
True, but issues of legitimacy and forcing the press to turn over confidential sources are two completely different issues.
Most of the people around here hate big government except when they have big government on their side.
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:28 am to Bard
quote:
If disclosing that someone is disenchanted with the President as their boss is a national security concern then it opens that person up to investigation.
True but probably only if person leaked and or published op eds in press using stolen info.
Either way we’re way past that now. We are now past point where a president was using the intelligence and security agencies of the government to spy on and target political opponents.
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:29 am to upgrayedd
quote:
Well, cooking up "national security" concerns to force the press to turn over a source is something they do in Russia, not the US.
It's not target someone whose critical of the administration (free speech), its to target someone who confesses to actively undermining the administration from within.
This isn't a free speech issue. Don't conflate the two.
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:30 am to wickowick
quote:best answer so far. INB4: 'two wrongs don't make a right', pussies.
FISA his arse...
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:30 am to More&Les
quote:
Serious question, the anon NYT writer has admitted to subverting the president's agenda and to stealing documents off his desk. Could the president not seek a court order, based on national security concerns, for the NYT to reveal the identity?
if the author sent this in electronically assume the WH already knows who wrote it. So unless the author typed it on a typewriter and handed the piece of paper to the NYT the real question is how does the WH handle the optics of this? that is assuming the whole thing isnt a set up by the WH to give DJT something else to punch in his rally speeches.
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:31 am to More&Les
quote:
court order
Anon has already confessed to stealing......
But it was an anon letter so the NYT should be ordered to turn over letter/s to U.S. Attorney Trump trusts....
Not the FBI....
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:31 am to More&Les
quote:
to me the article is the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:31 am to More&Les
quote:
it's an attempt to delegitimize a sitting president
Not illegal
quote:
which included discussion of invoking the 25th ammendment
Not illegal
quote:
and to me the article is the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater....
I don't think you know what you're talking about.
quote:
Read the article, allegedly multiple policy papers awaiting the CiC signature....
I don't see how that's a national security issue unless it involves something classified.
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:31 am to upgrayedd
quote:
but issues of legitimacy and forcing the press to turn over confidential sources are two completely different issues.
But the NYT manufactured this situation.
There are people looking into this and if the person is discovered via outside sources then so be it. But the NYT published an article that claims someone is stealing documents and working against the president.
Perhaps they shouldn't have gone into such detail to make the article more attractive.
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:32 am to BobBoucher
quote:
It's not target someone whose critical of the administration (free speech), its to target someone who confesses to actively undermining the administration from within.
This isn't a free speech issue. Don't conflate the two.
It's a free press issue
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:32 am to upgrayedd
quote:
What papers were stolen?
Threat-assessments, trade strategy, military re-deployments, POTUS detailed travel schedule and security team assignments, nuclear launch codes, etc.
The point is that if someone has admitted to removing "papers" from the Presidents desk without his direction or knowledge, then nobody knows exactly what information was lost.
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:36 am to keks tadpole
quote:
nuclear launch codes, etc.
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:37 am to upgrayedd
quote:
It's a free press issue
Our government has done some pretty heinous things over the years to ensure its interest in national security.
I can't think of a greater risk to national security than someone acting rogue agent within the gov to take down a democratically elected president.
This situation is unlike any other. Getting an order to turn over the source is least they should do.
And BTW - I would feel the same way if it was a Dem prez in office. Some of these issues are way more serious than politics. The DOJ/FBI is another one.
You start having traitors in an administration and weaponozing your law enforcement agencies, and this democracy won't last. Coups are just around the corner.
There must be zero tolerance and consequences.
This post was edited on 9/7/18 at 10:45 am
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:41 am to upgrayedd
You must be out of your mind. Policy papers awaiting the CiC signature being stolen off the President's desk? This person belongs in prison. They have to give him or her up.
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:42 am to More&Les
quote:
the anon NYT writer has admitted to subverting the president's agenda and to stealing documents off his desk
The writer *did not* admit to stealing documents in the op-ed.
quote:
Could the president not seek a court order, based on national security concerns, for the NYT to reveal the identity?
DOJ could investigate if there was an unauthorized disclosure of classified info but I’m pretty sure that is not an issue here.
This post was edited on 9/7/18 at 10:43 am
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:43 am to BobBoucher
quote:
You start having traitors in an administration and weaponozing your law enforcement agencies, and this democracy won't last.
This would be weaponizing LEA's to go after the press.
What an ironic statement.
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:45 am to upgrayedd
quote:
It's not target someone whose critical of the administration (free speech), its to target someone who confesses to actively undermining the administration from within.
This isn't a free speech issue. Don't conflate the two.
It's a free press issue
The press doesn't have the right to intentionally sabotage the commander in chief, whether he's a big meanie head or not.
This person has admitted to crimes against our president and against the people and has demonstrated a national security risk, the failing NYT should be forced to identify the author.
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:46 am to LuckyTiger
quote:
We are now past point where a president was using the intelligence and security agencies of the government to spy on and target political opponents.
That sort of thing would be covered under such an umbrella of "national security concerns".
Let the anon writer stay anon for now. Nothing stays secret forever, especially in DC.
Posted on 9/7/18 at 10:46 am to upgrayedd
quote:
This would be weaponizing LEA's to go after the press. What an ironic statement.
You're not targeting and prosecuting the press. Your seeking information. You know, like spying on a presidential candidate (without evidence).
Except here there's evidence of a Sedition and national security risks.
This post was edited on 9/7/18 at 10:49 am
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News