Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
30 seconds of googling...

NYT

 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
The article talks about Trump seizing a reporter's phone logs and records. You've been trying to argue that Trump's lies and attacks on the media were different because Trump didn't do things like seize reporter's records.


Good God, you completely distort what that was about, to make it conform to your Democrat propaganda anti-Trump talking points.

The guy who was arrested was the Senate Intelligence Committee's security director who violated his trust, was involved in crimes and will be going to jail. I remember this story when it came out, there is no question of his guilt. And it wasn't just talking to a reporter, he was having a sexual affair with her, way beyond just news-gathering.
The records legally subpoenaed were tangentially related to prosecuting the Senate security director, *not* jailing or prosecuting a reporter.

And it's ironic because:

 Quote:
[Senate security director James A. Wolfe’s arrest] case led to the first known instance of the Justice Department going after a reporter’s data under President Trump. The seizure was disclosed in a letter to the Times reporter, Ali Watkins, who had been in a three-year relationship with Mr. Wolfe. The seizure suggested that prosecutors under the Trump administration will continue the aggressive tactics employed under President Barack Obama.



So in no uncertain terms (and I've heard of no other cases I can recall of Trump's DOJ going after a reporters's records) even this (liberal media) New York Times piece is saying if Trump went down this path repeatedly, he would approach the egregious suppression of freedom of the press that went on under Obama.

A hilarious reach on your part.


It is legal to go after the leaker, even though the reporter can legally report anything that is leaked. To my knowledge, the only exception to that is if the reporter is actively involved in helping steal top secret or government documents. Such as Julian Assange allegedly helping Bradley Manning hack the passwords to get secured government computer files. But if Manning had already hacked them and given the already unsecured documents to Assange/Wikileaks, then Assange could not be prosecuted.

In the case of the Senate intelligence security director, he was (by encrypted message) disclosing to multiple reporters secret information before it was unsecured, and therefore doing the exact opposite of what he was paid to do as security director.

  • from Do Racists have lower IQ's...

    Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.

    EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.