right-wing fanatic Marc Thiessen: WikiLeaks must be stopped

(And before you start, Clinton's lies were not perjury because they were not about a "material fact.") Originally Posted by TexTushHog

Sure, anything you say. Leave it to a lawyer to parse degrees of perjury.

Clinton's lies were not perjury because they were not about a "material fact." Originally Posted by TexTushHog

No, but the materiel fact wound up in the Smithsonian.

Sure, anything you say. Leave it to a lawyer to parse degrees of perjury. Originally Posted by pjorourke

Not a degree of perjury. The fact that the lie is about must be a "material fact". That is an essential element of the offense that must be proved by the State beyond a reasonable doubt. If it is not about a "material fact," then by definition, it is not perjury, it is simply a lie.

Like I said.

What I am saying is that they won't be. Originally Posted by WTF

First, you said they SHOULDN'T be. I disagreed with you on that. THEN you said they WON'T be. Never disagreed with that. See my first response to your first post on the topic...best justice money can buy, etc., etc.

I highly doubt that Obama will commute this private's jail sentence. That is what Bush did for Libby.

I also doubt that any of the folks that were for a Libby pardon will be for this kids pardon, if convicted. Originally Posted by WTF

No argument here. It's this young man's misfortunate to have run afoul of national security law during the administration of someone who apparently isn't a total pussy. Tant pis for homme...

I understand. We have higher standards for a buck ass private than we do a top level assistant to the Vice President of the United States leaking information that could put our operatives in harms way. Both stand accussed of doing that from either side you know. Originally Posted by WTF

No, I don't think you do understand. We have higher standards of those in the military than we have of of jive-ass Schedule C civil servants. Sad, ain't it???

MOMENTUM GATHERING BEHIND CALLS FOR PATRICK FITZGERALD TO RESIGN? “Fitzgerald is lacking in the very qualities we must demand of prosecutors: discretion and restraint.”

[quote=Sisyphus;493791]



No, I don't think you do understand. [quote]

You can think what you want...even if you're wrong.

MOMENTUM GATHERING BEHIND CALLS FOR PATRICK FITZGERALD TO RESIGN? “Fitzgerald is lacking in the very qualities we must demand of prosecutors: discretion and restraint.” Originally Posted by pjorourke

Every freaking prosecutor can be accussed of doing this. They all do it. They are hardly any different than the people they go after.

Ken Starr comes to mind. Oul legal system is broken.

Ken Starr comes to mind. Originally Posted by WTF

I do note however that Starr was a "special prosecutor" too. That is where the worst abuses occur. These guys become like Captain Ahab.

Oul legal system is broken.

Well Duh! Look at TTH

[QUOTE=WTF;517395][quote=Sisyphus;493791]



No, I don't think you do understand.

You can think what you want...even if you're wrong.

As can you...

I'll take "Gratuitous Assertions" for $1000, Alex...

I'll take "Gratuitous Assertions" for $1000, Alex... Originally Posted by Sisyphus

You have already taken that once in this thread and got it wrong, Sisyphus!

Woa . . .I read the first part of this thread and wrote up something in Word to paste-in. Now that I have read the last third or so it seems the thread is well ofthe topic (ts a good topic, but . . .)

To come back to WikiLeaks then: It may be ethno-centric for us to judge the acquisition and release of this information by WikiLeaks within the framework of the US Constitution.

Wiki Leaks operates outside of the USA and is outside of the jurisdiction of US law. As such they are not subject to US law.They are also outside of the protection of US law.

Their actions could adversely affect civilians and duty personnel of other countries. Countries that operate from a different set of fundimental rights and protections. In the 1980s, French commandos attacked and SANK a Green-Peace ship! I would not be surprised if the volinteers at WickiLeaks find it hard to find a safe place to hide— aside from of somewhere ending in . . ."-stan."

The initial release was done by at least one member of the US armed forces serving on-duty in a foreign country during time of war. He does fall within the jurisdiction of US law. He is subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He is now in custody in the Marine brig in Quantitco. He will not be tried in a civilian court. He will face a military court. Leavenworth is in his future.

Pleased with his handiwork, Assange takes a moment of rest to reflect on his ability to pulverize frozen water by telekinesis.

Yet one more scare warning from the US Gov. that the release of this material will cause "someone" to get killed.

Once again, the warning comes. Yet there is not one instance that the Gov to point to where someone was killed due to these "leaks."

Yet one more scare warning from the US Gov. that the release of this material will cause "someone" to get killed.

Once again, the warning comes. Yet there is not one instance that the Gov to point to where someone was killed due to these "leaks." Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

That might be hard to do in a combat situation, Charles. Plans laid because of info gained from the leaks might be months in the preparation so that it would be very difficult w/o access into the insurgent's planning process to know for sure.

That said, it's not out of the realm of reason to expect that those documents will be carefully read by our opponents to gain any useful knowledge contained therein.

Here's the highlights:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/wo...cables.html?hp

What sort of advantage do you think our "opponents" could gain from reading this sort of stuff?