June 7, 2017

"WikiLeaks Declares War on The Intercept," according to The Daily Beast.

"The FBI says a reporter led it to an NSA leaker. Julian Assange says that person, whom he suspects is an Intercept reporter, is a ‘menace’ to sources, journalists, and democracy."

16 comments:

rhhardin said...

who he suspects, not whom.

Sebastian said...

It figures. The left wants to commit treason without worry. Lefty leakers and their MSM enablers should be able to sleep well.

What if we went after the NYT for gratuitously exposing the Swift anti-terror financing program, or the names of key intelligence people in the field?

Reality Winner is low-hanging fruit. Let's go after the bigger, higher bunches. You know, up there, where the real collusion happens.

mockturtle said...

Reality Winner is low-hanging fruit.

Maybe so, but she is a rotten fruit that needs to be tossed. Into the slammer.

traditionalguy said...

Cute move Assange You are policing the ethics of publication of classified and secret materials leaks.

rhhardin said...

Assange is Australian so not particularly bound by US secrets laws unless he gets those secrets under such an agreement.

Fen said...

Wikileaks is an ally in the war against the Establishment Party (E).

Paul Zrimsek said...

Sucks when reporters fail to keep secrets, doesn't it?

Mitch H. said...

"Termination"? Did Wikileaks just put out a hit?

The Godfather said...

So let me see if I've got this straight. A government employee or contractor, who has agreed to maintain the confidentiality of classified information, and then discloses that information to someone who will publicize it -- he/she is a hero. But a reporter who receives the classified information from the source and then informs the government of the leak -- he/she is a villain. Right?

I understand why Assange would feel this way, but why should any normal law-abiding citizen buy into it?

Virtually Unknown said...

Winner is a hero, Assange is a villain. I don't know why you guys can't keep this straight. It all has to do with the moral weight of affecting Hillary's personal ambition.

Yancey Ward said...

Assange has a point if the allegation from the FBI is true- reporters turning in their sources does undermine the publication of secrets the government wants kept. If I were a reporter, I would also want the identity of the Intercept reverse leaker revealed and shunned by the profession.

In my opinion, if you leak classified or confidential material, you take your chances at getting caught, prosecuted, and sentenced, and that is how it should be, in my opinion. The journalists are shielded by the law, however. If you are going to publish the leaks of such material, you shouldn't be outing your source as principle of personal ethics.

However, I don't believe the FBI story about how Ms. Winner was caught. I think she foolishly fell into a set trap, and the FBI isn't going to let you know that, at least not immediately.

R.J. Chatt said...

I think all the constant leaking from anonymous sources is detrimental to democracy. "With all due respect" to Julian Assange who has set himself up as the supreme ruler of what we all should know, we expect our elected officials to conduct the business of government including foreign policy. Getting all kinds of dubious information not only serves to weaken the public trust, it tells us we should never trust.

sakredkow said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Drago said...

I'm picturing a Minions slap fight.

Matthew Sablan said...

I remember when journalists protected sources from the FBI. I'm not sure whether this is a good, or a bad, change. But it is a change.

Birkel said...

@ Matthew

But you're not old enough to remember when the average journalist liked the United States and wanted her to be successful.