Perry Stein article (below) states that "The Trump administration has also fought in court to limit reporter access in the Pentagon and has used the Federal Communications Commission to threaten to revoke broadcast licenses over news coverage of the U.S.-Israeli war in Iran that President Donald Trump churlishly mischaracterized as “unpatriotic.”
"Unpatriotic?"
Malarkey.
"Secrecy is for losers," as Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan said it best, "for people who don't understand the value of the information."
"Patriotism."in this case is a silly sham, a slogan and a shibboleth -- the shallow scoundrel's "last refuge," a line that I learned from my high school history teacher, a former Roman Catholic priest from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (quoting Samuel Johnson).
In the "Pentagon Papers" case, a new Nixon-appointed trial judge, U.S. District Court Judge Murray Gurfein (later an appellate judge) famously wrote, ""The security of the Nation is not at the ramparts alone. Security also lies in the value of our free institutions. A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, an ubiquitous press must be suffered by those in authority in order to preserve the even greater values of freedom of expression and the right of the people to know." United States v. New York Times Co., 328 F. Supp. 324, 331 (S.D.N.Y. 1971).
From The Washington Post:
DOJ issued subpoenas to force Post, WSJ reporters to testify before grand jury
The extraordinary actions against the national security reporters were withdrawn by the Justice Department after legal challenges by the news organizations.
The grand jury subpoena to Washington Post reporter Ellen Nakashima this spring was related to sensitive reporting about a national security matter, the person said. The Justice Department also issued subpoenas to appear before a grand jury to three Wall Street Journal journalists, who also reported on national security issues.
The Washington Post was fighting the demand in federal court in the Eastern District of Virginia in sealed proceedings when the government rescinded Nakashima’s subpoena, according to the official familiar with the matter. The Justice Department also withdrew the Wall Street Journal subpoenas, which the news organization had challenged in the same federal court, according to the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss proceedings that are not public. None of the journalists testified before the grand jury, the official said.
The purpose and scope of the investigations that triggered the subpoenas are not clear, but the person familiar said they relate to national security matters. While the journalists are no longer scheduled to appear before a grand jury, the Justice Department’s action reflected a new front in the Trump administration’s aggressive tactics toward the media as it attempts to crack down on government leaks to the press and content that administration officials think is unfair to the president.
The Justice Department in January raided a Post reporter’s home as part of a criminal investigation of a government contractor who had already been charged with leaking sensitive national security information. The president and his allies have sued media outlets for articles they argue were defamatory — an extremely rare action for a sitting president.
The Trump administration has also fought in court to limit reporter access in the Pentagon and has used the Federal Communications Commission to threaten to revoke broadcast licenses over news coverage of the U.S.-Israeli war in Iran that President Donald Trump characterized as “unpatriotic.”
But the grand jury subpoenas marked the first publicly known instance in which the Trump Justice Department sought to compel journalists to testify under oath in front of a grand jury.
The Washington Post confirmed that Nakashima received a grand jury subpoena. She is a veteran national security reporter who, during the Trump administration, has reported on the country’s most powerful intelligence officials, the Iran conflict and deadly U.S. military strikes on boats that officials alleged carried illegal drugs.
“The unwarranted subpoena of our reporter Ellen Nakashima — a clear violation of constitutionally guaranteed press freedom — was another sign of the government seeking to compel journalists to become instruments of its investigations,” a spokesperson for The Post said in a statement. “We will continue to stand fully behind the journalism of The Washington Post and fight all efforts by any administration that violate our First Amendment rights.”
The Justice Department did not respond to requests for comment.
The Wall Street Journal reported in May that the Justice Department had issued subpoenas to reporters seeking documents related to the paper’s coverage of the conflict in Iran. The outlet did not report at the time that its reporters were also called to testify before a grand jury.
n the May Journal article, Ashok Sinha, the chief communications officer of Dow Jones, which publishes the Journal, said the subpoenas “represent an attack on constitutionally protected newsgathering” and vowed that the institution would “vigorously oppose this effort to stifle and intimidate essential reporting.”
It was not immediately clear why Justice Department prosecutors withdrew the subpoena to Nakashima. The Post had asked the court to quash it, and a judge in the Eastern District of Virginia held a closed hearing on the matter, according to the official.
The judge had not ruled on The Post’s motion at the time the Justice Department rescinded the subpoena to Nakashima.
The Wall Street Journal has also sought to quash the subpoenas to its reporters, according to the Justice Department official.
It is extremely rare — and potentially risky professionally — for journalists to be forced to testify in front of grand juries.
Most news organizations follow strict ethical guidelines to protect confidential sources. If the appearances had proceeded, prosecutors could have asked the journalists to identify their sources. If the reporters refused, they could have been held in contempt of court or charged with obstruction of justice, according to press freedom experts.
“Once you are up in front of the grand jury, the testimony can go in many different ways and can inquire into stories that are unrelated to the underlying investigation,” said Gabe Rottman, vice president of policy at the advocacy group Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. “The potential of the government intruding into the newsgathering process is even greater when you are in the grand jury than it is for a subpoena for documents.”
Historically, it has been rare, though not unprecedented, for federal law enforcement officials to even subpoena journalists for materials around their reporting. Instead, it is far more common for law enforcement officials to find other ways to build cases against government employees believed to be illegally disclosing material.
In the first months of the current Trump administration, then-Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a memo rescinding a Biden-era policy that prevented officials from searching reporters’ phone records when trying to identify government personnel who have leaked sensitive information to news organizations.
The internal memo said that the media should not be afforded such protections, noting leaks of government information during the Trump administration. According to the memo, law enforcement would search reporters’ communication records only when other investigative methods had been exhausted. The memo said the attorney general must approve all attempts to question or arrest journalists.
Press freedom activists have lambasted the Trump administration’s aggressive actions against the media, accusing officials of curtailing freedom of speech and chilling journalists’ ability to report on sensitive topics that are in the public interest.
“The administration has taken a number of extremely aggressive steps in respect to the press,” Rottman said. “These are all aggressive attempts to target journalists reporting on the actions of the Trump administration. They are a dangerous intrusion of the independence of the press.”
The litigation around the subpoenas to The Post and the Wall Street Journal reporters is under seal, meaning the public cannot access it. Media outlets — or other parties, including advocacy groups — could request that the judge unseal the records to make the contents of the fight public.
The cases of Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper and New York Times reporter Judith Miller are the most prominent examples in recent history of the Justice Department demanding that journalists appear before a grand jury. In 2004, the Justice Department issued the reporters subpoenas after the identity of a CIA operative, Valerie Plame, was revealed in reporting.
Cooper was unsuccessful in his appeals of the subpoena, but he reached an agreement with prosecutors that he would provide testimony and documents relevant to a specific source who had said he had no objection to their release.
Miller was also unsuccessful in her appeals and refused to testify. As a result, she was held in federal detention for contempt of court for more than 80 days. She was released from prison after her source — Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, Scooter Libby — gave her permission to reveal his identity.
n 2014, former Fox News reporter Mike Levine revealed that, in 2011, the Justice Department during the Obama administration issued a subpoena for him to appear before a grand jury over his reporting that Somali-Americans had been secretly indicted in Minneapolis for joining a group in Somalia with ties to al-Qaeda. Levine, who now works at ABC News, tried to fight the subpoena, and prosecutors never called him to testify.
No comments:
Post a Comment