3 ms·
Either he IS a journalist/publisher and thus protected from prosecution for revealing evidence of real crimes, or he isn't. The US Government, by omitting this
by fit2rule 6y ago
Either he IS a journalist/publisher and thus protected from prosecution for revealing evidence of real crimes, or he isn't.
The US Government, by omitting this video from evidence, is making a tacit admittance that he is a publisher.
(He is a journalist and this trial is a sham.)
- joshuamorton 6y ago> The US Government, by omitting this video from evidence, is making a tacit admittance that he is a publisher. This doesn't, at all, follow. > Either he IS a journalist/publisher and thus protected from prosecution for revealing evidence of real crimes Not if he himself committed crimes to get the evidence.
- fit2rule 6y agoIndeed, there is very little actual evidence of him having committed crimes in order to function as a publisher - and yet there is massive amounts of evidence of him functioning perfectly well in his capacity as a journalist and a publisher without committing crimes, at all.
- zepto 6y agoWhy won’t the defense simply include the video? Why would you expect the prosecution to make the defense case?
- fit2rule 6y agoWill the defence include the video? I hope they do.