At a court hearing on Wednesday, a federal judge agreed to delay accused leaker Reality Winner’s trial until March. The delay will allow Winner’s lawyers and expert witnesses to acquire the required security clearances needed to access classified information the government may use against her in court.
A potentially critical pretrial battle, however, is brewing right now, according to court documents filed Tuesday. Winner — the 25-year-old Air Force veteran and ex-National Security Administration contractor indicted under the Espionage Act for allegedly leaking a top-secret document — has accused the FBI of violating her Miranda rights. Winner’s lawyers are arguing that any alleged confession should be barred from a jury trial.
“Because Winner was not read her Miranda rights prior to law enforcement questioning,” Winner’s lawyers said in a memo supporting their motion, “any statements elicited by law enforcement from Winner during the encounter must be suppressed, as should any evidence obtained as a result of those statements.”
Winner is accused of having leaked an NSA document that was the basis of a story published by The Intercept on June 5, though The Intercept has no knowledge of the source’s identity. (The Intercept’s parent company, First Look Media, has taken steps to provide independent support for Winner’s legal defense through the Press Freedom Defense Fund. First Look also contributed $50,000 in matching funds to the Stand With Reality campaign, which I co-founded.)
Winner was denied bail shortly after her arrest and is currently in jail awaiting trial. Her case is the first leak prosecution the Trump administration has brought under the Espionage Act, as part of a wider crackdown on leaks. Winner’s case is widely seen as having enormous implications for both whistleblowers and the press. The Miranda rights argument made by her defense adds a potentially significant early wrinkle in what is almost sure to be a complex case.
In the Justice Department’s June 5 complaint, an FBI agent claimed that when Winner was questioned at her house two days earlier, she voluntarily confessed to being the source of the leak.
In the Tuesday filing, Winner described, for the first time in her own words, the events that transpired when the FBI raided her home in June.
In a four-page written declaration, Winner told the court that 10 armed, male FBI agents came to her house with a warrant to search the premises and her person. While there, she said, agents pressured her into consenting to an interview, giving her the impression she did not have a choice to leave. “During the entirety of my encounter with law enforcement on June 3, 2017, prior to being arrested, I was never provided any Miranda warnings,” Winner wrote.
In other words, the FBI didn’t inform her that she had the right to refuse to answer questions or cut the interview short, or that anything she said could be used against her in court, or that she had the right to an attorney — all constitutional requirements, thanks to the famed Miranda v. Arizona Supreme Court case.
Winner wrote that when agents started searching her house, two of them “told me that they wanted to speak with me and asked if I would rather speak with them in my house or at the FBI office.” They then directed her to a cramped, unfurnished backroom in her home, despite her initial protests that she did not want to talk to them in the “creepy” and “weird” 7-by-9-foot room. Once there, she sat with her back to the wall, with the door almost all the way shut, as agents stood in front of her “physically blocking the exit to the room.”
According to Winner, while agents told her the interview was “voluntary,” they did not inform her that she could leave and refused to give her a direct answer when she asked if she was being arrested. After the interview concluded, the agents directed her to stand in her yard. Then, two female FBI agents showed up and arrested her.
Miranda rights are not limited to interrogations that occur after a suspect is arrested. Suspects are supposed to be apprised of their rights during any “custodial interrogation,” essentially any place where a suspect feels that they are not allowed to leave.
Miranda cases, however, are often “messy,” University of Texas School of Law professor Steve Vladeck told me, because the exact definition of a custodial interrogation can be murky. Courts undertake a balancing test — comprised of over a half-dozen factors — when determining whether a questioning is considered a custodial interrogation.
Winner’s case may meet that definition, Vladeck said. “I have to say, if everything happens the way she claims, it’s a pretty good argument,” he said. “The circumstances weigh pretty heavily in favor of concluding that this was a custodial interrogation.”
That’s because, as Winner’s lawyers noted, many of the factors federal courts have looked at in other cases point to a conclusion that agents should have been required read Winner her Miranda rights before they conducted any interview. The Tuesday filing cited previous cases’ examinations of “whether law enforcement ‘unambiguously advised’ the suspect she was free to leave and not in custody”; “whether the suspect was separated from others during the questioning”; “whether law enforcement had a search warrant for the person of the suspect”; “the number of law enforcement agents at the scene”; and “the physical characteristics of the interview location.”
University of California, Davis law professor Elizabeth Joh came to a similar conclusion about Winner’s case. “She certainly could have a valid argument,” Joh told me on Tuesday. “While she wasn’t arrested at the time of her questioning, Miranda requirements kick in any time there is a situation of custodial interrogation. That includes formal arrest, but can also include situations that amount to a coercive atmosphere that looks and feels like the equivalent of an arrest.”
“I’m surprised that her rights weren’t read to her.”
Both Vladeck and Joh emphasized, though, that these types of Miranda claims are always decided on a case-by-case basis — and because there’s no hard and fast rule, it’s ultimately up to the trial judge to look at the entirety of the “circumstances surrounding the interrogation” and the “broader picture” of the scene, as the Supreme Court puts it.
Joh added that she would have expected more diligence from law enforcement officials in such a high-profile case. “I’m surprised that her rights weren’t read to her,” Joh said. The allegation “that she provided documents to The Intercept made immediate national news, so it was clear that this was a case people would pay attention to. And most defendants end up waiving their rights and talk. The government may ultimately win on the ‘no custody’ argument, but it’s a complication for them for the moment.”
Top photo: Accused leaker Reality Winner leaves the U.S. District Courthouse in Augusta, Ga., following a bond hearing on June 8, 2017.
,
My name is , and I live in .
On , was killed by a drone, that triggered an alarm before entering airspace. .
I write to you related to your located at the . It is said that once is solved it will lead to a new . Let’s call the latter .
Another individual, , thought to have the solution, before you revealed . That solution would have been
I believe the former quote, part of a speech by , is the solution to the , which I dub . I already mentioned this in a post on :
Why do I write you? trial will start. Right now, it seems will not have a fair trial, unless can refer to the article that was published by dealing with . is alleged to be the source related to this article:
I left a riddle there, in the comments section, the very first comment you will find.
In case you do not want to open this URL, here’s what is says:
QUOTE
UNQUOTE
, if you agree that the solution I indicated fits as the solution to or , it would be nice that you confirm to . I copied from for that purpose. There is no need to .
If I were right, and you acknowledge, maybe that could draw enough attention from the general public, to said , which currently is not allowed to consult and/or refer to in defense.
I believe is innocent, courageous and a hero.
You indicated ( ) that you will not . I believe that doing so can prevent a , in the current atmosphere. It is only days ago that a plane made an flight over .
Anyway, I hope will have a fair trial, that is all is asking for, and I hope wins.
asked for writing with messages of support. Well I thought if I have the solution to maybe that could help. Time is running out fast, trial starts . .
I hope you receive the correct solution to soon.
Respectfully,
Kind Regards,
Doesn’t matter — she’s still toast. There’s still a lot of evidence even in the unlikely event that her confession gets tossed.
Leakers like this one need to be made an example of. Raked very hard over the coals.
Will Jeremy Scahill ever update his pod cast?
Speaking of “white women can’t STFU”…
https://www.damemagazine.com/2014/12/15/white-women-please-dont-expect-me-wipe-away-your-tears
She should just plead insanity. After all, she is a white female, and those beeyotches are biologically incapable of STFU. It;s in their jeans, just dying to get out.
*white womans tears*
And LOADS of insulting privilege.
And that statue in Wall Street- the one by Ariel Levy, the other white meat? You know-the little white girl looking the WS Bull square in the eye? Try that as a black or Hispanic girl.
Um. Yeah. them white beeyotches can’t shut up and get off the stage-ever. AND, when they take a political leak instead of a principled one FOR ALL PEOPLE, even THAT is cherished.
The only whistle’s women like that are blowing are the Anti Defamation League’s gnarly, maimed putzes, and all them bushy headed cannibals from the desert tribes who hate real Jews jus can’t get enough white female psychobabble.
They’re so easy to program.
These guys and their shiksa whores should stick to spying instead of pimping shiksa’s all the time. Oh wait! Why not run two industries at once! Swallows of a feather…..
NSA/FBI/DEA/ADL mass surveillance and spying started here:
https://www.nsfwcorp.com/feature/relax-everything-will-be-fine/
Do you think the Federal Government cares if rights were violated? Hell Edward Snowden would be in America again.Who’s rights are being violated, the governments or the people’s?
Telling government secrets ,,,,,,, tch,,,,,tch !!!
Since they are paying her legal fees, articles are going to be bias , especially after admitting one of their reporters fabricated stories and quotes discovering a deception pattern , also being arrested in march 3 2017 in connection with a string of bomb threats made against Jewish centers , indicated on federal cyberstalking
What’s with Americans arrested by the law?
Each month there are hundreds of TV shows where you hear the phrases “I want a lawyer”, “Miranda Rights”, etc.
How come all these arrestees – in real life – don’t make like TV arrestees and “demand their rights”.
Or they could grab medication then claim they were unfit to be questions.
Cops have to wear cameras – perhaps the FBI should be forced to wear them or audio recorders, too. It’s accepted fact that Cops lie (aka ‘alternative truth’, ‘vivid imagination’).
Perhaps The Intercept should reduce all incoming documents such as these to plain text using Courier New. Security people are known to use butchered fonts – easily assigned to individuals – in order to track printer usage.
The Intercept, the beneficiary of the alleged leak, should b doing more for the woman.
Set Reality free on bail.
Put Trump in jail.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/i-ran-congress-911-investigation-the-intelligence-committees-today-cant-handle-russia/2017/09/01/665f0d04-8c31-11e7-91d5-ab4e4bb76a3a_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-d%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
I really hope The Intercept provides us with some kind of explanation about what the hell is going on with the Russian embassies. I mean, the way the news reads it sounds like the U.S. practically barged in there with a surprise search warrant while the Russians were frantically burning their secret documents like they were in 1970s Tehran. Has the idea of diplomatic facilities gone the way of the dodo and domain name/search engine neutrality? How many weeks does Assange have left before the British come in to get him, and will they bother sending him to Sweden first?
I think the ‘above the law’, lawless nature of our police departments & specifically here..with the FBI is apparent. They should have been told to dot every i, would have known this would be challenged under federal Whistleblower protection laws..so ten agents and not one remembers Miranda rights?
By the way, who investigates the FBI? DOJ? I really don’t know, law isn’t my field. So if Loretta Lynch can break the law to protect her job & her party, her boss… is there any hope for justice now?
The FBI is denying they have Seth Riches laptop, why? Who will stand for justice there?
Fantastic!
Sounds like Mr Trump’s lawless thugs FUBAR.
I hope this is an auspicious beginning…and let this be a lesson to all law enforcement, in 2017.
Please consider providing a physical mailing address to facilitate sending paper letters of support to Ms Winner. Thanks.
Oh yeah, I forgot, the assholes at the NSA are above the law.
If the NSA hires losers like this lady, all the secrets are out in the public. Give me one reason to trust these NSA punks?
First – I would have clammed up the minute they said search warrant….
Next before allowing them to search I want a lawyer to read the warrant..
(warrants have to state what they are searching for – otherwise its a free for whatever they find)
IF you are SEARCHING FOR A KNIFE – and find a gun not listed on the warrant it is not admissible (I’m a little shaky about the workings so again – WHERE’s the lawyer …..)
I thought we did away with the necessity
I thought we did away with the necessity to read the Miranda rights years ago?
I believe that’s only in terror or support for terror questioning? I wouldn’t say it was explained to me but, in the face of material support alegations you can apparently be rendered?
Just more proof of the Government breaking the law to enforce the laws it wants to enforce, while ignoring the Constitution. This has been going on for decades ! ! !
To be honest with you even without her admitting guilt they already have a paper trail of her doing it, this is ridiculous to delay the inevitable she still going to get tried for leaking classified information
It’s just her lawyers grasping at straws and maximizing billable hours — especially now that organizations like the one in the URL line are throwing money at them. Plus the Intercept feels guilty and is trying to make it up with glowing, one sided, coverage.
This woman is an idiot. She reminds me of those dummies on the tv show Cops. She might have a legal case that she was not read her Miranda rights, but not knowing that she didn’t need to talk to investigators is moronic; especially considering the seriousness of her crimes.
She calls a room in her own house “weird” and “creepy”?!?!? LOL!!!
I love whistleblowers, but I have no sympathy for this one. She was a reckless, partisan hack; not someone trying to do good for the country. She’s obviously not very intelligent either.
She is not a “whistleblower.”
She was trying to promote a story which is supported by the
agency where she worked. She did not adhere to their rules about
how their propaganda should be distributed. A whistleblower
would be working against the propaganda instead of promoting it.
Calling her an idiot is foolish. It is not her place to know – that they are “required” to read her – her rights….. If anything they are the idiots trying to pull a fast one – it is part of their training to know to read her – her rights……NOW everything is tainted – throw it out and start from scratch……and I’m willing to bet all of it is tainted. That’s a problem they created for themselves
Winner is an air-head because of the stupid worthless crime she committed for idiotic political reasons. Her bragging about her crime to the FBI while not being in custody just shows her malady may be incurable.
She has destroyed her career and lost her freedom but maybe she can pick up some life tips from the stupid criminals she meets in prison.
It’ll be her word vs the FBI that raided her on the Miranda thing. If there are no witnesses there she’s out of luck at any chance for a motion to suppress, the court will side with law enforcement generally. She faces an institution that has statistically a 99% conviction rate, if she fights this in court she’ll almost certainly lose and get several times what the plea bargain offered will be. http://justicedenied.org/wordpress/archives/3190
Winner should get a couple of years in prison to digest her stupid actions but she is following the lead of these opportunist lawyers and will pay for it. Her statement about the FBI interview reeks of coaching verging on lying.
I read that she stated to her interviewer that the information in the documents she released had already been leaked and reported on which is true. She apparently thought this made her document release no big deal which is criminally stupid. What was in the documents was not the crime releasing the documents, any classified documents, is a crime.
I get that, but none of those facts truly matters in Federal Court, they will convict her, no matter what the facts are. Please read the link I posted above look and study the acquittal statistics. I know firsthand from experience serving time in a Federal private run facility exactly how the court works, there’s a 99.8% chance she’ll be convicted and serve time in prison. That’s all I’m saying, if they point the finger at you for instance, you’re going down, and if you don’t go along with their plan and take the plea they’ll even possibly involve a family member or business aquantance, if you fight it you’ll serve multiple times the sentence they proposed. She will serve time.
I hope she spends the rest of her life behind bars.
The lawyers are over-arguing this. The mere possession of a warrant to search her person establishes she was in custody and not free to leave. Since the agents proceeded to exploit this detention to interrogate her – it’s a custodial interrogation. Notice that in the case law they cite there is no example where the agents had a warrant to search person.
Reality Winner is/was a government agent who was promoting
a story about SUPPOSED Russian manipulations
which have NEVER been proven.
If you think she is some heroic “whistleblower,” then you are
easily manipulated.
The eagerness of some at the Intercept to try to invest in her
as if she is anything more than a suspiciously gullible agent
is pathetic.
This whole thing smells suspiciously like a planned manipulation.
The FBI may have been doing the right thing here. It is in the best interest of the nation that this information be made public. It in no way threatens national security. Only threatens Trump. The laws are obviously flawed and need to be rewritten. Only a matter of time and the FBI will be reading Trump his Maranda rights.
Presuming you’re liberal / progressive / against fascism / against stupidity, you’d better well hope that the FBI doesn’t read Trump his maranda rights while he’s POTUS; that would guarantee an even WORSE outcome for the country: president Pence with BOTH houses of congress in R hands.
Trump is, at least, an incompetent executive, while Pence would be very effective at following through… Better be careful what you wish for; you might get it.
They don’t need her confession. Now they just have to work harder. She won’t be bragging about this at the gym any time soon
What a grounded and logical comment to make. I’m sure you feel super awesome about whistleblowers facing serious prison time. And WTF do you know about whether she ever did or would ever brag?
Work harder? As in, eat more jelly donuts?
I forgot which case, but it was held because someone merely remained silent after being arrested, but didn’t specifically invoke the 5th amendment rights, that silence could be used as evidence of guilt.
There are videos about “Never talk to the police”. Beyond all the crypto and other things (and don’t show them actual printouts) the Intercept does a disservice by not mentioning how to clearly and specifically invoke constitutional rights. 1. Record if possible every interaction. 2. invoke your rights and shut up.
“Let’s go see the magistrate right now” works really well.
The cops don’t know what to do. They just know they can’t intimidate anymore because you’re ASKING to see the judge… pronto.
The statement is actually means you want “preliminary /probably cause hearing” before an actual judge (aka magistrate) instead of the the redneck with a badge standing in front of you waving his pecker in your face.
If the govt. wanted to put her away that badly, who’s fault is their stupidity w/no Miranda reading? Remember, former CIA Director Petraeus deliberately gave CLASSIFIED information to his now ex-lover. Then he lied about it to the FBI in HIS interview. These are felonies. If you’re convicted, this means lots of jail time. Then (unless your pardoned), try doing lots of things w/a felony conviction on your record. Find a job. A place to live. Vote.
What happened to him? His attorney (Hillary’s attorney and one of the most expensive and powerful in DC) got him off w/a fine. Just because of his money, power and connections. Meanwhile Winner? Roast her alive. Can we put her to death under the Espionage Act?
If Winner pleaded guilty claiming Trumpophobia caused her temporary insanity she might avoid a long sentence. Allowing her opportunist lawyers to convince her to lie about her interview that took place before her arrest may cause the judge to come down hard on her at sentencing.
The young woman is a dummy caught in a politically motivated leak that she proudly defended when questioned by the FBI, this is not in any way related to whistleblowing.
She has never claimed she was the leaker and neither has The Intercept. The FBI is the only one claiming she is the leaker.
Winner has claimed responsibility for the leak and the Intercept helped the FBI directly trace the leak to her due to their incompetence. Releasing classified documents is a crime and the FBI investigates this type of crime while the DOJ is prosecuting Winner for the crime of leaking what she knew were classified documents.
I would say Reality is the winner here, which has nothing to do with the total nonsense your trying to push. Talking about liars, do you work for the FBI?
thank you for this report Mr. Timm.
The erosion of American rights is what the criminal minds that run the US gov need to promote wars, WMD, and wallstreet theives who are prepping for the next big robbery.
This disrespect of Americans is a mindset that one adopts in order to support the will of the criminals running the gov.
HOWEVER… Suppose police pull over a car with 2wm seen near a home burglary. The officer sees a set of kitchen plates and linen in the back seat. Can the officer ask “How much time did it take you to steal that stuff in the back seat?” without reading him his rights?
In actual practice you don’t get Mirandized until they ask you to put stuff in writing THEN they give you a form that says you’ve been advised of your rights.
If this could be explained to me. Why is it that information that the Russian Federation hacked into American voting machines an American military secret classified as top secret? It almost makes one think that the Russian Federation spies and hackers were working for (or with) the US military in trying to impact the outcome of the American election.
I would like another explanation that makes sense. Is it not important that the makers of voting machines and local election authorities throughout the nation should know that there had been attempts, successful or not, by foreign hackers to subvert the outcomes of elections in their jurisdictions.
Having Winner go to jail for this is foul and disgusting. The people in the federal government hiding this information from election authorities are the real criminals. They are conspiring with foreigners to throw an election.
That was never suggested even by anyone in the intelligence community.
“That was never suggested even by anyone in the intelligence community.”
From the original Intercept article:
https://theintercept.com/2017/06/05/top-secret-nsa-report-details-russian-hacking-effort-days-before-2016-election/
“Sure enough, VR Systems advertises the fact that its EViD computer polling station equipment line is connected to the internet, and that on Election Day “a voter’s voting history is transmitted immediately to the county database” on a continuous basis. A computer attack can thus spread quickly and invisibly through networked components of a system like germs through a handshake.”
VR Systems, the Florida company alleged to be hacked into by the NSA document disclosed to the Intercept, makes part of the “voting machinery,” the software that communicates the votes from the machines to the county or state office that tabulates votes.
It’s classified so the Russians don’t find out that they hacked the election!
This seems like an awfully stupid thing for FBI agents to forget.
That said, what difference does it make? I thought they had damning evidence before any conversation.
The “leak” was so trivial, its prosecution so rapid, that from the beginning I’ve suspected some kind of set-up. For Winner to do hard time though seemed a disproof, because how did they get her to go along with it? (She’d have had to, or else she’d have provided a more thorough leak) So if she manages to go scot-free or nearly so, then the set-up theory is back on the menu. Question then is … who is being set up and how? It could be a bunch of spies trying to justify their own spying by their own criteria according to some obsessive compulsive paranoid schizophrenic logic almost unknowable to ordinary men. Or maybe something more obvious not started yet against The Intercept. I don’t know why the numbers don’t add up.
I think you are essentially correct. The FBI probably believes their case is so strong, they didn’t need her confession to be admissible in court. They probably figured they could learn more about potential co-conspirators without a lawyer present. Lawyers often advise their clients not to say anything, unless a plea deal is offered.
You tell me I’m essentially correct, then come up with a mundane explanation to demolish my conspiracy theory. Always a kidder, Duce.
I wasn’t trying to demolish your theory. Something doesn’t add up, but we don’t have a lot to work with.
We now have one small additional fact – the FBI didn’t tell Ms. Winner she had the right to remain silent. The FBI is not some local cop who forgets to read the suspect their rights. Therefore it is almost certain they made a conscious decision to interrogate her without a lawyer being present.
Assuming the FBI knew that Reality Winner was the leaker, (as she had confessed), their next question would have been did she act alone? The information she leaked does not appear to be material associated with her own job. Therefore either someone gave it to her, or she happened to find it. If someone gave it to her, presumably it was because they knew she identified with The Resistance and would possibly leak it. If so, they are the real leaker and Ms. Winner was just a patsy. So why haven’t they been charged? Either there is no second person, or that person’s actions were approved by the CIA.
If that’s person’s actions were approved by the CIA, then Ms. Winner was merely carrying out the wishes of the CIA, which is what she was paid to do as an employee.
If we have “Equal Justice Under Law”, where nobody is above the law, not even a president, wouldn’t we also have to criminally prosecute several members of the Bush Administration?
Former Qwest Communications CEO, Joseph Nacchio, claims that the Bush Administration asked his company to participate in the felony crime of warrantless wiretapping in the “winter” of 2001 – this was before 9/11 had happened so there was no wartime reason or emergency circumstance. When Nacchio refused to participate in the felony crime, the Bush DOJ found a reason to indict and convict him, then threw him in prison.
Even if think Nacchio should have gone to prison – the fact remains that the Bush Administration did commit felony crimes by forcing other telecoms to warrantless wiretap. There was no 9/11 and no War on a Tactic in the winter of 2001.
Reality Winner should have “Equal Justice under Law” as the Bush Administration. Remember Richard Nixon also claimed presidents were above the law.
Uh, 9/11 happened in September 2001, so “in the ‘winter’ of 2001″ would be AFTER. Be smarter, won’t you? Seriously, if you can’t keep basic facts straight what good are you?
Joeseph Nacchio was approached by the NSA for his customers’ data in February 2001. That year, September came after the cold months of January and February.
Exactly where “Winter” sits on the calendar can be confusing for people who don’t follow the NHL Hockey Season. Up here in True North––and increasingly south of the border where our best players are lured away by big money––the windup of the regular season on ice takes place in Jan-Feb-March, well before any day of September of that same year.
The Stanley Cup playoffs fill the months of April, May and June. That leaves July, August and September, which are set aside for player visits to orthopedic surgeons and the structural repair of hockey rinks.
Winter resumes with the first face-off of the season in early October and continues through December. In summary, winter is split over nine months, whether played under firs or palms, and bookends the month of September in most years.
Bravo , Jay :)
America’s Justice System is out-of-order. When the DOJ criminally prosecutes the DOJ lawyers that approved torture, blacklisting and warrantless wiretapping (felony crime) – then they will have the integrity to go after the “little people”. The abuse of the Espionage Act of 1917 is also criminal in the way it has been exploited in a fraudulent manner to silence legal whistleblowers.
None of these DOJ lawyers have been indicted or held responsible for violating Ronald Reagan’s Convention Against Torture. One was promoted to a federal judge. There is harm when America’s Justice System starts resembling those of despotic regimes and practices used by former enemies.
It is truly amazing the horrible things powerful people get away with in America.
Good grief, for the past few days whenever I want to scroll down to read good comments it instead scrolls to other articles. Maybe I’m the only one with this problem? It’s annoying. A billion dollar website that can’t function.
On topic: Miranda rights even despite court rulings aren’t absolute I think. And I sure hope The Intercept is paying all legal fees for her, since their utter incompetence (along with hers) outed her.
It’s annoying. A billion dollar website that can’t function.
Yes, outside of Federally Approved Healthcare sites, it’s shocking! Just shocking!
Nope, it’s happening to me too when I click on comments. It goes to other articles immediately. Annoying. And I have a pop-up blocker.
And I sure hope The Intercept is paying all legal fees for her,
Did you not bother to read the article? And, if you did bother, did you not bother to open the link which was noted with the words “taken steps?”
a href=”https://theintercept.com/2017/07/11/first-look-to-support-defense-of-reality-winner-in-espionage-act-prosecution/”>taken steps
Uh. Yeah. “Taken steps”.
So no, they aren’t paying all legal fees for her. They are “taking steps” to have others not them donate in order to do so, with “matching funds” as some kind of honorable thing. Utterly pathetic. THIS SITE OUTED HER. NO ONE ELSE SHOULD PAY FOR HER DEFENSE.
That The Intercept set up a kick-start like fund to raise money for her defense rather than doing it themselves is just one more vomitous moment of this particular tale. A blight. A stain.
You’re too much of an idiot to read the link. Consequently, you don’t what you’re talking about. You’re just being an asshole in order to delight in being an asshole.
Dave is more right than I am willing to discuss here. You have my email address if you would like to know the information not included in Trevor Timm’s piece that, in my strong view, should be.
I don’t have your email address, Mona, but I would like to know the rest of the story.
I’ve noted some of your previous comments excoriating The Intercept for failing in its duty of care for their alleged source, and iirc at least one of the reporters for T.I. had some role in compromising John Kiriakou and getting him sent upriver on a 30mos. trip.
How can I get in touch?
Did you bother to note your precious link also doesn’t say that The Intercept will not actually pay all her legal fees out of their own pockets? A whole lot of words and then a “general fund”. Eye-roll worthy.
Point me to an article here or elsewhere where “The Intercept will pay for all of Reality Winner’s Legal Fees”.
Show me such or admit that you are a liar. Or an ignorant. If the latter, it can get better. You might become aware. Seek objectivity. Stop lying.
Just even binary logic: 1 or 0. Yes or no. Does The Intercept fund all legal fees for Reality Winner? No. Duh. End of logic and discussion.
Sorry for being an asshole. I’d blame my alcoholism but that’s not an excuse. Live well and prosper, everyone!!!
as Winner’s CIA handler on the retail side, TI needs to establish an intermediary regarding the $$$
I never stated that The Intercept said they were going to pay all of her legal bills, so fuck you and your inability to read. What I did do was point out that your claim that they are only supporting part of a general fund is not half of the story. Details, or whatever detail The Intercept felt they could provide without doing damage her case, are at the link I suggested.
You see, the thing is there is no way that I can know exactly what all The Intercept is doing in regard to her defense or her legal fees. The same, although you’re inanity won’t allow you to admit it, holds true for you. But yet you insist on making demands based on your ignorance. And then you go on to call anyone (me) who doesn’t agree with your demands or with your ignorance a liar.
Do you *open* the comments section first?
I had the same experience today and it so annoyed me that I complained via email to various Intercept/FL employees, who will of course ignore the feedback.
She also had the right to be stupid, and fully engaged in that right. She did the crime, she should do the time.
Even if you escaped on this legal technicality all the other damning evidence is enough. For example, a certain news organization sent the government enough to track her down.
I cant tell if your against whistleblowers and/or find them annoying because they reveal how corrupt the US GOV can be. I find it interesting how folks get more annoyed with the leaker instead of the actual findings and discoveries. ITs counterproductive and keeps the oligarchy or plutocratic system we live under intact.
She’s suspected of petulantly leaking internal documentation that originated from somewhere that suggested that over a dozen agencies claimed Russians had undue influence over the election, so she could prove Trump is the bad man and undeserving of a win she thought Bernie was.
A real whistleblower.
Interesting. I’ve never read the federal criminal code, but I wouldn’t have thought that the degree of petulance associated with a given crime was knowable without intimate knowledge of the defendant or that it was a qualifier for the types of charges they ultimately face.
It’s in the guidelines.
Reality Leigh Winner revealed how corrupt the US government can be? How?
Why was the FBI in such a hurry?
Again the factor of intimidation is clear. 10 FBI agents vs. 1 woman?
They wanted to hit the press with the story right away.
And prove that they are protecting “national security”
An important piece today tweeted by Glenn Greenwald about the claim that the DNC hack was an inside job. An article published by VIPS is contested by other members of VIPS. Long comments on technical issues of the alleged hack of DNC by the Russians.
Since this allegation could in an extreme case lead to Nuclear War, one would think that responsible agencies would actually make their evidence public.
A Leak or a Hack? A Forum on the VIPS Memo
A letter from dissenting members of VIPS, a reply from VIPS, and the results of our independent review.
And we still have the stories out there from Kim Dotcom that he was in contact with Seth Rich who was the possible source of DNC emails.
The DNC was not concerned enough to have the FBI do a forensic analysis of their system but they cheer on the arrest of a potential whistleblower.
Kim Dotcom is noise. I believe nothing he says about Seth Rich.
Thanks for those links. At least minds are on the actual details, and not just on the propaganda side. Seems to me the dissenters to the original VIPS memo have been gotten to. They actually use the Washington Post as part of their argument! The reply by the original VIPS memo writers shows the intent to deceive pretty clearly in the dissenters.
I would hope that the courts side with her, but even it they do, the PTB will probably have not problem ignoring the findings. We haven’t really lived in a representative democracy with checks and balances for a very long time now.
Well the real problem is that even without Ms. Winner’s confession or any proof of her guilt they obtained as fruit of that confession, and even if suppressed, it likely will not have bearing on the rest of the proof that the government likely has from independent methods of collection pursuant to valid warrants–assuming Ms. Winner was the leaker.
In a fair US system of criminal justice, Ms. Winner would win this suppression motion easily but for the fact the US Supreme Court has basically gutted the 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments to the Constitution over the last 40 years in the name of fear and law and order.