Washington Post Editors: US should drop AIPAC prosection

The Washington Post in an unsigned lead editorial has called on the US government to put an end to the prosection or persecution of AIPAC officials for allegedly disclosing "national security secrets." One of the reasons for the call may be the fact that among the alleged recipients of the supposedly classified information is a Post reporter.

 

I'm not sure I agree with their reasons for putting an end to the case:

 

The government has the right to demand strict confidentiality from government officials and others who swear to protect its secrets. The Justice Department errs egregiously and risks profound damage to the First Amendment, however, when it insists that private citizens -- academics, journalists, think tank analysts, lobbyists and the like -- also are legally bound to keep the nation's secrets. The prosecution in effect criminalizes the exchange of information.

So let's see if I got that right. If I get the top secret plans for the classified American super-weapon and sell them to the Iranian government, I should not be prosecuted because private citizens are not bound to keep the nation's secrets? Who is going to agree to that? That surely can't be what the editors of the Washington Post intend, can it?

 

The real questions are whether the documents were classified, and whether or not Rosen and others knew they were classified, and whether or not they had any intent to harm the United Staes or could have done so by disclosing the contents of the documents - and what was the motivation of the FBI in pursuing the investigation.

 

As the editorial notes:

 

The trial court has also determined that in order to prevail, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants passed along information they knew to be closely held by the government, that they did so knowing it could damage national security and that they acted in bad faith. These are exceedingly high hurdles to clear.

 And the real risk to the government is that a little digging by the defense may disclose some very ugly things about the reasons that the FBI had for pursuing this investigation.