“In a search-warrant application, the government must describe the violations of federal law it contends have been committed. To issue a search warrant, the judicial officer must find that there is probable cause to believe that a crime has been — or is being — committed and that evidence of the crime will be found in the place the investigators seek permission to search.
In the PV warrants at issue, the government said it was investigating violations of federal penal laws relating to conspiracies to (a) transport stolen property across state lines and (b) possess stolen goods, interstate transportation of stolen property, aiding and abetting, accessory after the fact, and misprision of a felony. One would think that journalists would find this disturbing, given that in their reporting processes they frequently and confidentially become aware of information that may have been purloined — at least allegedly.
In the column, while I conveyed curiosity about what the government claimed was its jurisdiction to investigate the burglary, I acknowledged that federal jurisdiction can be triggered if stolen property is transferred in interstate commerce. That is obviously what the FBI and SDNY prosecutors are getting at in the warrant’s allusion to the interstate transportation and receipt of stolen goods, as well as aiding and abetting — a concept that makes someone who intentionally assists the commission of a crime guilty of that crime.
“Aiding and abetting” is a staple of federal prosecutions. More rarely investigated or charged is the crime of accessory after the fact. In that offense, Person A has committed some crime, and then Person B, the “accessory,” takes actions that help Person A evade apprehension.
Even more rarely charged is misprision: This offense holds that if A has committed a federal felony and B knows about it, then B has a legal obligation “as soon as possible [to] make known the [felony’s commission] to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States.” Prosecutions are highly unusual because, while people grasp that they must not violate the law themselves, and that they must testify about crimes they’ve witnessed or learned of if subpoenaed by the government, they are very resistant to the notion that they must tell the government if they learn of a crime, rather than mind their own business if they choose to.
One might think that journalists would find a misprision investigation eye-popping as applied to other journalists.”

Brett is 75% to his goal!


Directly support Brett today: GiveSendGo.com/CBSwhistleblower

Three congressmen who respectively are the Ranking Members of the House Committee on the Judiciary, House Oversight, and Senate Subcommittee on Investigations - have sent to the Attorney General of the United States asking questions about the FBI raid.

FOX NEWS: Media Outlets Call Out FBI's Project Veritas Raid

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxMLuEloYjA

The New York’s 2nd Appellate Division upheld the Supreme Court’s Order to sequester and not to publish or disseminate further our attorney-client privileged communications with our attorneys in our ongoing defamation lawsuit against the New York Times. You can wrongly attack this journalist and Project Veritas as requesting an unconstitutional “prior restraint.” But those critics are also attacking two different New York courts—the New York Supreme Court and the 2nd Appellate Division—as anti-First Amendment, because both of these Courts agreed with the relief Project Veritas requested.

My detractors are wrong.

I’m a journalist and a First Amendment champion. My detractors base their attacks not on sound legal analysis or even an understanding of the First Amendment and related issues of permissible restraint, but as Glenn Greenwald wrote, they are blinded by their cult of personality and hatred of me.   Principles, not personalities or politics, should guide any discussion of the First Amendment.

FOX NEWS MISS OF THE WEEK: DOJ/FBI raids Project Veritas

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbFgbppllEI MUST WATCH: Even people who are not politically aligned are waking up and seeing through the media headlines now.