Where were these screams when law enforcement seized attorney records?

Media watchdogs fret over seizing of reporter records in US probe

Washington (AFP) - Media watchdog groups expressed alarm Friday over the seizing of a journalist's records as part of a probe into intelligence leaks resulting in the indictment of a congressional staffer.

The Justice Department late Thursday announced the indictment of James Wolfe, 57, on three counts of making false statements about his contacts with three reporters.

As part of the probe, the Justice Department seized years of records related to two email accounts and a phone number belonging to New York Times reporter Ali Watkins, the newspaper reported.

The seizing of records raises constitutional concerns about press freedom, activists said. At the same time, the admission of a personal relationship between the reporter and the source raised questions about journalistic ethics.

So the same people who didn't seem to bat an eye over late night raids of cooperating witnesses, and full on scale multi-location raids on a President's private attorney, are suddenly upset because a reporter had his records seized?

I would offer that the same principle applies here. If the reporter has nothing illegal to hide, then why sweat it. If he does have information about felony intelligence leaks, then that reporter shouldn't be complaining if his records are seized.

While attorney client privilege is very real, there is no such thing as reporter leaker privilege. A reporter is not an attorney, not a clergy, and not a spouse, and can be legally compelled to provide testimony or evidence against a law breaker.