mr. risonbehaved -- delayed publication for years out of an abundance of caution until it was clear to him the government's desire to censor him was not a matter of national security, rather it was a matter of national embarrassment. government does not seek to compel information from mr. rison to put an end to an existing thread to top -- to stop a terrorist attack or crime will stop the government seeks information ordered to investigate an alleged leak that occurred years ago by someone else. quite frankly, i'm puzzled as to why the doj needs to use them to make their case or them. you would think with all the resources expended on federal law enforcement, the fate of our nation would not rise and fall at the feet of a 59-year-old reporter revealing his sources. and i'm sorry to give away your age. and investigating e-mails and credit reports of journalists, the government has made it clear that it does not fear the chilling effects of our free press -- to our free press and does not value t

but to be clear, mr. risonbroke no law gathering the news, broke no law proliferating the news and publishing his articles and books. nor can the justice department make such claims. there is no law that mandates to the press to obtain government approval about legally acquired information. there is no dispute that such a law would be unconstitutional as a restraint on speech and would transform this great country from being a democracy to becoming a totalitarian state. yet james risen delayed publication for years out of an abundance of caution until it was clear to him the government's desire to censor him was not a matter of national security, rather it was a matter of national embarrassment. to be clear, the government does not seek to compel information from mr. risen to put an end to an existing threat -- to stop a terrorist attack or even an ongoing crime. the government seeks information ordered to investigate an alleged leak that occurred years ago by someone else. quite frankly, i'm puzzled as to why

but to be clear, mr. risonbroke no law gathering the news, broke no law proliferating the news and publishing his articles and books. nor can the justice department make such claims. there is no law that mandates to the press to obtain government approval about legally acquired information. there is no dispute that such a law would be unconstitutional as a restraint on speech and would transform this great country from being a democracy to becoming a totalitarian state. yet james risen delayed publication for years out of an abundance of caution until it was clear to him the government's desire to censor him was not a matter of national security, rather it was a matter of national embarrassment. to be clear, the government does not seek to compel information to put an end to an existing threat -- to stop a terrorist attack or even an ongoing crime. the government seeks information ordered to investigate an alleged leak that occurred years ago by someone else. quite frankly, i'm puzzled as to why the doj needs t